1.5. Aesthetics and objectivity

There is another reason of why the aesthetical side is dismissed. We can all agree on how much a sheet of paper measured, we can also agree on the volume of a glass of water. But aesthetically things are not so linear. We have masterpieces that differ widely in almost every aspect. For instance, if we contemplate the beauty of Chopin's music, and then go on with U2's music, Regina Spektor, Mozart, Yes, Beethoven, Philip Glass, Dave Matthews Band, Enya, Alanis Morrisete, The Beatles, Vangelis, etc, we find completely different approaches to music. However these people created masterpieces which are, in their own fields, hard or impossible to improve. Notice that we can measure almost all objects of the senses in a four dimensional grid. Time and space exhaust the number of properties with which an object may be described in a "material" sense. But the same does not happen with aesthetics. We have no idea how many dimensions are needed to accurately represent a work of art, much less how to describe them. One of them is certainly joy. But the rest are uncertain, probably we have no words for it, for they were not directly necessary to our survival (hunting, sowing, etc). The only field where it might be important to take aesthetics into account is probably healing, but even in that respect we have made reference to mystical entities and superstition.

In any case, the complexity of the aesthetical world means that, with all likelihood, a society in which the members would give weight to their aesthetical intuition, would give rise to a gigantic diversity of taste. For instance, in present cultures, we may altogether ride ourselves of aesthetical considerations when building a modest city. Since it is all a matter of personal "taste" it woudn't make much sense to choose a single kind of aesthetical style, so we simply ignore it and we build "functional" or practical buildings. However, when people give wings to their creativity, they choose very different architectural styles. This is just an example of what would happen to society if people gave more importance to aesthetical considerations. The range of choice would explode in a myriad of different styles and only a very open society (much more open then ours, where it is a crime to simply walk naked on a public street!) would allow for such a tremendous array of features.

In this imaginary exuberant society, where aesthetical experience is considered as important as material efficiency, the world opens up its magic, it becomes a "wonderful world". A world full of detail, infinitely vast and complex, and infinitely beautiful too: it not only encompass all the great masterpieces, all the works of art, but also all of the artists, all of their creative moments, the stories that led to them, it is like a gigantic musical fugue in which everything is connected to everything else. However big your admiration may be for a certain aspect of the world (a piece of music, a monument, a person, etc), the whole world has that and much more than that.