People often say that "Beauty is the eye of the beholder." A sunset, an opera, a Corvette, a new house, a boat can be called "beautiful," or, in slang, "a beaut" by some people. Does this mean that nothing can be beautiful to everyone? Is the concept totally subjective? Or, as Adler states, "Does the maxim De gustibus non disputandum est (There is nothing accounting for taste) apply without exception to all judgments about goodness and beauty; or do some fall under the maxim De veritate disputandum est (There is no disputing taste.)?" (65).

In his book, Adler defines beauty through the concept of goodness-which, as he admits, a difficult task (64). That is, he says, if goodness can be defined,

However, who can really say what is admirable or not? (114)? He answers: "The judgment about the beauty of an object in terms of its admirability for intrinsic excellence or perfection is the judgment of an expert, with special knowledge and skill in judging specimens of a certain kind" (115).

Adler first offers some philosophers' definitions of beauty to set the stage. Aquinas equated beauty with something pleasurable or that satisfies. In other words, it fulfills one's need for good in the world. Kant added and clarified to this idea by noting that the object of beauty must somehow fall outside of practical concerns. It may or may not be something someone desires to possess-just to behold it is enough, since its existence provides delight. If a person sees some beautiful museum-quality antique furniture, it is possible to gain pleasure without purchasing it. It is understood that the antiques are available to offer beauty to any visitors.

If the terms goodness and beauty are connected, as Adler states, and goodness can be closely defined, then the hope is that "what is beautiful" can likewise be determined. However, is this true? Or is beauty too difficult to define because it is the most subjective of the three terms truth, goodness and beauty.

Now it is time to return back to that mother and child mentioned at the beginning of this essay. Why is the look between these two considered to be of beauty? First, there is indeed nothing more universal than the love between a parent, especially a mother, and her son or daughter. There are many types of love: of justice; for the physical body; for nature, of food, of money; of power; for learning, of fame; of art. However, it is maternal love that is the most universal, whether it is due to the survival of the fittest or an something innate. Anthropologists point to the fact that many mothers throughout the world, including the West, do kill their children-especially when there is famine or extreme poverty. However, this is not the norm. The definition of "universal" is something that is found in all cultures; it is not something that is found among all people in all cultures, or even all people in the same culture.

Adler then explains that there is a difference between asserting that something is beautiful because a person takes pleasure in it and asserting that something is beautiful because it has intrinsic qualities that are adm

Some common words found in the essay are:
People Beauty, King Jr, , Six Ideas, mother child, According Adler, intrinsic excellence perfection, intrinsic excellence, goodness beauty, excellence perfection, superior taste, gain pleasure, beauty adler, truth goodness, disputandum est, objective definition,
Approximate Word count = 1621
Approximate Pages = 6 (250 words per page double spaced)