Kant suggests reflective judgment (imagination) as the aesthetics taste. When imagination, independent of understanding and reason, abstracts pure forms of objects on the basis of subjective purposiveness, then “free beauty” is produced. On the other hand, when it combines these forms with the concept of the perfection of an object (objective inner purposiveness), then it develops “dependent beauty”. Kant considers such a combination in dependent beauty to be a combination of good and beautiful. This point has caused a great ambiguity in Kant’s idea about beauty, so much so that some interpreters do not deem dependent beauty as a genuine beauty, but a product of reason.This article argues for the falsity of this interpretation by explaining Kant’s understanding of free and dependent beauty, and his emphasis on the independence of aesthetic judgment.

Nature has aesthetics of its own, what can provoke the human mind into better recognizing the concept of beauty via mental perception. As such, human mind can interact with the nonverbal expressions of nature only to better his/her primitive aesthetic knowledge and reach a more novel recognition of aestheticism via the practice of interpretative deduction. This article has been the result of a series of discussions and dialogues between the authors on the nature of aesthetic geotouring and exploring the natural phenomena based on the Dialectical Method of Socrates and modelled after the Platonic dialogues. The outcome of this dialectic study brings to light the fact that touring in nature through providing the due opportunity for mental perception of aesthetic phenomena can provide a clearer definition of ‘beauty’ in its rich variety. Aesthetic search as such will culminate in forming a more illuminated mental concept of beauty in mind, what can influence human rationale for aesthetic judgment and enrich even more the texture of human aesthetic creation. Such aesthetico-interpretative endeavor might lead to a higher potential for creating more original works of literature and art and culminate in a better judgment about such aesthetic creations.

There was not much philosophical debate in aesthetics before 17th century when beauty was not treated per se. The main two theories on beauty were those of Plato and Aristotle, which were not essentially very different. Nevertheless after the 17th century, the individualistic approach to artistic creation caused a variety of sometimes contradicting philosophical views to the subjects. This article however avoids philosophical discourse to find aesthetical rules which are practically applicable in creating a 'beautiful' built environment.        

The main goal of this research is to explain the relationship between artistic and natural beauty from Aquinas' point of view. This study is fundamental type and its nature is explanatory-analytical. Information is collected using the library method and qualitative analysis. This research shows that in both types, we are facing tangible beauty. Both beauties are imperfect and a reflection of the perfect beauty of God. Natural beauty is without human intervention and artistic beauty is without human intervention. God is the cause of natural beauty. Artistic beauty is not the creation of the face, but the representation or transformation of the face. Natural beauty is superior to artistic beauty; because the principle as a measure of beauty is nature, and artistic beauty is somehow derived from natural beauty. Beauty criteria (harmony, proportion, clarity, and perfection) are current in natural and artistic beauty. Aquinas' view of natural beauty is descriptive.

Although Hume, regarding his basic ideas, explicitly identifies beauty as a sentiment, but in some passages it is introduced not as a sentiment but as a real quality. In some other passages, it also seemed like a secondary quality. Some interpreters, just by referring to these unclear passages in Hume’s writings, offered a kind of interpretations from Hume’s basic idea of beauty that finally is incompatible with his entire philosophy. We attempt, in this paper, by presenting the Hume’s theory of beauty as sentiment and its different from the making -beauty qualities, to explain the reasons of these misinterpretations.

The prophet Mohammad (p.b.u.h) in a tradition stated that; verily Great God created man according to his figure. This tradition that is called the tradition of (figure) or face caused a lot of discussion among scholars and men of opinion, and every one declares in a different expression according to his opinion and thought. Some consider this tradition apparently or from extemal points and use simile like unbelievers and became pagan. And some others consider it by use of logical reasons and like extemalisms,because they couldnot understand its meaning, denied it and suspected about the origin of this tradition and stated that it was taken from Musaic law. They stntggled with those commentators who interpret it mystically. This article attempts to find out the reality of this fact that this tradition belongs to the prophet (p.b.u.h) and prove the truthness of commentators thought about it.

Jonathan Edwards, a New England theologian and theorist, in response to the extremist current of Enlightenment rationalism and the isolation of revelatory teachings in the process of describing moral beauty, believes that man, due to the disease of descent, needs a kind of resurrection and return to natural situation According to him, the creation of man is done by God and under two general principles of human nature (essence) and his inclinations (tendencies),but returning to the natural state is possible only with the grace of God. Man, influenced by divine grace, undergoes changes in his conscious desires and will that become the source of his choice. The most important conscious choice of man in this field is to get out of self-centered love and make a collective good choice. Although this choice is influenced by the understanding of the mental and conceptual part of man, but the influence of human emotions and tendencies on the will eliminates the passivity and indifference of mental activities in morality. If this sublime current continues, all human conditions will take on the color and smell of love for God, which is the moral beauty.