Can beauty be taught?

Following on from yesterdays post on beauty, there is a obvious continuation. There is a saying that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but if this is the case, how does it tie in with the current research into perception suggesting that the way we see things is conditional on the way in which our brains are wired, which in turn is conditional on our upbringing and experiences and a whole range of environmental factors. If the ability to perceive something as beautiful is dependent on an individuals ability to understand the concept of beauty in terms of an aesthetic ideal, then it would make sense that it was something that was learned rather than being inherent. However, if we consider Chomsky and his theory of an inherent, universal language ability that is unique to homo sapiens, then could it not be argued that the understanding of beauty could be an inherent cognitive function as wekll. It would certainly seem to make sense that a perception of beauty linked to, lets say, food stuffs that are good for us, or sexual partners who will provide a good chance of genetically vibrant and resiliant offspring.

So, we find ourselves with two disparate arguments with strong contentions on each side. I strongly suspect that what we consider to be the ability to teach what is beauty is actually an ability to teach concepts of aesthetic principle, or concepts of "right and wrong" from a perspective of social convention rather than something as discrete and concrete as fundamental beauty. If we consider the concept of beauty in architecture we see relatively rapidly changing aesthetic tastes in terms of form and changes of stylistic conceptions of function, but if we go beyond this I would suggest that there is at least an element of convention in regard to beauty found throughout the great architectural styles from the Parthenon and Colliseums of Rome and Greece to modern skyscrapers and shopping malls.

The principle is also found in nature, and is sometimes refered to as the "Golden Ratio" or a Fibonachi sequence of numbers. The principle has been at times erroneously employed in a far wider context than is appropriate to attempt to quantify human physiological beauty, which doesn't really work. However it does raise an interesting point. Perhaps it would be better to try to argue for the idea of an ability to teach beauty in terms of purity of concept, whether by an abstract mathematical theorum, or a great work of art, or an architectural masterpiece. Let me know what you think?