Below I am asking three separate questions, the first question is just a difference in opinion. The second and third question I need some explanation as I am confused about the differences. My thought to question one is no they all all different in their own way, but I would like your opinion and why you feel that way.
Are persons, natural landscapes, and objects of art all "beautiful" in the same way?
Is art criticism based upon aesthetic value? Could you explain why please.
Could you give me an example of criteria to show that something has aesthetic value.
1- It depends on your criteria. Don't forget, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. What is one man's garbage is another man's treasure. For example, you have many different forms of art. Some people prefer abstract over still life. Others prefer surrealism or cubism; portraits or landscape art, etc. Some people equate beauty with the price of the acquisition, or it could be a personal feeling that you get when you look at it. For example, the Mona Lisa, some people find it beautiful while others find it dull and boring. Usually beauty, with respect to art, is equated with monetary worth.
Beauty and Aesthetic Value are questioned entities.