Mando: So, more change in the perceiver than in the perceived. Of course,
there cannot be beauty without a perceiver ..
Geoff
From: armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
CC: armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Envisioning by Cheerskep
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 11:41:09 -0700
Geoff,
I'm don't necessarily mean physical beauty, i mean the
specific parts that cause the aesthetic reaction in our
brain from any thing, By aging I mean that constant
exposer any thing eventually brings familiarity , which
in turn changes our perspective for better or worst.
But change is Happens.
mando
On Oct 27, 2008, at 6:52 AM, GEOFF CREALOCK wrote:
Mando: "Beauty ages" - physical beauty? beauty depends on fashions -
which change? true beauty lasts well?
Geoff C
From: armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
CC: armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Envisioning by Cheerskep
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 20:16:50 -0700
Boris,
i didn't include the second line,which includes my reasoning, if it
make any difference. For me, and I assume for others, beauty ages.
ok! For starters (beauty)----- beauty is fuzzy, at best.
Because; #1 the mind does not remain rigid in it's taste.
mando
On Oct 26, 2008, at 6:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The sense of beauty- what makes us complete human. Mystical-yes,
> fuzzy- can't
> be applied.
> Boris Shoshensky
>
> -- armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ok! For starters (beauty)----- beauty is fuzzy, at best.
> mando
> _____________________________________________________________
> Orlando Vacations - Click Here!
> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2221/fc/
> Ioyw6i4uGWEQ4VVzgmSWllGAoB6RNx
> WS85cUrmHKYVapbzWArSAu9m/?count=1234567890
