Originally Posted by 53x12
HTBS, read the quote again. "Objective good looks". There is no objectivity to "good" looks. What looks good to one car owner is ugly to another. Sure color and shape are objective. But what looks good as he was referring to is subjective. There is no definition for "what looks good for all mankind." There is a definition for color codes, shapes and designs. But not what looks good.
Btw HTBS less is more. If you can't state your point in 4-6 sentences in a concise manner you probably don't have anything to say.
Aestetics ("looks") i.e. how something appears to one person, is completely subjective to the viewer. There is nothing objective about aestetics.
Example, a certain curve could appear appealing to one person, but not an other. While the curve itself is an object, the appeal to one's senses (vision) is wholly and completely subjective.
The plurality of viewers having a BAD reaction to a specific set of traits would be considered to be objectively bad looks.
INCORRECT. It's still subjective. Because on the other end you have a plurality of viewers (using your terminology), that have a GOOD reaction to it. You can't have objective BAD and GOOD looks when talking about the same item, and by the very definition, 2 people seeing something differently doesn't equal objectivity. Hence.. it's subjectve looks/aestics of an object.
Can we just ban H2BS now and get it over with? He's vomited on his keyboard again and this time, proven that he's been NASIOCs longest troll. Jokes all on us.