AESTHETICS

Aesthetics is the field of philosophy that studies the ways in which humans experience the world through their senses. It is especially concerned with the appreciation of particular objects when they strike the senses in a pleasing manner. For this reason aesthetics most frequently focuses on works of art and other similar objects that are explicitly designed for human sensory enjoyment. However, aesthetic appreciation is not limited to art; it is frequently directed towards the world at large. This is the world that surrounds humans in their day-to-day existence and thus constitutes the everyday environment: the world in which people work, play and live. The aesthetic experience of this world is the subject matter of environmental aesthetics. This area of aesthetics focuses on philosophical questions concerning appreciation of the world at large and, moreover, that world as it is constituted not simply by particular objects but also by environments themselves. Therefore, environmental aesthetics extends beyond the narrow confines of the art world and beyond the appreciation of works of art to the aesthetic appreciation of human-influenced and human-constructed as well as natural environments.

SCOPE & DEVELOPMENT OF AESTHTICS THROUGH THE YEARS

Environmental aesthetics is one of the three or four new areas of aesthetics that developed in the second half of the twentieth century. And, although it has emerged as a major field of study only recently and considers aesthetic appreciation of human as well as natural environments, it has roots in earlier traditions concerning the aesthetic experience of nature. Eighteenth-century landscape aesthetics together with notions such as the sublime and the picturesque have exercised considerable influence on its development. Nonetheless, there are important differences in emphasis between eighteenth-century landscape aesthetics and current environmental aesthetics, differences that stem in part from the fact that after reaching its climax at the end of that century, the former went into gradual decline and by the twentieth century was almost totally eclipsed by the philosophy of art. Thus, to some extent environmental aesthetics had to be fashioned anew in the second half of the twentieth century. The twentieth-century development of environmental aesthetics was strongly influenced by two factors, one theoretical and one practical. The former was the exclusive focus of twentieth-century philosophical aesthetics on art; and the latter was the public concern for the aesthetic quality of the environment that emerged in the second half of that century. Both factors helped, first, to broaden the scope of environmental aesthetics beyond that of earlier landscape aesthetics, which concentrated

primarily on sublime and picturesque scenery, and, second, to set the central philosophical issue of environmental aesthetics. The scope of environmental aesthetics was broadened by the exclusive focus of philosophical aesthetics on art, since this, de facto, excluded from mainstream aesthetics everything else, leaving it to environmental aesthetics. The scope was broadened by the public concern for the state of the environment, since this concern was not simply for preserving natural scenery, but also about the aesthetic condition of everyday human environments. Thereby, the central philosophical issue of environmental aesthetics was set in large measure by the apparently dramatic contrast between that which had become the focus of public concern, everyday environments and that which had become the sole focus of philosophical aesthetics works of art..

THE AESTHETICS OF HUMAN ENVIRONMENT AND EVERYDAY LIFE

Knowledge and an appreciation of the presence of biodiversity for its own sake is another reason to preserve it. Quite apart from killing wildlife for food, it is important as a tourist attraction. Biodiversity is a beautiful and wonderful aspect of nature. Sitting in a forest and listening to the birds, watching a spider weave its complex web or observe a fish feeding. Symbols from wild species such as the lion of Hinduism, the elephant of Buddhism and deities such as Lord Ganesh, and the vehicles of several deities that are animals, have been venerated for thousands of years. Valmiki begins his epic story with a couplet on the unfortunate killing of a crane by a hunter. The Tulsi has been placed at our doorsteps for centuries.

Non Cognitive and Cognitive approaches in environmental aesthetics were initially developed mainly
by reference to large-scale environments and in many cases originally tailored primarily to address issues concerning the aesthetic appreciation of natural environments. Each of the cognitive and the non cognitive approaches has resources that may be brought to bear on these areas of investigation.

COGNITIVE APPROACH
Cognitive accounts hold that appropriate aesthetic appreciation depends on information about what something is what it is like, and why it is as it is. Thus, for human environments and for the objects, events and activities of everyday life, what is relevant to appropriate appreciation is knowing about their histories, their functions, and their roles in human life (Parsons and Carlson 2008). Consequently, just as knowledge provided by the natural sciences is central to appreciation of natural environments, in the case of human environments that provided by the social sciences, especially history,

geography and anthropology, is applicable (Carlson 2009). Some cognitively oriented accounts especially stress cultural traditions in the aesthetic experience of human environments and everyday life. Such traditions seem particularly relevant to the appreciation of human environments, more so than to the appreciation of natural environments. They are germane to what might be termed cultural landscapes environments that constitute important places in the histories and cultures of particular groups of people (Sepnmaa 1993). What is called a sense of place together with ideas and images from folklore, mythology and religion frequently play a significant role in individuals aesthetic experience of their own home environments. Again, as with natural environments, examples illuminate the cognitive position. Consider the hedged and stone-fenced landscapes of England and Scotland. In their aesthetic appreciation, knowledge of traditional farming practices is especially relevant, as well as information about the social, political and economic forces that have shaped the look of the land. By contrast, consider the human environments of contemporary North American agriculture. In this case, it is important to know about the functional utility of cultivating vast fields devoted to single crops. Such knowledge encourages enlarging and adjusting frames, senses and even attitudes appropriately to appreciate the sweeping, uniform landscapes that result from such farming practices.

NON COGNITIVE APPROACH

The noncognitive approaches to environmental aesthetics also provide several channels for exploring the aesthetics of human environments and especially for pursuing the aesthetics of everyday life. The aesthetics of engagement is presented as a model for the aesthetic appreciation of not simply both nature and art, but also of just about everything else. It studies the aesthetic dimensions of small towns, large cities, theme parks, museums, and the like. Moreover, under the name social aesthetics, it even investigates the aesthetics of human relationships, delving into the idea of getting along beautifully (Berleant 2005). Likewise, accounts that emphasize related dimensions of experience, such as various kinds of emotional and feeling-related states and responses, help to illuminate appreciation, aesthetic and otherwise, of human environments and especially of the objects, events and activities of everyday life. How people feel about where they live and what they do cannot but play a role in aesthetic appreciation. In the tradition of John Dewey, some non cognitive accounts tend to construe aesthetic experience in a broad way, giving a central role not primarily to the distal senses of sight and hearing, but to the proximal senses of touch, smell and taste. Although this revision of the concept of the aesthetic is not philosophically uncontroversial, it seems particularly appropriate when considering the appreciation of

the objects, events and activities of everyday life, which humans experience in an especially intimate fashion.

ETHICS AND AESTHETICS

When the word value" is used to justify conservation, it is often associated with economic or financial value.. The difficulties with an economic approach to valuation are often attributed to its focus on what's of value to humans. It's important to understand, however, that the anthropocentric focus does not mean that only humans are valuable. It means that only humans do the valuing. Deep ecology" and related approaches would argue that values exist independently of humans and that those values deserve respect. Broadly speaking there are three reasons why place a value on biodiversity:, 1. We might need it. - Values associated with use. 2. We like it. -- Values associated with pleasure, appreciation, or aesthetics. 3. We think we ought to. --Values associated with ethics or morality..

Intrinsic vs. instrumental value

One of the concepts conservationists often try to use to indicate the limitations of economic approaches to valuation is the distinction between intrinsic and instrumental value. Something is said to have intrinsic value if it is good in and of itself," i.e., not merely as a means for acquiring something else. Happiness might be an example of an intrinsic value, because being happy is good just because it's good to be happy, not because being happy leads to anything else. Something is said to have instrumental value if it is good because it provides the means for acquiring something else of value. Having a net worth of a million dollars is an instrumental value. Having those assets is good only to the extent that you can use them to get something else-like happiness. Biodiversity, those who argue in this vein would claim, is intrinsically valuable. Attempts to quantify this intrinsic value seem wrongheaded. How can one put a price on the existence of a species or an ecosystem if it has its own value independent of humans? Perhaps if everyone agrees about the source of intrinsic value in nature arguing that bio- diversity is intrinsically valuable compelling. Things

that are intrinsically valuable seem to be of virtually infinite value, so it is worth almost any price to save them.

Consequentialist vs. non-consequentialist theories of ethics

There are two broad categories of ethical theories concerning the rightness or wrongness of actions: consquentialist and non-consequentialist. A consequentialist theory judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on the consequences that action has. The most familiar example would be utilitarianism - that action is best that produces the greatest good for the greatest number" (Jeremy Bentham). Over what ethical community" are the consequences to be measured? Does damage to trees count as much as damage to human beings? _ John Stuart Mill Socrates dissatisfied should have more moral weight than a pig satisfied. The criterion might be satisfied by an action that causes great harm to a small number of people while giving a small benefit to a great number. Biodiversity implication - Biodiversity has instrumental value, because it can contribute to human welfare, but it has no intrinsic value. A non-consequentialist theory of value judges the rightness or wrongness of an action based on properties intrinsic to the action, not on its consequences. Libertarianism - People should be free to do as they like as long as they respect the freedom of others to do the same. Biodiversity implication - Biodiversity has instrumental value, and only to the extent that it can contribute to the expression of individual freedom. It might be possible to develop a libertarian theory that included the rights of non-human organisms to be free". Contractarianism - No policy that causes uncompensated harm to anyone is permitted (Pareto safety). Biodiversity implication - Depending on how broadly the term anyone" is defined biodiversity might or might not have intrinsic value. In a widely influential version of contractarianism due to John Rawls, it is very difficult to imagine how biodiversity could have intrinsic value. There have been philosophers, notably deep ecologists" and those promoting animal rights who have attempted to extend ethical theories that fall broadly within this realm to non-human organisms, or at least to animals. More recently, Martha Nussbaum has developed a contractarian approach to ethics that is broader than the one Rawls proposed. While

Nussbaum develops her ideas in ways that allow the contractual approach to be applied to non-humans, that extension involves something like rights" for individual animals, not for species and certainly not for biodiversity. In any case it should be clear from this brief discussion that although appeals to intrinsic value sound good and make us feel good, they are very difficult to justify philosophically.

Instrumental value versus Use value

Using economic approaches to placing a value on biological diversity pose great challenges and an important part of using those approaches must be incorporating non-use values into the economic framework. It is vital to remember that instrumental value is not the same thing as use value. Use values are those derived either from using a resource, e.g., the commercial value of lumber extracted from a forest, or from the costs we incur from failing to protect a resource, e.g., the cost of levees and dams used to control river flooding when floodplain wetlands are converted to residential or industrial use. Non-use values include those associated with pleasure or appreciation, i.e., aesthetic values, and those associated with obligation or duty, i.e., ethical values. It is therefore not problematic for an adherent of any ethical system to incorporate non-use values of biodiversity into decisions about what is right or just, so long as the non-use values concerned are aesthetic values. It's interesting to ask, though, whether there is some sense in which we have a duty, i.e., an ethical or moral obligation, to conserve biodiversity (or protect the biological integrity of a system or ensure the ecological sustainability of our use of a system and its resources). Problems for an environmental ethic so the question becomes: Is there a reasonable basis on which to argue that we have an ethical obligation to promote conservation of biodiversity? The question arises because values that react ethical obligations are more likely to command adherence than those that react taste or preference. In an effort to persuade others that conservation efforts are worthwhile, being able to show them that those efforts are required to fulfill certain ethical observations will carry a lot of weight. There are, however, several problems facing the development of a conservation ethic: the problem of holism, the problem of natural", and the problem of deciding.

THE HUMAN BENEFITS OF ENVIROMENTAL AESTHETICS

Humans conserve the bio diversity being a part of it and benefit themselves by aesthetically conserving the environment for various purposes. Quality of life Tourism Micro-climate Roof gardening. Human habitat

QUALITY OF LIFE
NATURE PHOTOGRAPHY

Nature photography appeals to our aesthetic sense because it can forever capture both the simplicity and complexity of beauty in nature. The complexity of a hummingbird sipping nectar from a flower can be captured in one instant by a photographer and shared with many viewers of the photograph. The instant is forever preserved. Instead of being fleeting, it becomes lasting. Not only does the aesthetic value of nature photography come from the instant captured but also from the photographer's skill at showing us nature in ways that we otherwise would not see it. A photograph uniquely frames the photographer's vision. We notice flowering plants, but we feel the beauty and power of nature much more when we see a bud bloom into a flower through time-lapse photography. A photograph of a plant's foliage can capture the varied shades of green in dappled sunlight as well as the texture and veining of the leaves. All of these simple qualities of light, substance, and texture coalesce together to broaden our visual sense as we study the photograph. Our appreciation of the world around us is enhanced through the art of nature photography.

Capturing on camera a bird in flight, alit on a branch, or in its nest gives us a rare, close up peek at a creature that has fascinated us since we could see it take to the air while we were bound to the earth. Similarly, photographs of a germinating plant, from the fragile stalk that pushes itself up from the ground, sprouting only two leaves, to its older flowering or fruiting mature form, leave us with a respect for the mysteries of life and the life-giving properties of Mother Earth. Nature photography allows our conscious and subconscious minds to ponder the mysteries of nature. This is of both aesthetic values, bringing the beauty of nature, captured in a durable fashion, to our perception, and of practical value, helping us to maintain a respect for the beauty of the natural world. To conclude, nature photography has great aesthetic value. Its value resides in the ability of the photographer to share with the viewer a uniquely framed, fleeting instant captured on film. Its value also resides in the inherent beauty found in nature that we can witness through a photograph and the power of nature as it reflects growth and change, helping us to respect and understand the world surrounding us.

TOURISM
Tourists are attracted by natural landscapes which harbor significant biodiversity. Tourists in coastal areas enjoy swimming in clean waters among the fish and coral reefs, and watching whales and seabirds. Others go on safaris to watch wildlife. All these activities require intact and healthy ecosystems. National parks rely on functioning ecosystems to provide visitors recreation, education, culture and fun. Tourism is one of the fastest growing industries and can be a sustainable alternative to economic activities that would be damaging to biodiversity. It can be a sustainable alternative to more damaging industries. The money that tourists spend can serve nature, society and culture in the form of protected areas and other attractions. Sustainable tourism can also make communities proud of maintaining and sharing their traditions, knowledge, and art, which contribute to the sustainable use of local biodiversity. Tourism can have a variety of negative impacts on biodiversity, particularly when there is no adequate management. Irresponsible and unsustainable tourism can damage nature through habitat destruction, overexploitation of local resources, waste and pollution, invasive alien species, infrastructure development, and greenhouse gas emissions. Tourists expect a clean environment and they will not return to polluted or degraded destinations, which will cause economic losses. Travellers, the tourism

industry, governments and investors all have an interest in the conservation and sustainable use of resources. Biodiversity keeps tourism going, not to mention that it meets our most basic needs by supplying food, drinking water and medicines.

FACTS ABOUT TOURISM:

Tourism contributes about 8% of global GDP, and one in 12 jobs world-wide. In 2007, global international tourist arrivals grew to 898 million, 6% over 2006 levels. Arrivals in developing countries, however, grew by 8%. In spite of the economic crisis, there is no change in long-term growth projections of the UNWTO, the World Tourism Organization. 46% of the workforce in tourism are women, as their percentages of employment in most countries are higher than in the workforce in general (34-40% are women, ILO data). Carbon dioxide emissions from tourism account for approximately 7% of total global emissions, a problem compounded by the unpredictable nature of emissions in the higher atmosphere.

MICRO CLIMATE ROOF GARDENING

The current challenge for cities facing the global climate crisis is how to design sustainably in ways that incorporate the creation of dynamic, inspiring and functional spaces for people to live, work, study, play and invest. In a previous article, the importance of public spaces was highlighted in the reimagining of cities; pointing out that sustainable cities need higher densities coupled with vibrant public spaces. Another form of public space, which is often overlooked, are roofscapes. This is a missed opportunity as not only can roof gardens contribute to stormwater management, they can also reduce biodiversity loss, heat island effect and noise pollution. In addition they act as natural oases which are very necessary for people living or working in cities. We are running out of space in our urban areas and need to use our space more intensively. Roofscapes can vary in function and form from green spaces used as gardens or social spaces to those that are planted with low-maintenance plants with a focus on climatic and biodiversity benefits

rather than visual impact. Then there are those roofscapes that are integrated into the built structure as a whole, while also form part of the surrounding landscape. The New Life Sciences Building at the University of the Western Cape in Bellville is an excellent example of how the roof and building as a whole have been incorporated into its immediate surrounds. It combines a number of interrelated departments under one roof in order to share laboratories and amenities. The roof garden provides an educational space which is an extension of the classrooms and laboratories. The campus is on the Cape Flats which is prone to drought in summer and flooding in winter, and where a number of species are under threat because of urban growth. As the building is located in a harsh environmental context, with gale force winds in summer, the challenge was to create a comfortable environment inside and outside the buildings. In The Urban Green File Penny Unsworth of OvP Associates points out that because the new building is situated adjacent to a busy arterial road which is in public view, a major objective was to create an appropriate landmark building which announced the presence and the new image of the university. This new image was achieved by landscape architects OvP Associates working closely with dhk Architects to create a learning facility comprised of two buildings which include a six storey laboratory and an organic learning centre with a caf. These buildings are held together by the landscape through the linkages of open spaces around the buildings. Structural engineers Henry Fagan & Partners as well as Environmental consultants Ecosense ensured the structural integrity of the extensive earth embankments which ramp towards the roof gardens on top of the learning centre, creating the fluidity between built form and landscape. Due to the environmental sensitivity of the site in close proximity to the nearby Cape Flats Nature Reserve, it was very important to plant mainly indigenous plants, chiefly endemic species found in the Cape Peninsula. The vegetation strategy for the roof gardens was to use succulent plants which are low-growing and mat-forming, and thus withstand gale-force winds. They are also extremely drought resistant, so less soil and moisture loss occurs with the heavy summer winds.

In addition, the selected plants do not require deep soil to survive so the structure requirements of the roof are reduced, making it more cost effective. Rainwater is not harvested off the roof as the roof gardens act as natural retention systems, reducing the impact of storm water. Not only is the roof garden creating a more sustainable built environment, but it is also an educational landscape due to its strong connection to botanical studies and research at the university. The intention is to use the roof garden as a mother nursery to establish plants used elsewhere for rehabilitation and research purposes on campus and at the reserve. On top of all the functions the roof garden is already fulfilling, it is also promoting the biodiversity of the area due to the use of indigenous plant species and as a result the roof garden forms an ecological island for plant, insect and bird species. This is extremely important for the sustainablitiy of cities especially in areas with little ecological value due to urban development such as the central city of Cape Town where there are few open spaces containing indigenous plants. Gwen Theron of Golder Associates Africa (are they landscape architects) says it is critical that we look at the ecosystem value of roofs as an opportunity to bring biodiversity back into cities. This element is extremely important especially in an environment like Cape Town where the biodiversity loss rate is one of the highest in the world. The introduction of the Biodiversity Showcase Garden which is part of the Green Point Urban Park is an important step in the battle against biodiversity loss. Now imagine if plant, bird and insect species could live freely between the Cape Town roofscapes, the Urban Park and the Table Mountain National Park which forms the heart of our city. The installation of a vegetated roof is expensive but the roofs present saving in the long term building maintenance. Landscape architect Mark Saint Pol states that the real saving in green roofs is the roof itself (structure and waterproofing) as it is protected by the soil and planting which makes up a green roof. In a study done during the research for the proposed extension of the Cape Town International Convention Centre it indicated that in a retrofitted building, the roof could potentially be preserved by the new green roof for up to 25 years longer than the previous roof had been and that is the

major saving. With the green-building movement, a change in mindset is needed among professionals and developers to ensure the delivery of green roofs as a standard aspect of building development. This process will be hastened by the fact that planted roofs present a highly visible marketing strategy for ecological design; enhancing public perceptions and, therefore, the corporate image of buildings. Up to four points can be earned in the Green Star SA rating system when it can be demonstrated that the ecological value of a development site is not diminished. Planted roofs effectively provide shading for buildings reducing the absorption of heat. This not only reduces the heat island effect associated with cities but also increases the efficiency of solar panels. Eric Noir of WSP Green by Design says green roofs can also impact on the effectiveness of photovoltaic cells which function more efficiently in cold environments. The reduction in the outside operating temperature of the area around the PV cells allows for up to 10% more efficiency out of the cells. With the need to design with more social-responsiveness, these are prime examples of how to reimagine unused spaces. Creating green, vibrant and sustainable spaces within highly urban areas not only reduces the negative effects of urban development, but also provides more spaces for people to be able to take a deep breath of fresh air.

HUMAN HABITAT
Going environmental and being little environmentally friendly at mansion plus at labor is something that bountiful humans are doing every day. The role of the homemaker in maintaining the order of a space in preventing the build-up of clutter, so that the order of the composition is not obscured can be likened to that of a curator. A composition, therefore, must exist before tidying can occur. The tidy home invites visitors and occupants alike to view it as a work of art. Domesticity itself might also be viewed as an art, and therefore the entire practice of inhabiting as aesthetic. Yet it is not entirely clear and for needs the to treated why domesticity, home, be that matter,

as

art in

order to be

recognized as aesthetic. Elevating domestic drudgery to the status of art assumes that art is of a higher aesthetic order than domesticity.

Art and domesticity need not be treated as part of a hierarchy or degree of aesthetic quality. Both belong to the category of that which can be considered aesthetic. Rather, to emphasize the importance of engagement in both cases, while stressing that neither ought to be considered more or less engaged or particularly different in mode of perception or consumption. The way in which they

are different is in their genesis and construction. Art, in the institutional sense, is generally created with
the category of art in mind, while domesticity occurs as a matter of course in daily life. While a hierarchy may exist among more or less appreciable objects of the same kind, there is no inter-kind hierarchy concerning aesthetic values. Further, the world-artwork transcends any classification of the form of art and the artistic genre of a particular form of art, and thus comprehends all possible forms of art and all possible genres of a particular form of art into a single unnamable holistic artwork, indicating that the notion of a worldartwork is to be so expansive as to engulf the very category of art itself, thus making the world artwork unnamable and uncategorizable. In this case, then, domesticity understood as artistry, while practicable, cannot be measured against a distinctive category of art. The risks in treating the everyday or domesticity as aesthetic only on the basis of artfulness are numerous. Doing so reifies the belief that art and the aesthetic are continuous or even synonymous. It offers little criticism of the problems of traditional, art-based aesthetics, such as a lack of attention to the participants embodied experience of a work, the hegemony of vision over the other senses, and

the difficulties of attending to composition and organic unity in everyday life. And, lastly, it provides a myriad of cultural stipulations on objects or practices in order to even be considered artful, let alone aesthetically-rich. Furthermore, it is particularly difficult to fit use-objects, which so many domestic objects and practices are, into the label of work of art because of their utilitarian quality. Alternatives to the art-centered model of aesthetics include functional beauty. A toaster might be considered aesthetically appreciable based on how well it makes toast, just as a method for cleaning a dirty bathtub might be considered aesthetic based on how easily it removes grime, the amount of effort required for good results, and whether the method has any side-effects such as bad smell, water pollution, or drain clogging. Yet, quite often simple functionality does not signal aesthetic appeal. Consider, for example, a threadbare couch, dingy wallpaper or chipped dishes and cups, and cracked driveway, none of which exude aesthetic appeal but still function all the same. Aesthetic appreciation might correlate with objects or practices that do not suit their goals particularly well, such as when we use decorative egg-beaters instead of shiny Kitchen Aid mixers. The egg-beaters may fulfill the goal of being aesthetically-pleasing and kitsch, but they certainly do not fulfill the function of beating as well as the electrical mixer. Similarly, function is not the only link to aesthetic behaviors or judgments, as we might be motivated by both social and aesthetic reasons to clean up our appearances, despite the fact that our clothes and bodies function all the same regardless of stains, stray hairs, or bad breath. In many cases, recognizing and cultivating a relationship between function and aesthetics is valuable, but function cannot be the determining factor for every aesthetic judgment.
GRACE ON THE ON LOOKER

The call for the aesthetic enrichment of domestic labor is followed by advocacy of grace. The possibility for grace resides in the cultivation of good habits, discussed above. Grace enters into domestic practice when a homemaker seeks to accentuate or, at least, retain the spectacular dimension of a space without destroying the equilibrium of labor and pleasure rooted in habit. In short, the homemaker seeks to inhabit a beautiful space without becoming a slave to it. In this way, a tension between habit and spectacle, and particularly between livability and composition, must be maintained. Grace is specifically located, therefore, between the fresh eyes of the visitor and the embodied pleasures of habit accessible only to the occupant. One must go about his or her daily tasks with an economy of effort, removing the appearance of drudgery from domestic tasks and

elevating them to the level of well-styled gracefulness. A balance is therefore struck between effort and the appearance of effort, as is required in the case of successfully entertaining guests. In this sense, The aestheticization of domestic process likens it to a performance. But this performance is not simply for the pleasure of the on-looker, but also for the homemaker, who takes pleasure in the process. While one affords the homemaker some pleasure in the performance of domesticity, it is on the basis of grace and artfulness, rather than on the basis of his or her own everyday experience. Domesticity, here, is artful as a performance, working only from within the reaches of an art-based model of aesthetics. But, as Paul Souriau notes in The Aesthetics of Movement, grace often takes more effort rather than less, more in order to give the appearance of ease and effortlessness. Souriau explains that simply exhibiting vague qualities of ease or effortlessness do not necessarily amount to gracefulness; rather, gracefulness is the effect of certain qualities, including conformity with personal habits, which may not be limited to the artful choreography described above. Finally, Souriau asserts that the actual appearance of gracefulness depends upon elegance in movement and an avoidance ofgauche or embarrassedactions, but that when this elegance is put on or overtly intended, it is certainly not graceful. Naturalness is an essential condition of grace. The most elegant gesture will not please with a preoccupation with elegance: it is no longer freedom of movement, no longer perfect ease. One must act within the bounds of ones own comfort and on ones own basis, constructing a balance of behaviors and domestic order that suits oneself. There exists a delicate balance between spontaneity and choreography within our domestic lives simply because, for many, a taste for aesthetic balance demands it. This is demonstrated by the often precarious balance between order and disorder in our organizational regimes, and in the work of negotiating composition and livability in a domestic space. Excesses of mess, clumsiness, orderliness, and perfection are often experienced as too extreme for an inhabitant. Saito goes as far as to say that there is something almost inhuman and repugnant about the sign of order that controls every inch of space or every moment of our life. The reverse also holds true; that is, an environment or a life that lacks any order or discernible organization is not appreciable. But as she goes on to point out, Our appreciation of order and mess thus does not seem to be directed towards those qualities in themselves. It is rather toward the way in which we negotiate between exerting control over these inevitable natural processes and accepting them by submitting ourselves to such processes. In this sense, we seek balance in the surface qualities of our domestic spaces not solely for the sake of cleanliness and messiness themselves, but rather because the balance between the two is often more pleasurable.

A similar balance applies to our domestic routines, insofar as gracefully choreographing the way we clean the bathroom might seem delightful if performed for an audience, but often we are simply attempting to get a job done and cannot be bothered to do it with grace and design. We may instead attend to the negative aesthetic qualities of some housework, attending to it on its own terms and without the added stipulation of choreography. Does this mean that the aesthetic value is diminished? No, because the aesthetic value in the choreographed and ordered scenario is determined by its visual appeal to onlookers, while the spontaneous scenario gives itself over to function and need, affording the possibility of aesthetic attention. It is more valuable to focus on the experience of the inhabitants themselves, since, barring dinner parties or houseguests or times when we do put on certain behavior, we rarely go about our household activities as if for an audience. Imagine subjecting your neighbors to the ins and outs of your toilet-cleaning regime! For the inhabitant, the entire gamut of sensory data,, both negative and positive, is experienced not just through the visual senses but also through the entire body in our movements. By focussing primarily on the sensory engagement of the inhabitant, it is possible to generate awareness of the aesthetic possibilities of our domestic routines, however clumsy or unlikely they might seem. Richard Shusterman notes that body consciousness and some aesthetic reflection have traditionally been discouraged by Platonic Western philosophy, but advocates a renewed awareness of the body as a method for cultivating enjoyment and combating a growing reliance on outside stimulations. A balanced approach between reflective awareness of ones interactions with the world and unreflective awareness in spontaneous, unchoreographed action provides a method through which aesthetic awareness within the domestic sphere might be cultivated. As he notes, a focus on ones body as foreground necessarily involves a feeling of ones environmental background, indicating a vision of an essentially situated, relational and symbiotic self. Shusterman further affirms that habit and bodily movement do and must respond to a bodys situations in an environment, because these external stimuli contribute to the possibilities and limitations afforded to the body. But he underscores the importance of a certain unconsciousness that would leave room for spontaneity, thus preventing daily life from becoming entirely unwieldy or unmanageable. Deliberate attention to ones actions, while increasing the possibility for graceful action, requires increased effort in order to break habitual body patterns and maintain fixed attention. Likewise, as Berleant notes, Deliberate attention to perceptual qualities is a central mark of the aesthetic. The physical senses play an active part, not as passive channels for receiving data from external stimuli but as an integrated sensorium. This deliberate attention or engagement advocated by Berleant amounts to an awareness of engagement as it happens. This emphasis on continuity

between body and environment is crucial in order to overcome the tyranny of performing for others, thus affording the participant with a greater awareness of his or her own body, activity, and environment. Through a renewed attention to our engagement, it is possible to cultivate more aesthetic possibility. Furthermore, it would theoretically reactivate the senses branded as passive, like smell, taste, and touch. The entirety of the human sensorium is engaged in this domestic exchange and gives rise not solely to the apprehension of sensation but also to an understanding and experience of place and situations. The olfactory, gustatory, and haptic senses contribute to experience, as do more somatic sensations of the muscles and bones. The synaesthesia of these forms of perception amounts to an environmental perception that engages the entirety of the sensorium. So, Berleant writes, We become part of environment through interpenetration of body and place. Surface qualities and immediate sense data, however, are unavoidably superficial if taken alone as the single characteristic of environmental perception, for social, physiological, and psychological factors also shape and determine our experience. Human perception blends memories, beliefs, and associations, and this range of meanings deepens experience. It is necessary, therefore, to consider the ways in which imagination and memory play a role in our cultivation of a domestic aesthetic.

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF CONSERVATION OF BIO DIVERSITY IN THE NAME OF AESTHETICS

All-out systematic conservation of biodiversity is not justified solely by beliefs in sacred creation, patrimony, or other such values, although the public may often advocate environmental stewardship based on one or another of these values. Instead, my article was part of a series of papers actually dealing with the biodiversity loss in an evolutionary context. These studies and earlier ones consider both the problem and possible solutions in ways that go beyond simply preserving biodiversity writ large. For example, the implementation of plans for corridors and networks that link local populations of plants and coral reef species are practical solutions based on evolutionary principles, mindful of the reality that we cannot preserve all regions, all habitats, and all species. Not all factors are known or outcomes predictable with precision. There are now even cases where invasions by large numbers of plant species, contrary to conventional expectations, have been accompanied by the extinction of relatively few native plant species. Evolution entails randomness, heterogeneity, and other factors that that frustrate our forecasts

of Earth's environmental future. Still, urgency dictates a straightforward effort to mitigate the current massive destruction of biodiversity. The word conservation may have problematic connotations, but by any other name there remains an acute need for a broad public as well as scientists to recognize the biodiversity crisis and to do something about it. Many such factors include:

GENETIC INTERVENTION
Many genetic mutations are deleterious, reducing the individuals chances of survival, but are also recessive, requiring the inheritance of one mutant gene from each parent to manifest their effect. This means that in a large population, their effect will be masked by the overwhelming numerical superiority of the normal dominant gene. For the reasons explained above, in a small population chance events cause the loss of genetic variability and so increase the likelihood that individuals will suffer harmful genetic diseases. A study on mammals kept in zoos illustrates the harmful effects of inbreeding. In the past, to maintain sufficient productivity, zookeepers often bred animals that proved to be good at producing young. Because of this practice, some breeding pairs quickly came to have the same grandparents and, in some cases, the same parents. The studies showed that such pairs produced young that were much less likely to survive than young from pairs of unrelated individuals. The practical problem for conservation is whether to place efforts on genetic intervention bringing in new blood, that is, individuals and so genes, from the outsideor to concentrate on the factors causing the initial decline.

FUR FARMING
Fur farming is the practice of breeding or raising certain types of animals for their fur. Approximately 30

million animals are raised in cages and killed worldwide for fur every year. Minks are the animals most commonly raised on fur farms, but foxes, chinchillas, rabbits, dogs and other animals are also victims. Animals raised on fur farms live in intense confinement, and suffer psychologically. Neurotic behaviors include pacing, circling, self-mutilation, and throwing themselves against the sides of their wire cages. Caged foxes will resort to cannibalism. Although some animals die from disease, stress, cannibalism and self-mutilation, enough survive to make the endeavor profitable. Methods of killing on fur farms include breaking the animals neck, gassing, lethal injection, genital electrocution and anal electrocution.

TAXIDERMY
Taxidermy is the act of mounting or reproducing dead animals for display. Though considered weird, many pet owners prefer to get their animals stuffed rather than mourn for its loss. It is aesthetically considered as a souvenir for the animals existence and its bonding with its owner. But one should be aware of possible disease among game. Chronic Waste Disease (CWD), which is in the same family as the human disease Creutsfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD), is a growing concern. While humans can't yet contract CWD, the more an infected body is moved around, the more likely contamination of land becomes.