We see that in every aspect of life -- spouses & dating, automobiles, architecture, dining, etc. -- aesthetics adds value. Compare property with a water view to that with a poor view. It could be the same building but the former commands a much greater price. It makes a difference or people would not pay more for it.

I think beauty and aesthetics are important. I'm very much a fan of William Morris, his art and philosophy, esp these two bits:

If you want a golden rule that will fit everybody, this is it: Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful.

and

Beauty, which is what is meant by art, using the word in its widest sense, is, I contend, no mere accident to human life, which people can take or leave as they choose, but a positive necessity of life.

I also agree with Virgil that education and awareness play an important role. I've posted on GW several times these quote from designers Alberta Hadley and Peter Dunham,

Albert Hadley: "Obviously, you can’t have much of an opinion if you don’t know anything about what you are talking about. You have to have some education or some exposure. I am always interested in young people who have some kind of knowledgeable background about the business and about the people who have been involved in it over the years. … When I was growing up, I was educated mainly from magazines because in those days that’s where you could get at it. All of the magazines were so fabulous because they showed how the best of the best people lived — the ladies and gentlemen of style and taste, and what their houses looked like. The articles were wonderful and many of the magazines in the thirties had marvellous illustrations by the artist of the day."

Peter Dunham: "I see a lot of people in the States, who basically want to live in a hotel or have the look of a hotel. I think this comes because, and this is a really snobbish thing to say, the American experience is much more limited. I mean compared to England, where there is always kind of a fancy house in the country near where you grew up, even if you grew up in a little village. In Europe, at one point or another, you are exposed to these palettes and you see the pinnacle of the amazing beautiful chateaus in France or the great country houses in England. Whereas I grew up thinking my inspiration is Lord and Lady something-or-other, who had an incredible house with incredible colors and beautiful paintings and furniture and it was all mixed together, and it was kind of roses and 17th-century Chinese porcelain. A lot of people here want what they last saw at the Four Seasons Hotel."

There is also the education in learning about the Golden Ratio (Golden Section, Golden Mean) and scale, proportion, and harmony. But I think many who haven't formally studied these subjects often have an unconscious understanding of when proportion and scale are off. It's when you don't listen to that little nagging, persistent feeling/voice and push forward regardless that trouble starts.

Pity those poor peasants raised in the wilderness by wolves with no access to the great masters! What, oh what, will they come up with for a home!

Form follows function. Aesthetics do not exist in a vacuum.

A home is not well-designed if it does not suit those who live there and make life easier and more enjoyable. Good design is rooted in purpose, but if it is not also aesthetically pleasing, it has only done part of its job.

who defines what passes as beautiful? magazines? houzz? the internets? architects?

Aesthetics is very important to me. I'm far happier when surrounded by beauty. As I age and spend more and more time at home, having a lovely home is more and more important to me and I take great pleasure daily looking at my house.

DE, there are certain established things which most people find beautiful. There are proportions of things that we appear to be hard-wired to find pleasing, or the lack thereof, unpleasant.

We tend to be attracted more to "pretty people" than those who are unattractive.

Houzz and the internet have ZERO influence over my design choices. GOOD magazines (my favorite is the UK House & Garden) have always influenced me greatly. One trains ones eye by seeing beauty repeatedly. It's sort of like proper grammar - one might not know the grammatical rule, but something just doesn't "sound right". Unfortunately today there is so much poor grammar out there that this is no longer a reliable way to train ones ear.

who defines what passes as beautiful? magazines? houzz? the internets? architects?

Plato, Kant, and Hume?

My mother told me there are three things I should not talk about at dinner parties: Religion, Politics, and Aesthetics.

This is a great topic for discussion but a difficult question to answer! Part of the problem is that the term is used very broadly and so means different things to different people. Aesthetics in the purest sense is a philosophy of sense perception so will always be subjective as we all have different sensory perceptions based on culture, background and education........what is 'beautiful' to one may not be 'beautiful' to another. So I would avoid necessarily equating aesthetics to beauty. Connected or related, yes, but they are not the same things.

For those interested, Google "aesthetics in architecture", https://www.google.com/search?ei=kABCXOq_Fs6WsQWqk7j4Dw&q=principles+of+aesthetics+in+architecture&oq=principles+of+aesthetics&gs_l=psy-ab.1.3.0i71l8.0.0..17917...0.0..0.0.0.......0......gws-wiz.ZO1wD1HmMz8

Lots to read there. I don't think aesthetics and beauty are necessarily the same thing.

There may be those who may think this is beautiful and aesthetically pleasing. If you do, there's not a lot of hope for you, except to go back to the study of aesthetics and architecture....

Where did you find THAT ?!?!?!? [rhetorical question]

I know...isn't it wonderful? And PINK!

From our current contrarian: "...who defines what passes as beautiful? magazines? houzz? the internets? architects?..."

The simple and obvious answer is each individual decides for her and himself. That's what the folks with the pink house above did.

But the more important question is whether (or not) the evaluation is an informed and experienced one. Looking at the pink house, I think the answer is obvious.

I'll put it like that: our surroundings do play huge effect on us, whether we notice it or not.

That's how I came to be so interested in design. Yes, I always was drawn to houses, but I didn't start reading books etc until I payed closer attention to how, say, very little kids react to spaces and changes within them.

I noticed that they will always go to play to the cleanest, most organized corner of the room:) Even if you'd inside be like "c'mon, I've just cleaned it" lol.

They do like seeing and touching many interesting things-yet at some point if will be chaotic rather than interesting- they'll get restless and a bit destructible. They'll add to the chaos, throwing things around, getting into fights. They'll get tired too. They'll want to change something.

Some kids inherently possess desire for order. gives them pleasure. These are fewer:)

All love to play with water-besides tactile thing, water also changes how surface reflects light. They want to wipe everything because they're fascinated with that change-something matte became shiny. And they can make it happen.

They love textures. a lot.

They are deeply fascinated with colors-some are more than others. I knew a boy who got so impressed with the concept of rainbow he'd want to dress in all six colors everyday(he left one shade of blue out, feeling probably is not definite enough to play a role). went on for months. Also tried to play with toys etc by order of rainbow. Would be upset if all six colors weren't there for him to employ:) He was a very intelligent boy by the way, and very social too.

Strong color preferences might appear, and they're not neccessarily what we assign.

They much more appreciate having their own creations on the wall than whatever adults think they'd like to see

They love bringing nature finds inside, and taking toys outside. They can observe things for the longest time-frost on the windows, fallen chestnuts, rain making splashes in puddles, you name it. They're always in connection with the world. The relationship of inside-outside is very important. They'll naturaly seek the best correlation between the two. "Time to throw stones, time to gather stones". They'll need both. And they'll hold to the "stones"-you need to hold to "stones" so you'll have something to throw and then gather:)

So, that's how most of us are wired to be. Interested. and yes, influenced and affected.

There's huge only slightly explored microscopical world inside us that influences us. Huge world outside influences us too. With these, we just less know how. Immediate surroundings? Oh yes. You bet.

One can play with it a tad too, see effects on grown ups. Well it's all well known and described.

Then of course it will depend on a person. Culture, how they grew up, where they grew up, customs and traditions, times they live in, places they saw, associations they made. And individual himself.

Some people will be more sensitive than others. Some will be much more sensitive.

I read that William Morris threw up while visiting that famous exhibition in Paris. Made him literally sick. I think most people wouldn't react that strongly. To whatever they consider not beautiful.

Or here's one more quote for example. Makes one ponder. Do I agree? Not sure, Need to think. But it's pretty obvious that aestheic expression was important to the author.

"..almost all crime is due to the repressed desire for aesthetic expression"

Since my answer is too long already and I'm not even sure it really answers the question, I'll try and stop now.

But these are things I start thinking of when contemplating your indeed very interesting and important question.

I'll continue to think, because to me, this relationship between us and that bit of the world we have a tiny bit control over creating, is the most fascinating one.

You know this saying, 'A man needs to do three things in his life-build a house, plant a tree, bring up a kid"?

That's the illustration. All three "things"-another person who's supposedly most like you, something living that's very unlike you, and something inanimate created by you-you do that knowing, hoping they're to outlive you, well, hoping to a different degree, of course, and you know you won't have control and as the time goes the less control you have, and it's painful(to a different degree, again..hence three very different relationships mentioned) and then you die.

But something within you pushes you to do this all anyway. To go through.

You'll be changed by that relationship too. Again, to a different degree.

A house won't neccessarily be " house" per se. As a tree might not be exactly a tree. and a kid might not be yours, or not a kid, etc.

But that's a good metaphor.