Is beauty subjective or objective? The answer to that question is regarded by some philosophers as the “single most-prosecuted disagreement in the literature”. The popular conception of course is that beauty is subjective “in the eye of the beholder.”
However, philosopher Arlyn Culwick argued in 2019 that the ancient transcendentals are objectively real and not just mind-dependent.

Aesthetic relativism is an absurdity because it renders all judgements of beauty ultimately meaningless. Consider the analogy of room temperature at 71F where one person feels cold and another is hot. Or the argument by C.S. Lewis’ for objective value in The Abolition Of Man with his reference to God as the “archetype of beauty”

Scripture declares that beauty is an attribute of the Triune God, “One thing I have asked from the Lord, that I shall seek: That I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, To behold the beauty of the Lord” (Ps 27:4). As an attribute of God, beauty is necessarily objective. It is God himself, the architect of all reality, who defines beauty and graciously endows humans with his own capacity to appreciate what is aesthetically pleasing.

While the Christian worldview understands beauty is objective because it is ultimately grounded in the Triune God, naturalism has no transcendent ground for beauty. Beauty therefore becomes not only necessarily subjective, but is ultimately a meaningless concept. How does one account for beauty that has no evolutionary benefit? Israeli philosopher Eddy Zemach (PhD from Yale) affirms that “relativism in aesthetics is self-contradictory.” Zemach importantly concludes that the burden of proof is on those who deny the objectivity of beauty.

How then do we account for the differences of opinion if beauty is truly objective. Virtually all would agree that the rings of Saturn, a rainbow, a total solar eclipse, a delicate rose, the Himalayas, and a spectacular sunset are all objectively beautiful.
But what about something like the Johnny Cash song “Folsom Prison Blues”? Some would proclaim it beautiful, others are ambivalent and still others are repulsed by it. How do we explain that?

We must be careful to distinguish between personal preference and the objective value inherent in something. Think of a salad bar, where different preferences do not invalidate the objective nutritional value of each item on the bar. A very young child may think a cheap toy doll is more beautiful than a solid gold diamond necklace, but that does not affect the objective inherent beauty of each item. Years later, as an adult, the same person will undoubtedly regard the necklace as more beautiful. Our taste for beauty changes as we mature and are exposed to various facets of God’s marvelously beautiful creation.

The answer to differences of opinion on beauty is the incredible diversity with which God gifts creation and his moral creatures. Evan Minton helps us here by emphasizing we need to distinguish between musical taste and objectively good music; i.e., we can recognize when music that we may not care for is poorly executed. Groothuis reminds us that “While it is real, beauty is not completely analyzable according to materialistic categories – that is in the language of natural science.” In other words, there is something other-worldly about beauty that defies logical deductive analysis.

The inability to appreciate beauty as a direct consequence of sin, which would explain many “differences of opinion” with respect to objective beauty. When Christ frees someone from their bondage to sin and they subsequently walk in the renewing and regenerating power of the Holy Spirit, there is a growing awareness of transcendent beauty. The norm for a Christian is growing appreciation and awe for the beauty of creation. Our aesthetic discernment sharpens as we mature in Christ.

The degree of beauty that something or someone exhibits is directly proportional to the degree they reflect the beauty of the Triune God. As creatures locked in space-time who are focused on the material aspect, we must also remember that God views beauty differently than us; there is often an immaterial aspect to beauty of which we may not be cognizant of (1 Pet 3:3-4; 2 Cor 4:16; Phil 4:8; 1 Sam 16:7; Ecc 3:11). It is important to recognize that because of common grace, even unbelievers are capable of great beauty. God can be glorified in anyone that he chooses. God is a God of peace and order (1 Cor 14:43); disorder and violence are symptoms that beauty has been compromised.