Eye of the Beholder

Everything in the universe is composed of elements, which are in turn different combinations of atomic particles called protons, neutrons, and electrons. The different elements are different ratios and combinations of the three atomic particles. For simplicity sake we will ignore the further reduction of the atomic particles into objects such as quarks.
If it is understood that all objects are made of elements, and all elements made of these atomic particles, then we can accept that the only difference in objects is in their arrangement of these particles. Arrangement, however, is rather arbitrary.
H2O is a perfect example of something that exists in multiple forms (objects in the world) but whose different forms are all identically composed. The three forms of H2O are water, ice, and vapor. One could say that he or she has a preference for ice to water, but that preference is arbitrary.

If water, ice, and vapor are all H2O we can call H2O “a”.
So:
Water=H2O=a
Ice=H2O=a
Vapor=H2O=a
Water=a
Ice=a
Vapor=a
a=a=a
They are all the same. By having a preference you are juxtaposing greatness onto something. If one has a preference for ice(a) they are saying it is better (>) than water or vapor. They are saying that a>a or a>a. That is illogical. It makes no sense for something to be greater than itself. It’s placement or position or arrangement is purely arbitrary. It’s the same logic as saying a pencil on top of paper is better than a pencil in a cupboard. The placement of the pencil does not change what it is. The distance in molecules of H2O doesn’t change its composition, it is still H2O, a.

If we understand this important analogy, we can understand that everything around us is very similar to water. Everything has the same composition, instead of H2O it’s the three atomic particles. The arrangement and number is meaningless. A substance like gold having more neutrons than a substance like dirt is meaningless when you think of the idea that having 10 pounds of ice is better than having 6 pounds of water, 1 pound of vapor, and 3 pounds of ice. A brick of gold has the same protons, neutrons, and electrons that can be found in your socks and shoes. Arranging your socks and shoes’ protons, neutrons, and electrons would easily yield a brick of gold. Their arrangement currently does not matter, as shown earlier. Favoring an object is illogical.

With this idea in mind, I cannot help but apply it to other forms of thought. Is beauty, then mercurial? Beauty is the favoritism of the placement of objects. The difference between a Picasso and a four year old’s drawings is placement of color, objects, etc. It is all paint, however. If beauty concerning art is capricious, would not beauty concerning any facet be capricious too? My favoring a woman with large breasts over a woman with small breasts, or a woman with wide hips compared to a woman with narrow hips is as arbitrary and ridiculous as favoring ice over water.

If so many people’s life goals and lives are built around the accumulation of wealth to achieve luxury items like cars, books, gold, etc. then wouldn’t their lives be based around the accumulation of the meaningless differences? Their lives would be illogical and irrationally based.

I believe the idea of beauty to be irrational, and I fear this would crush the very outlook of my world. From my ideas of women to my desire for success: they are all a foolish pursuit of the irrational.