1) The human being is a creature desirous of pleasure. In those instances where the human being actively seeks pain, he is doing so because he gains pleasure from pain. Most generally, our actions aim at some sort of good.

2) There is a heirarchy of the senses. The most dominate of these is the sense of sight, followed by the sense of touch. The auditory faculties follow, trailed by the sense of taste, then lastly the sense of smell. The reasons for the ordering are thus:

Sight is obviously the sense upon which humans are most dependent.
Touch, not hearing, follows sight because hearing is most prone to deterioration with age or weathering. Granted, the eyes are also prone to deterioration but the abilities to correct deteriorated sight far exceed the abilities to correct deteriorated hearing. Those persons who are wholly blind or wholly deaf are the exception to the rule. Yet still, in those who are wholly blind touch is the sense that dominates, being the faculty through which the blind form "sensation images" of those things they could not otherwise "see." Hearing does not enjoy this degree of magnification, although it does experience some hieghtened sensitivity in the blind. Likewise, for the wholly deaf, touch is not magnified but the sense of sight grows more accute, as the deaf person seeks to communicate by means requiring sight (i.e. sign-language, lip reading, etc.) Taste is next in order because, although taste does depend on smell for the maximization of the stimulatory experience, without smell taste still exists. There seems little need to justify a claim that the olfactory sense is the weakest of all.

3) Having established that the human animal is desirous of pleasure, and then established a heirarchy of the senses, it can now be said that the human being wishes to surround himself with those things that bring pleasure upon the senses. Because humans are primarily visual creatures, it follows that humans shall wish to surround themselves with things pleasing to the eye. Then, of course, those things that are pleasing to the touch must also follow. Indeed there is little to no middle ground where this sensation is concerned, for, unlike the eyes, the origin of the stimulus is far less removed from the experiencing body, making the sensation more personal. In touch things are either pleasing and comfortable, or displeasing and uncomfortable. From what has been written, the correct conclusions can be drawn with respect to the remaining senses.

4) The creation of those things that are displeasurable to any of the senses therefore is an act of agression against one's fellow man. Just the same that torture, looked at for its own sake and not as a means to some end, is considered a wrong because of the inherent injustice is forcing a displeasurable sensation on another human being, so much the same for the rest of the senses as well.

5) The argument that beauty or pleasure is subjective has no place here. Certain things are held to be universally beautiful and/or pleasurable. Certain geometric proportions are universally held to be more pleasing than others. The anatomy of the human face and represenations of the face elicit the highest degree of responsiveness. Representations of the human face in expressions of eudaemonia or some other pleasure are the representations to be considered the most favorable. Music, too, can be written to follow certain mathematical proportions deemed most pleasurable to the senses universally.

Therefore: The creation of ugliness (anything not deemed universally pleasing) is an act of agression against society. The creation of visual ugliness is the most immoral, followed by ugliness or displeasure in touch, then sound, lastly taste and smell.