Aesthetic terms, metaphor and the nature of aesthetic properties

In this paper I begin by arguing that aesthetic terms cannot be used as metaphors and I end by arguing that the concept of an aesthetic property is analyzable in nonaesthetic terms. The beginning and the end of the paper are connected by a complex reasoning that can be summarized as follows: aesthetic terms cannot be used metaphorically because their applicability is never restricted to a particular category of objects (Section I); if the applicability of aesthetic terms is never restricted to a particular category of objects then a fortiori it is never restricted to a category of nonvisual objects; if the applicability of aesthetic terms is never restricted to a category of nonvisual objects, then all aesthetic terms are applicable to visual objects (Section II); if all aesthetic terms are applicable to visual objects, then all aesthetic properties can be exemplified by such objects; finally, if all aesthetic properties can be exemplified by visual objects, then for the purpose of analyzing the concept of an aesthetic property it suffices to analyze the concept of a visual aesthetic property (Section III).