All works of art are beautiful and have something to teach us. Thus, since the natural world as a whole is both beautiful and instructive, it is a work of art. The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument ['uses the inherently vague term "beautiful" without providing an explicit definition of that term', 'concludes, simply because an object possesses two qualities that are each common to all works of art, that the object is a work of art', 'attempts to establish an evaluative conclusion solely on the basis of claims about factual matters', 'fails to consider the possibility that there are many things that are both beautiful and instructive but are not part of the natural world']