# Where does the idea of beauty come from?



## Ryukil

As far as nature. Why do basically all humans find certain aspects of nature beautiful? Is it because we evolved in it, are products of it? If aliens lived on some planet vastly different than ours, that we considered ugly, would they find our world ugly? It's just sort of odd to me. The development of nature over history should be totally sporadic. How did it turn into something we consider "beautiful"? (And no, I'm not advocating the existence of a God. I'm agnostic.)


----------



## hammerfast

from the roman empire haha


----------



## Ryukil

hammerfast said:


> from the roman empire haha


What does that mean? lol


----------



## Ramondo

Ryukil said:


> As far as nature. Why do basically all humans find certain aspects of nature beautiful? Is it because we evolved in it, are products of it? If aliens lived on some planet vastly different than ours, that we considered ugly, would they find our world ugly? It's just sort of odd to me. The development of nature over history should be totally sporadic. How did it turn into something we consider "beautiful"? (And no, I'm not advocating the existence of a God. I'm agnostic.)


Yes, it's because we've evolved. The person who finds things beautiful (the opposite sex, life in general) are more likely to reproduce. Natural things like the sun, plants, etc are beautiful because they give us life. So green pastures are more beautiful than brown ones.


----------



## Twinkiesex

I hate that word. It's like if your not "attractive" your completely worthless as a person. I think whoever comes up with these ridiculous standards of beauty should be sent away to a special camp. I'm tired of feeling completely worthless cuz I don't look like Angelina Jolie.

Rant over.



Sorry haha  needed to vent


----------



## ltrain

Twinkiesex said:


> I hate that word. It's like if your not "attractive" your completely worthless as a person. I think whoever comes up with these ridiculous standards of beauty should be sent away to a special camp. I'm tired of feeling completely worthless cuz I don't look like Angelina Julie.
> 
> Rant over.
> 
> Sorry haha  needed to vent


Be glad you don't look like Angelina Jolie. I've never found her attractive in any way and lots of guys I've spoken to agree with me.


----------



## Twinkiesex

ltrain said:


> Be glad you don't look like Angelina Jolie. I've never found her attractive in any way and lots of guys I've spoken to agree with me.


It's funny how out of touch Hollywood's beauty standards are with the real world. When did bone thin and fish lipped become "in"??

This is comforting...maybe I won't die alone after all.


----------



## ltrain

Twinkiesex said:


> It's funny how out of touch Hollywood's beauty standards are with the real world. When did bone thin and fish lipped become "in"??
> 
> This is comforting...maybe I won't die alone after all.


I agree. Don't worry too much about what Hollywood says. No matter how you look there will always be someone who finds you to be the most beautiful in the world. You just need to find that somebody... or they need to find you!


----------



## fredbloggs02

I can't say for sure. It appears to me societies attempt to condition it. A developed intellect encourages an ethereal sense of beauty, which encourages the emancipation of women at the expense of the concentrated male sex drive. Some call the unconditioned male drive indiscriminate. Some human beings find sagging-buttocked eighty+ year olds covered in abscesses beautiful; or so they say, though perhaps that is the work of the intellect. 

Society has every interest in dampening the sensuous impulse and raising an intellectual reprieve that splits everything apart before piecing it together as abstract bodies inside the weight of a foreign infinity. The idea of science is the method by which society dampens the natural drives. Stark contrasts, arithmetic bodies, groups, divisions and confluences contribute weight and form to a world that consequently grows out of these concepts and separates from us. To the majority in society beauty becomes heavier. When the herd tell you: "this is beautiful" they take possession of it intact. There is power in "the beautiful" that preceded ours.


----------



## Twinkiesex

ltrain said:


> I agree. Don't worry too much about what Hollywood says. No matter how you look there will always be someone who finds you to be the most beautiful in the world. You just need to find that somebody... or they need to find you!


They need to come find me dammit...THIS ****S TIREING.


----------



## Ryukil

I mean beauty in nature, like the Grand Canyon or Niagra Falls. Not "beauty" in people.


----------



## Reinah

I think it's an extremely complex topic, since there's a huge range of things that can be considered beautiful (music, art, living and nonliving things, ideas, actions), ranging from the most abstract concepts of beauty to material objects that we find beautiful, and what may be moving or beautiful to one person might mean absolutely nothing to another. There's definitely a gigantic web of reasons why certain things might seem beautiful to the human mind. Defaulting to "it must be a miracle/god" is just...meh


----------



## markwalters2

Are you only talking about beauty of nature or does beauty of people also come into the picture?


----------



## Ryukil

Well, I wasn't really talking about beauty of people. Beauty of people is just facial symmetry and **** like that. lol


----------



## Ramondo

Ryukil said:


> Well, I wasn't really talking about beauty of people. Beauty of people is just facial symmetry and **** like that. lol


If you're really kean, you could tackle this:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aesthetic-judgment/


----------



## albrecht

Twinkiesex said:


> I hate that word. It's like if your not "attractive" your completely worthless as a person. I think whoever comes up with these ridiculous standards of beauty should be sent away to a special camp. I'm tired of feeling completely worthless cuz I don't look like Angelina Julie.
> 
> Rant over.
> 
> Sorry haha  needed to vent


The problem isn't in thinking that some people are beautiful and others aren't, but, as you've hinted, in the idea that these are standards everyone _ought_ to look like or live up to. Another problem is the idea that beauty is about physical attractiveness.


----------



## Royals

Twinkiesex said:


> They need to come find me dammit...THIS ****S TIREING.


Who is Angelina Jolie? The woman with inflated lips? You look better than her.

Back on topic, even when the idea of beauty stems from Egypt, maybe Cleopatra or Nefrititi, there was still some superifical person who invented the term beauty. He/she is to blame for millions of suffering people with eating disorders and beauty complexes.


----------



## harrison

Op this is actually a really interesting point. I really don't think I know where this 'idea of beauty' originates from, perhaps it's just something innate in all of us?


----------



## Royals

Humans started to focus more on beauty at one point though, because in thestone age the focus was more on survival. Maybe when make-up, pigment, clothers, jewelry, masks/hats was invented. Must be from the Egyptian era. Or any civilization that was notorius for adorning it's people.


----------



## retracekim

Because certain pressures called for it. Things such as the attraction of curvy women-which represents that she can bear children easier. 

Or women being attracted to bigger men, because they can protect them.

So it is natural selection that drives the notion of "beauty".


----------



## One Man Wolfpack

I think OP was talking more about nature, like what evolutionary purpose is there to us finding flowers, a rainbow, a sunset or the night sky beautiful?


----------



## Gorefiend

Well, not everyone shares the same view of beauty. There's subtle differences in all of us, but being drawn to beauty is in us all, and there's a limited amount of things one can find beautiful, so you're bound to cross paths with someone who agrees with you.. Let's say you look at a picture that the majority finds beautiful, it does not necessarily mean you find the same thing beautiful. Let's pretend this picture is of a mountain with snow and a clear sky.. One person might think the sky is beautiful, another might like the atmosphere of the picture.
Anyway, a lot of us also find beauty in things we connect good memories to, and since a lot of us have similar habits, the cycle continues. It can also work in the opposite direction. If someone grew up in Hawaii, they might feel the need to move to Alaska.. But that Hawaiian might also be really fascinated by the beach, because he or she has beautiful memories from spending time there.


----------



## markwalters2

Beauty is subjective. In the eyes of the beholder ...


----------



## Ramondo

One Man Wolfpack said:


> I think OP was talking more about nature, like what evolutionary purpose is there to us finding flowers, a rainbow, a sunset or the night sky beautiful?


Yes, I think given that he's already confirmed this twice, that's a reasonable conclusion.


----------



## PaxBritannica

I think evolution has acted upon humans to perceive the world as beautiful for different reasons, rather than the other way round. I.e. the world being beautiful inherently and humans then appreciating it


----------



## Mina84

Aesthetics of nature is a sub-field of philosophical ethics, and refers to the study of natural objects from their aesthetical perspective


----------



## Wolfboy

The classical Greek noun for "beauty" was κάλλος, kallos, and the adjective for "beautiful" was καλός, kalos. The Koine Greek word for beautiful was ὡραῖος, hōraios,[5] an adjective etymologically coming from the word ὥρα, hōra, meaning "hour". In Koine Greek, beauty was thus associated with "being of one's hour".[6] Thus, a ripe fruit (of its time) was considered beautiful, whereas a young woman trying to appear older or an older woman trying to appear younger would not be considered beautiful. In Attic Greek, hōraios had many meanings, including "youthful" and "ripe old age".


----------



## Wolfboy

Our minds control what we sense and controls what we call beautiful. So, a woman with perfect head and body is beautiful on the surface but underneath she's a skeleton. That skeleton is atoms. Those atoms are empty 'space' mostly.


----------



## ugh1979

Twinkiesex said:


> I hate that word. It's like if your not "attractive" your completely worthless as a person. I think whoever comes up with these ridiculous standards of beauty should be sent away to a special camp. I'm tired of feeling completely worthless cuz I don't look like Angelina Jolie.
> 
> Rant over.
> 
> Sorry haha  needed to vent


Nobody came up the standards of beauty in people. They evolved naturally. The more beautiful you find someone the more likely you are to mate with them.

That creates cultural trends, which differ, often significantly with time and location based on many factors.

For example, rich European cultures a couple of hundred years ago tended to favour very pale plump women. A slim tanned women was seen as a sign of poverty. Now that's totally changed of course.


----------



## ugh1979

Royals said:


> Back on topic, even when the idea of beauty stems from Egypt, maybe Cleopatra or Nefrititi, there was still some superifical person who invented the term beauty. He/she is to blame for millions of suffering people with eating disorders and beauty complexes.


Nonsense.

See my previous post.


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> Beauty is one of my very personal reasons why I believe there is a rational mind behind it ,,
> The problem with beauty in nature is , type in google images beauty nature ... It is a design - been designed .


By that logic any random pattern you see is a design. It's clearly nonsense.

We evolved to appreciate certain configurations of matter. (Typically ones that served us a positive practical purpose, like lush green meadows and warm sunsets, but there are lots of more abstract reasons for design that fall outwith portraying nature.)

If we were all designed to appreciate the design of some supreme being then why aren't we all the same?

A bottom up evolutionary process rather than a top down design process makes far more sense.


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> ugh1979
> ________
> 
> I don't see what is the problem with the word " design " ! , What's the difference between " been designed " and ,,,
> " been programmed " ! ,


The use of the term design in this context has significant links with the creationism/intelligent design as opposed to the process of evolution.

You have even confirmed that was your intended use of the term in your post so I'm not sure how you are getting confused.



> or you just want to say there is no such a thing as " beauty " like you said before there is no such a thing as good and evil ?!


What I'm clearly saying is that it's subjective, but based on evolutionary/cultural programming. Just like good and evil.


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> I said " rational mind behind " it's my personal belief , I don't know how this has anything to do with " creationism/intelligent design " as we used to see in the scientific context (or) that what some people used to mention while arguing against evolution !


Your post clearly implied the beauty of nature indicated it was designed. That has everything to do with creationism/intelligent design.



> If you think evolution = Atheism , then it's your problem !


I don't. They both describe very different things.



> Who said it isn't !


You were trying to say I was implying it didn't exist.


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> Yes and that's what I " believe " in , Again it's my personal belief ! Hell No


Of course it does. You can't believe in evolution _and _intelligent design.



> Okay I am going to ask you .. Do you think it's ok for an evolutionary biologist to believe in the Christian God ?


That depends on their definition of the Christian God. Everyone has their own. Christians are especially good at cherry picking what they do and don't believe from Christian doctrine.

However if an evolutionary biologist is also a proponent of intelligent design then they are contradicting themselves.


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> Really ?! I feel so much enlightened now !
> Which intelligent design you are talking about! in which context ? This site is intelligently designed !


The intelligent design branch of creationism of course.



> It's obvious that you are talking about "Creationism" ...


So you do know what definition of intelligent design I'm talking about. :roll



> where I said I am with both evolution and creationism ?


You claimed nature has it's appearance by *design* which has a "rational mind behind it", therefore you are a creationist/intelligent design proponent.



> Nonsense.
> I think you need to learn what professionalism is .


I wouldn't deem them professional if they say one thing professionally but believe the exact opposite personally.

What kind of idiot completely lacking in integrity would do such a thing?


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> I still don't see what's your problem with the word "design" , Stephen Hawking said " We have this one life to appreciate the grand design of the universe " and he has a book called the grand design !


Haha are you seriously quoting a book which provides an extremely strong argument for the non-existence/need for a god to exist in your defence of creationism? :haha

Talk about missing the point!

I'll say it again, you claimed nature has its appearance by design which has a "rational mind behind it", therefore you are a creationist/intelligent design proponent. That is not "design" in the same sense Hawking talks about it in _The Grand Design_.

You should try reading the book, or even just the synopsis, rather than guessing the contents match your own beliefs after reading the title. :roll



> ah you mean evolution refutes the idea of a higher power ? When I say I "believe" there is a rational mind behind the origin of life !


Yes it directly refutes the idea of a "higher power" being responsible for how life forms.



> what evolution has to do here ! , Anyway see what I said :


No idea what you are trying to say there. I can only assume English isn't your first language.



> I said "very personal" why I "believe" . I hate evolution but I am obliged to accept and defend it sometimes even though it doesn't support my personal belief .


How bizarre.



> you can't judge me for my personal belief .


Of course I can, and I am. I am judging you to be completely wrong on the subject of if life has a designer.



> They are a bunch of idiots that's not your business! , It's their personal belief , They have the right to believe what they want and you don't have the right to judge them as long as they separate/don't invoke or throw their beliefs and what is more important their work isn't affected by what they personally believe in , It is called a personal belief !


If they personally believe the opposite of what they professionally believe there is a huge problem, and it casts serious doubt on the quality of their work.

I have every right to judge them, just as I judge you.

Imagine someone worked professionally with children but was also a paedophile. Would you not judge them as long as they didn't actually interfere with the kids in their care and didn't hurt anyone?

All beliefs are valid of judgement by others.


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> mmm I think it's pretty easy for anyone to comprehend from the quote that both we " me and the man whom I really respect" don't share the same opinions/views ,


Yes it easy to comprehend, so why did you quote him when clearly you knew it was totally out of context and in fact related to a definition of designer you don't believe in?



> I was just trying to teach you what professionalism is , I think you got what I meant , unless you are pretty stupid .


You're mention of professionalism was in relation to something else, which I went on to address the fallacy of.



> why this : :haha


A creationist quoting Hawking's _The Grand Design_ as a defence of their use of the word design in this context is hilarious.



> Stop pretending you are not fooling anyone , This only shows how unmature your posts are for a 34 years old man especially with all the smilies you are using !


Stop pretending about what? Are you saying I'm wrong about the book? What exactly is immature? What's immature about a couple of emoticons in the absence of fuller or physical discourse? They are an efficient way to convey facial expression and thus tone in short casual forum discussions.



> Not educated enough !


Maybe you aren't. What age are you?



> Not smart enough !


Don't worry, keep trying. I'm sure you'll get smarter with age and why you learn you to speak better English so people whose native language is English can understand you.



> True ! my English is really bad I never use this site without an online dictionary . but it's getting better I guess .. I hope so ^^


Fair enough, I'll not give you such a hard time for it then. Unfortunately, I do sometimes speak to people like you on these kind of topics whose English is just as bad and shockingly it's their *first *language.



> judging judge judge judge judgement blah blah blah


Excellent response. Very clever.



> Does anyone understand anything ugh says ?!


Thousands of replies to my posts on the very forum indicate yes, many people. What aren't you understanding?


----------



## ugh1979

Coincidence said:


> Why this is so difficult for this member to understand I don't get it !
> People who support Intelligent design/Creationism are trying hard to refute evolution , All their arguments are silly , nothing scientific , no peer-reviewed research supports their claims , no article has been published in a scientific journal , Nothing! , I am completely against them . but I am spiritual I believe in a higher power .. I never said I believe in evolution and Adam/Eve story at the same time just a higher power , he is trying to make me say that I belong to those people who are trying to prove evolution is false , I kept saying that is not the intelligent design that I believe in ,,, ! I believe that laws of nature are intelligently designed . And (no) that doesn't makes me a creationist/intelligent design proponent according to the wellknown meaning of those two words .. He keeps quoting the word " design " I don't know how the word "design" directly makes me someone who doesn't believe in evolution !


So if you don't believe in creationism/intelligent design then how to you justify your original statement where you claimed nature has it's appearance by design which has a "rational mind behind it"?

Even if some hypothetical being set the fundamental forces at the beginning of the universe then left it to evolve without interfere, (as deists do), it wouldn't mean that the being had designed all that emerged.


----------



## Raphael200

Coincidence said:


> Beautiful


:agree:agree:agree:agree:agree:agree

Humans are dumb.


----------

