Beauty

39 posts

Flag Post

Firstly argh to writing the whole thing pressing the back button and losing the post!…lets try again….

Right this is a follow-on thread form the that’s gay thread which somehow got hijacked (sorry!) and became a discussion on beauty. For those of you who have not been following the last few pages on the other thread i’ll try and summarise the main points that lead to this deserving its own topic. (These are not necessarily my views but a collection of the points raised by several people)

- Are beauty, physical/sexual attraction and fascination the same things? Do they overlap or are they completely independent?

- What defines beauty? Can we use a set of rules and mathematical formulas to define it?

- Who defines beauty? Is it decided by the majority?

- Can personality and memories affect physical beauty?

6turmovak please add any major points i have missed. :)

Even though one of the points is about whether personality affects beauty this is a thread concerning physical beauty rather than whether personaility is more important than beauty (i.e. this is not about whether true beauty comes from within).

…and a small request, whilst this was being discussed on the other thread it remained a relatively polite and civil exchange of ideas (something of a miracle on an internet forum :p ). So i just ask that if there is something you feel is wrong, offensive or controversial by all means argue your point but please do it politely and with restraint rather than starting a flaming war.

 
Flag Post

De gustibus non est disputandum.

 
Flag Post

Einar, we already discussed that part although reaching to no clear conclusion, so would you care to prove your point or do you prefer only to quote a saying without pointing out how it is true.

(bobo, right now I am pretty sleepy and I don’t want to start commenting yet, so I don’t influence initial posts here)

 
Flag Post

Translation on what Einar said, anybody?

 
Flag Post

well einar said milskidasith is that if milskidasith responds to this thread, tell him that he is not beautiful.

 
Flag Post

Basically Einar said the phrase “There can be no argument on matters of taste” most commonly known as “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”

EDIT:

any major points i missed in the intial post?

Frankly, bobo, I don’t know. My head is too tired to think now. I am going to look over the threads in the forum and go to sleap

 
Flag Post

Einars post means “there’s no accounting for taste”, which i will have to agree with 6turmovak does not say much on its own. I am also with him in that I’m not going to comment too much right now as i want to see other peoples opinions on the points :)

(and 6turmovak yes completely on the not commenting but were there any major points i missed in the intial post?)

 
Flag Post

Well, consider Rule 34. I’m not into BBWs, MILFs, hentai or probably a hundred other categories I don’t even know about – and yet, there are obviously people attracted to such women.

Aside from lust, there’s the beauty of objects and ideas. For instance, I consider Duff’s Device to be a rather beautiful perversion of C; on the other hand, the Taj Mahal is said to be one of the most beautiful buildings in the world. However, I have to admit that I don’t see why. It may just be because I’ve never seen the building in person, but I think it just looks like a pile of bricks.

Thus, the wide variety of human taste leads me to say that the only rule regarding beauty is that your own taste is indisputable. Although there are some commonalities between people, the specific set of what any one person likes is their own. I don’t think it’s possible to create rules that say “this person likes that thing”, without including in the rules the minute details of that person’s mind.

 
Flag Post

[post deleted for trolling]

 
Flag Post

Are beauty, physical/sexual attraction and fascination the same things?

I don’t think so. The word ‘nasty’ springs to mind here, overlapping sometimes with sexual attraction, but never (as far as I know) with beauty.

Do they overlap or are they completely independent?

They do indeed overlap, someone can be beautiful to you, and you can want to ‘do’ them. I think they are completely independent provided you are not talking about a person or a relationship with a person – you enjoying a beautiful sight/sound etc. is nothing to do with whether or not you want to have sex with it. When you are talking about a person, your sexuality comes into play and you wanting to spend time with that person to enjoy their beauty could well lead to love and/or sex. i’m not sure about the last bit, it’s more of a wild guess that makes some sense.

Who defines beauty?

I don’t think anyone does. I think we each have an understanding of the word which we cannot describe in words (I have yet to find a definition that I completely agree with), all we can do is give examples and agree or disagree with other people. We’re all wired up differently, so even if two people had the same definition, they need not agree on the examples.

Is it decided by the majority?

Nope.

Can personality and memories affect physical beauty?

I think so. The example I can think of is destructive, you can wind up finding something repulsive that you once found beautiful. Say you used to like looking at waterfalls, but now whenever you see one you can only think about when your friends went over one and died. I would guess your personality also affects what you find beautiful, but in what ways I have no clue.

 
Flag Post

Is it decided by the majority – Nope.

So what about the concept of ‘traditional beauty’ ? (not actually agreeing or disagreeing just trying to expand on this :p)

 
Flag Post

So what about the concept of ‘traditional beauty’ ? (not actually agreeing or disagreeing just trying to expand on this :p)

I said it in my reply to ‘Who defines beauty?’, I just thought I’d answer each of your questions, even if my answers would be redundant :P

Traditional beauty I think would be the things that most people would agree are beautiful. It’s like if most people’s favourite colour was green, then the ‘traditional favourite colour’ would be green – more people would agree with it than with any other colour (or beautiful object) used.

 
Flag Post

I dont feel that it answered the concept of traditional beauty though, what baout the seven signs of beauty, the concpt of symmetry as a sign of beauty etc. These are things suggested to be decided by te majority.

 
Flag Post

seven signs of beauty

I haven’t heard about them, only the seven signs of ageing (and I can’t remember even them). What are they, or could you tell me what page of ’That’s Gay’ to look at?

the concpt of symmetry as a sign of beauty

Some people may find symmetrical things beautiful, fair enough.

These are things suggested to be decided by te majority.

I think that regardless of what the majority thinks about an object, people will and will not find it beautiful. It’s like their opinion, except they do not even think it out. Perhaps even like a random emotion, you are not right or wrong to feel a certain way, you just do.

 
Flag Post

ooo now you’re asking! I can’t remember them all off the top of my head and cant seem to find them on google (there’s a first!) but the ones i can remember…shell like ears (i.e. small and dainty), widows peak (a dip in the front of the hair line) ummm there’s one about full lips i think and another about a long swan like neck i think. These are old traditional western beliefs and apply only to women by the way :p.

As for symmetry, it wasnt just that some people are attracted to it theres a belief that humans are attracted to things with natural symmetry more than those without.

But also what about trends influencing beauty, is it really completely separate from the majority? Is what you believe to be beautiful not influenced by the culture you grew up in and the people you see around you or are there things that are jsut inherintly beautiful no matter what your cultural viewpoint is?

 
Flag Post

cant seem to find them on google (there’s a first!)

I know, I was surprised it didn’t come up with anything.

shell ears, widow’s peak, full lips, swan neck

You’re asking me what I think about these? I think while the majority opinion will tell you what person to use to advertise a product (for example) if you wish as many people as possible to think she’s beautiful, there will be some people who do not find her beautiful and they will not be wrong (or right) in that.

As for symmetry, it wasnt just that some people are attracted to it theres a beleif that humans are attracted to things with natural symmetry more than those without.

That may tend to be the case, but since it is not always the case, I wouldn’t incorporate it in a definition of beauty if I had to make one, except perhaps to note that people tend to find symmetrical things more beautiful.

But also what about trends influencing beauty, is it really completely separate from the majority? Is what you believe to be beautiful not influenced by the culture you grew up in and the people you see around you or are there things that are jsut inherintly beautiful no matter what your cultural viewpoint is?

What you feel is beautiful may be influenced by the majority, but that is completely different from it agreeing with the majority. I may have misunderstood your question, by ‘Is it decided by the majority?’, did you mean ‘Is an object beautiful just because the majority of people think it is?’?

are there things that are jsut inherintly beautiful no matter what your cultural viewpoint is?

I don’t think so. Certain things in nature are usually agreed upon to be beautiful, but I wouldn’t be surprised if somewhere, someone didn’t think a sunset was beautiful. Though if you can think of a better example of something that everyone thinks is beautiful, I would be surprised :)

 
Flag Post

are there things that are jsut inherintly beautiful no matter what your cultural viewpoint is?

I have to disagree with Kyriva, and again I will bring up the color problem. Even though color is arguably the same every and each person on the world, green is always green. People may see it differently, but green is always objectively green (if it has the physical properties of green). Why is that? Well, there are two options for a statement considering an object. Either the statement is true, or the statement is false. Even if we don’t know the answer ourselves, it exists put in concrete. At least that’s what the principle of bivalence states, and it is one of the fundamental principles of classical logic.

This leads to the conclusion that beauty is always either there, or not. Now there may be some things ugly about an individual, and somethings that make him/her beautiful, but the overall impression is what counts.

The “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” stuff is partially valid, but only for opinions. It does NOT clearly state whether the object is beautiful or not.

Thus, I claim that all things on the world are either beautiful or ugly although some may disagree.

 
Flag Post

I have to disagree with Kyriva, and again I will bring up the color problem. Even though color is arguably the same every and each person on the world, green is always green. People may see it differently, but green is always objectively green (if it has the physical properties of green).

What does that have to do with deciding people’s favourite colour?

Why is that? Well, there are two options for a statement considering an object. Either the statement is true, or the statement is false.

There are at least 3 options: always true, sometimes true, and never true.

The “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” stuff is partially valid, but only for opinions. It does NOT clearly state whether the object is beautiful or not.

You are saying beauty is partially down to opinion (and partially objective)?

Thus, I claim that all things on the world are either beautiful or ugly although some may disagree.

I agree, but it varies from person to person, and I’d swap ‘ugly’ for ‘not beautiful’.

 
Flag Post

The “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” stuff is partially valid, but only for opinions. It does NOT clearly state whether the object is beautiful or not.

How do you get that? It clearly states that the choice about whether or not something is beautiful lies in the eyes of the one who beholds it.

Thus, I claim that all things on the world are either beautiful or ugly although some may disagree.

Ah, I see you accept the Axiom of Choice.

Anyway, I don’t think your claim is very useful. You’re just saying that for any given thing, it is possible to choose whether it is beautiful or ugly. You’re not specifically saying anything about whether or not other people will agree with this choice, just that it’s possible to make it.

In any case, if you want to define beauty as being something absolute, you’ll have to account for the fact that the ideals of human beauty vary from culture to culture and age to age. Sure, there’s some constants like facial symmetry, but things like how much body fat is ideal change.

 
Flag Post

he’s only proposing two sets here, beautiful things, and ugly things. and he’s not picking from them, but rather saying it’s possible to decide if any particular thing is in them. i don’t believe there’s any axiom of choice going on here.

similar to the statement that everything is either black or white. maybe he’s got some not beautiful iff ugly in there. no gray area, etc etc.

 
Flag Post

its completely relative.

 
Flag Post

Doc what’s relative and what is it relative to?

 
Flag Post

- Are beauty, physical/sexual attraction and fascination the same things? Do they overlap or are they completely independent?
I think they could have some overlaps, in my op fascination is rather temporary terms to describe something beautiful and new, if it lost its newness then the fascination seized, sexual attraction could be helped by beauty but not necessarily the same.

- What defines beauty? Can we use a set of rules and mathematical formulas to define it?
I don’t know if there’s a truly working mathematical formula that could cover all kinds of beauty. Maybe beauty is when one is perceived to have access to libraries of relevant solutions that’s in harmony with each other.

- Who defines beauty? Is it decided by the majority?
It could be, Btw beyonce is People’s magazine’s current most beautiful woman in the world.

- Can personality and memories affect physical beauty?
I think it greatly affects one’s perception of beauty. It really depends on the problems that the viewers have experienced in life and whether or not the object was perceived to have the access to some if not all of the solutions of the problems harmoniously.

 
Flag Post

Lol, how do you find threads to necro?
Anyways… I guess since you are adding to this very old discussion… It’s excusable?
None of these people will respond though…

 
Flag Post

I wanted to talk about beauty : ). Since I want to know people’s opinion about Beyonce being the most beautiful woman in the world. That to me is like… why? There are so many beautiful woman out there, why not some model became the most beautiful, because obviously they are the models. Why not mother theresa, or marie curie, or suu kyi?