"Beauty, they say, does not have to be a proxy for health or advantageous genes. Sometimes beauty is the glorious but meaningless flowering of arbitrary preference. Animals simply find certain features — a blush of red, a feathered flourish — to be appealing. And that innate sense of beauty itself can become an engine of evolution, pushing animals toward aesthetic extremes. In other cases, certain environmental or physiological constraints steer an animal toward an aesthetic preference that has nothing to do with survival whatsoever."
During a long hike a couple of years ago my wife & I got into a fantastic long and wandering philosophical conversation (two reasons why I love her) and worked out a sort of high level definition of "beauty", in a design sense. I'd describe it as "the unexpected discovery of chaos within order, or the unexpected discovery of order within chaos."
There's more to it but that's the thesis statement.
If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then why is there such agreement among people on things that people find beautiful. Not unanimous agreement, but majority consensus?
Dec 22, 21 12:23 am ·
·
TIQM
Exactly. They share a human nature, which leads them to find similar things beautiful. So, at least in part, beauty is not “in the eye of the beholder”.
Dec 22, 21 10:11 am ·
·
TIQM
I agree that we are a blending of Nature and Nurture. I think that it's a good idea for designers to focus upon and take seriously human nature, the things we share as members of the family of humans. Culture is transient. Human nature endures.
Aspects of the natural world, for example. A sunset viewed from a scenic overlook, for example. An overwhelming majority of humans would say that is a beautiful thing to behold. Why? If beauty were truly “in the eye of the beholder”, then you’d expect 50% of people to find that sunset ugly.
Thoughts on beauty
Thoughts? I think this deserves a new thread
“Beauty will save the world” - Dostoevsky.
Reminded of this fantastic article from a couple of years ago:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/0...
"Beauty, they say, does not have to be a proxy for health or advantageous genes. Sometimes beauty is the glorious but meaningless flowering of arbitrary preference. Animals simply find certain features — a blush of red, a feathered flourish — to be appealing. And that innate sense of beauty itself can become an engine of evolution, pushing animals toward aesthetic extremes. In other cases, certain environmental or physiological constraints steer an animal toward an aesthetic preference that has nothing to do with survival whatsoever."
If you don't know why red delicious apples are garbage, time to go find out.
what does joe rogan have to say?
During a long hike a couple of years ago my wife & I got into a fantastic long and wandering philosophical conversation (two reasons why I love her) and worked out a sort of high level definition of "beauty", in a design sense. I'd describe it as "the unexpected discovery of chaos within order, or the unexpected discovery of order within chaos."
There's more to it but that's the thesis statement.
That's the sublime...
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That's all you need to know about beauty.
Starting a "Thoughts on beholders" thread.
You win the internet for the day tduds.
Chad, that’s the 3 general notes on my drawing package cover A0 sheet. Just after the don’t scale drawings and ask for clarification points.
Beauty, truth, light, energy, art, love--all sides of the same coin. (No, I'm not high.)
Me neither but you've inspired me
I have loved this song since first hearing...
"All art is absolutely useless." -Oscar Wilde
If beauty is in the eye of the beholder, then why is there such agreement among people on things that people find beautiful. Not unanimous agreement, but majority consensus?
Exactly. They share a human nature, which leads them to find similar things beautiful. So, at least in part, beauty is not “in the eye of the beholder”.
I agree that we are a blending of Nature and Nurture. I think that it's a good idea for designers to focus upon and take seriously human nature, the things we share as members of the family of humans. Culture is transient. Human nature endures.
Are not beauty and the sublime intertwined in some way?
“The Sacred and the Beautiful stand side by side, two doors that open onto a single space, and in that space we find our home.” -Roger Scruton
Aspects of the natural world, for example. A sunset viewed from a scenic overlook, for example. An overwhelming majority of humans would say that is a beautiful thing to behold. Why? If beauty were truly “in the eye of the beholder”, then you’d expect 50% of people to find that sunset ugly.
I think you're beautiful Rando. ;)
A Darwinian Theory of Beauty
Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
All beer is beautiful, in my eye.
x-jia,
if you haven't watched it already, I highly recommend you watch the TED talk I posted above, "A Darwinian Theory of Beauty" by Denis Dutton.
"Beauty is no more than the promise of happiness." - Stendhal
Beauty is when x-jla gets nuked for posting lies and BS.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.