Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Vita]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

[stevie]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

"Beauty" is a cognitive feature etched in biochemical structures of the human brain so that a combination of sense stimuli is experienced as "beautiful".

[Pattern-chaser]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

Isn't 'beauty' just a judgement we make of something we see (or hear, etc)? It (the 'beautiful' thing) is out there, but our perception of it being likeable is internal to ourselves; a human value-judgement?

[Vita]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

"Beauty" is a cognitive feature etched in biochemical structures of the human brain so that a combination of sense stimuli is experienced as "beautiful".

So there should be a biochemical combination that is so beautiful everyone loves it.

[psyreporter]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

Astronauts report to experience pure beauty when they view earth from space. Astronauts describe a transcendental experience called 'Overview effect on Earth' which is an intense emotional experience that can best be described as "interconnected euphoria".

Perhaps it provides a hint. The experience of beauty may be caused by an experience of a part of the interconnected euphoria of earth, of 'Gaia on earth' (life on earth).

Topic: Astronaut's 'Overview effect on Earth' (interconnected euphoria)
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17693

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_philosophy

[psyreporter]

Isn't 'beauty' just a judgement we make of something we see (or hear, etc)? It (the 'beautiful' thing) is out there, but our perception of it being likeable is internal to ourselves; a human value-judgement?

How could it be when Gaia is overreaching the meaning in which an individual is to find itself a part? With the idea of Gaia, one is logically to have the idea of beauty existing and originating beyond oneself.

[psyreporter]

Isn't 'beauty' just a judgement we make of something we see (or hear, etc)? It (the 'beautiful' thing) is out there, but our perception of it being likeable is internal to ourselves; a human value-judgement?

How could it be when Gaia is overreaching the meaning in which an individual is to find itself a part? With the idea of Gaia, one is logically to have the idea of beauty existing and originating beyond oneself.

Just for the record, I didn't intend to insinuate that Gaia philosophy is necessarily valid. My reply was based on the knowledge that Pattern-chaser advocates Gaia philosophy and is a self-proclaimed Gaian Daoist.

I believe God exists, and She is an emergent property of life, the Universe and Everything. Thus, She is not a creator-God. She is more like the soul of Everything, just as the Universe is the 'body' of Everything. She is Gaia, extended to embrace all that is, not just this tiny planet. No? OK, it makes sense to me. When asked, I describe myself, religiously or spiritually, as a 'Gaian Daoist'. Make of that what you will.

[JackDaydream]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

Kant thought that aesthetics is objective in a realm outside of human values. Others, including the postmodernists saw the way in which values are based on meanings, and deconstructed these. The emphasis became on the subjective aspects of beauty and art. However, there is probably basis for seeing intersubjective aspects of beauty with culturally shared aesthetics.

There are certain measures of beauty but the division between beauty and ugliness is a questionable area. That is not simply because of the subjective aspects but in the clearcut distinction between beauty and ugliness.
The two are binary distinctions which have cultural significance, but especially sociologically in the way people are perceived. This is partly in relation to the media and also how there are specific rankings of beauty. That is probably more true in relation to women because people are more likely to use the term to describe women. However, the issues of beauty, especially looks also applies to men. More teenage boys are beginning to experience eating disorders as well as girls, which is likely related to body image and ideals about beauty and ugliness.

The extreme depiction of the idea was in the writing of the story of 'The Elephant Man', who was based on the life of a real man. One interesting aspect which I found in reading the story of the man was that in spite of what were regarded as 'deformities', he was described as having beautiful hands. So, there may be aspects of beauty in those who are often perceived as ugly as well as ugly parts of those most commonly described as beautiful. Of course, tastes in human beauty vary and it may be that seeing beauty in appearance alone is rather shallow.

However, the reason why I am speaking of beauty specifically in connection with humans is that the way in which it is seen can be detrimental sometimes, especially if the term is used as a sweeping judgement. It is likely that most people have concepts of beauty in their mind which influence their likes and dislikes but it may be worth thinking about the applications of the ideas in relation to life in relation to philosophy.

[stevie]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

"Beauty" is a cognitive feature etched in biochemical structures of the human brain so that a combination of sense stimuli is experienced as "beautiful".

So there should be a biochemical combination that is so beautiful everyone loves it.

"biochemical structures" refers to brain regions and their neuronal networks. If an excitation is conducted along particular neuronal paths and combinations thereof due to sense stimuli then the subjective experience "this is beautiful" arises. There seems to be a commonality among humans as to these "biochemical structures" but this commonality is no perfect fit, i.e. what different individuals and individuals from different cultures experience as "beautiful" may be not exactly the same. Also due to so called "plasticity" of the brain the "biochemical structures" may change in the course of time due to external and internal conditions. Nevertheless to a certain degree there seems to be a common sense of "beauty" which is specific for human species due to the human brains they have.

[Pattern-chaser]

Isn't 'beauty' just a judgement we make of something we see (or hear, etc)? It (the 'beautiful' thing) is out there, but our perception of it being likeable is internal to ourselves; a human value-judgement?

How could it be when Gaia is overreaching the meaning in which an individual is to find itself a part? With the idea of Gaia, one is logically to have the idea of beauty existing and originating beyond oneself.

In religious/spiritual terms, I have long referred to myself as a 'Gaian Daoist'. I can see no reason to believe or assume that Gaia is compatible or incompatible with external beauty. How or why do you think that Gaia supports the idea of beauty being in the thing, and not in the 'eyes' of the beholder?

[LuckyR]

I know it is pointless to argue about something we do not know, but I wonder if our idea of beauty was drawn from somewhere. All cultures have different “art”, per se, but regardless of religion we must have gotten our idea of beauty/art somewhere, something that was 100%.

"Beauty" is a cognitive feature etched in biochemical structures of the human brain so that a combination of sense stimuli is experienced as "beautiful".

Exactly. As in most subjective assessments, the labelling reveals much more about the one doing the labelling, than what is being labeled.

[psyreporter]

In religious/spiritual terms, I have long referred to myself as a 'Gaian Daoist'. I can see no reason to believe or assume that Gaia is compatible or incompatible with external beauty. How or why do you think that Gaia supports the idea of beauty being in the thing, and not in the 'eyes' of the beholder?

The idea of Gaia would imply that Gaia is in the essence of what can be considered beautiful. The spirit and product of life as a whole is in which a thing or individual is to find meaningful existence, and thus beauty would reside within, or be a product of Gaia. Without Gaia, there would be no meaning and thus no beauty.

[Pattern-chaser]

The idea of Gaia would imply that Gaia is in the essence of what can be considered beautiful. The spirit and product of life as a whole is in which a thing or individual is to find meaningful existence, and thus beauty would reside within, or be a product of Gaia. Without Gaia, there would be no meaning and thus no beauty.

I'm afraid I can't make head or tail of this. Why/how is Gaia "in the essence of" beauty?

[psyreporter]

Not the essence of beauty but "the essence of what can be considered beautiful" when Gaia is to be considered an embodiment of fulfilment of what can be considered 'good' when it concerns earth and life as a whole. The human as a part of Gaia would only be able to acquire meaning through Gaia.

What do you think of the 'Overview Effect' in which astronauts report to experience a transcendental experience purely by looking at earth?

The Case for Planetary Awareness
But first we should understand why we don't already know of this profound experience, despite decades of astronaut reports.
http://overview-effect.earth/

The Overview Effect
It’s hard to explain how amazing and magical this experience is. First of all, there’s the astounding pure beauty of the planet itself, scrolling across your view at what appears to be a smooth, stately pace... I’m happy to report that no amount of prior study or training can fully prepare anybody for the transcendental experience this causes.
https://www.psychologyinaction.org/psyc ... iew-effect

[Pattern-chaser]

Not the essence of beauty but "the essence of what can be considered beautiful" when Gaia is to be considered an embodiment of fulfilment of what can be considered 'good' when it concerns earth and life as a whole. The human as a part of Gaia would only be able to acquire meaning through Gaia.

This doesn't mesh with my own understanding, although that understanding is a spiritual one, so contradiction is not an issue here. But I see Gaia as the 'soul' of Life, the Universe and Everything, just as the physical Universe is its 'body'. As such, Gaia is not really the epitome of beauty, or of the opposite, but just a representation/representative of Life? I would definitely quarrel with Gaia being 'good' but not 'evil', for such terms are meaningless without careful qualification. Even then, they serve no useful purpose that I can see. I think Gaia is a sort of distillation of Life, not an embodiment of the 'good' bits only.

What do you think of the 'Overview Effect' in which astronauts report to experience a transcendental experience purely by looking at earth?

I think it's just an extreme version of what many people feel just by looking out at the world. It is wholly understandable, and I would be surprised if most of us did not share this same feeling if we also were able to gaze down upon our world as astronauts have done.