Darwin’s theory and beauty

Christ · Post by **Christ** » July 15th, 2011, 9:04 am

How does Darwin’s theory explain beauty of creatures? Flowers ,animals , birds ,trees,… are beautiful in human view .What is the relation between this beauty and struggle for survive .Why did slow changes result in that?
Furthermore, beauty could attract humans to these creatures so making a danger for their existence among millions of years .

Maxweismann · Post by **Maxweismann** » July 16th, 2011, 12:17 pm

[quote="Christ"]How does Darwin’s theory explain beauty of creatures?

It doesn't.

MadScience · Post by **MadScience** » July 16th, 2011, 3:43 pm

Christ wrote:How does Darwin’s theory explain beauty of creatures? Flowers ,animals , birds ,trees,… are beautiful in human view .What is the relation between this beauty and struggle for survive .Why did slow changes result in that?

Good question. What evolutionary reason could there be for humans being attracted to a meadow teeming with food and water as oppsed to a barren lifeless desert or a frozen tundra?

Christ wrote:Furthermore, beauty could attract humans to these creatures so making a danger for their existence among millions of years .

That is why we have found fossilized signs that clearly state, "Please don't pet the pretty pythons or Chuck will escort you from the building"

rainchild · Post by **rainchild** » July 17th, 2011, 6:07 pm

It's hard to say what attraction to beauty has to do with our survival. Flowers are pleasing to look at, but so are coral snakes and poison arrow frogs.

Two sets of considerations confuse me even more when it comes to this issue.

For one thing, art is not always meant to provoke pleasure. For example, Goya's painting of Saturn devouring his son reminds us that many artistic works exist to not to please but to fascinate in other ways.

For another thing, the popularizations of modern evolutionary theory that I've read often emphasize two points. First, natural selection is not the only mechanism of evolutionary change--genetic drift also plays a role.
Second, since there is no design in evolution, a structure or capacity naturally selected for one use may turn out to have other uses that may or may not be adaptive.

Perhaps the deliberate creation of fascinating artifacts is an inevitable side-effect of our capacities to attend to novel stimuli and make artifacts, to say nothing of our desire to avoid boredom. As for the cult of "true art" and "the artist," these are notions have come to us relatively recently from what little I've read.

Belinda · Post by **Belinda** » July 18th, 2011, 9:34 am

Would you not firstly have to define what for you constitutes beauty? Is it what pleases you? Or is it what is true for you? Or is it good? Or life-enhancing? Or is beauty inherent in something that stimulates emotional reactions? Or is beauty inherent in things that calm you down? Can a thing be beautiful if it signifies a lie or part-truth?

Wowbagger · Post by **Wowbagger** » July 18th, 2011, 2:13 pm

http://www.ted.com/talks/denis_dutton_a ... eauty.html

Belinda · Post by **Belinda** » July 19th, 2011, 5:15 am

Great video! One issue from it is that individuals have differing ideas of beauty. I don't mean only that individuals have differing educational advantages so that there are people who have not learned to appreciate some medium of beauty such as 'serious' music. I especially mean that culture, which is inherently changeable,highlights beauty of e.g. mountains or cliffs which in other cultures or at other historical periods, are regarded as downright ugly.

Them there are the beauties of meaning which are apart from the forms of beauty. For instance, the forms of beauty that Hitlerian Nazism used are beautiful as forms, at least superficially: the Siegfried Idyll and the Aryan type, the marching men, the blood coloured flags, the community anthems,the sexy Nazi uniforms. But these are all identified with ugly ideas=lies.I mention Nazi regalia and symbolism because the forms of beauty can and often are associated with untruths.

For instance, this also happens in advertizing which becomes more and more sophisticated.

It happened in the Sophistry of ancient Greece and of later university cultures, until the honesty of Socrates shows up the lies.

So I wonder if beauty, unlike truth, is corruptible.

Brosophocles · Post by **Brosophocles** » July 21st, 2011, 7:14 pm

like this:
"Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved." - Charles Darwin "On the origin of species"

If you can't find beauty in the complexity of a process then I don't know what to say. I'm always more impressed when a magician reveals how he pulled off a trick, but some people aren't. Some people get mad they have had their blissful ignorance stolen away.

If your question was "why did evolution produce beauty?"

I would argue that you are speaking of "subjective beauty". This is the universe you live in you cannot look at the concept of beauty from an objective position.

Belinda · Post by **Belinda** » July 22nd, 2011, 4:46 am

It's impossible for anyone no matter how well trained in the techniques of objectiveness to be free from subjective perspective.

Christ · Post by **Christ** » July 22nd, 2011, 11:50 am

Thanks to all.
MadScience wrote:
"What evolutionary reason could there be for humans being attracted to a meadow teeming with food and water as oppsed to a barren lifeless desert or a frozen tundra?"

I mean evolution of creatures no humans. In other words it seems creatures change in such a way that appear beauty in human view during millions of years .
Of course evolution of human in this way is also interesting and can be discussed .

Belinda · Post by **Belinda** » July 23rd, 2011, 3:51 am

Mad Science wrote:

Christ wrote:
Furthermore, beauty could attract humans to these creatures so making a danger for their existence among millions of years .
That is why we have found fossilized signs that clearly state, "Please don't pet the pretty pythons or Chuck will escort you from the building"

I wonder what are the recent thoughts on the influence of cultures upon humans' inherent traits. Cultures are bound to influence the actual genetically-acquired traits, as when some significant food source is absent from the environment and certain culturally approved diets arise to compensate, with the result that natural selection approves those individuals who carry genes that let them digest the culturally approved diet.I think this has actually happened in, I seem to remember, West Africa.

Similarly re perception of beauty. The gentle landscape with some water source, some climbable trees, an inviting path, and easy inclines, could, under circumstances where such scenery is positively dangerous, maybe because it harbours some endemic danger,become genetically less preferred than arid mountains.

Zeroblue92 · Post by **Zeroblue92** » August 12th, 2011, 11:34 pm

in science we came from water. that explains why we love it so much (plus it is cleansing to be around) Medows and that nature are our primary habitat.
Other creatures evovled such as we did, we are the same age in evolution just not at the same level of intellegnce and such.
Plus we are from the same habiats, earth. We all drink the same water and breatht the same air. That is why we are not too different from eachother (species).

Apeman · Post by **Apeman** » August 14th, 2011, 10:12 pm

If you can't find beauty in the complexity of a process then I don't know what to say

yep Bro, the goods are in the goings. And one man's venomous is another's cuddly.

"Beauty" is better referred to as "significance". And a hard-gained few things are far more significant than all the other utilitarian crap.

MasterLearner22 · Post by **MasterLearner22** » August 21st, 2011, 3:47 pm

Christ wrote:How does Darwin’s theory explain beauty of creatures? Flowers ,animals , birds ,trees,… are beautiful in human view .What is the relation between this beauty and struggle for survive.

It can be argued that love is a product of evolution as it makes us strive to do bigger and better things on the planet.. and that beauty is a part of love, and gives us stronger reason to..