Beauty can be anything from the complex, like the universe, to a single snowflake. It is all how you see things for beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
The more complex something is the more effort is required to make it simple, and the more simple it is made the more that which was once complex becomes beautiful. So beauty has a precise definition.
There is a beauty in simplicity, but there is also a beauty in complexity. There is beauty in imperfection, the Japanese even have a word for this.
I agree with you, spider ^^ Think there is beauty in everything, but often we see the beauty with our hearts, and not our eyes. :m:
There are some really but ugly deformed people out there that I bet you would not call beautiful. Just like a mathematical equation for instance, you can see and measure beauty.
I don't think you can. It's a subjective thing. I have seen beautiful photographs of old homeless people.
Are you saying love is unconditional? And that you will always see your loved ones as beautiful? Because I would tend to disagree. Suppose your loved one suffered a horrible accident and was scarred for life. You may still force yourself to love that person but you would not call them beautiful. You would agree with everyone else that your loved one is beautiful underneath but ugly on the outside. Hence, beauty is objective.
I'm not saying that love for a person makes them beautiful, but even if I think they are ugly, perhaps someone else disagrees. Scars themselves aren't necessarily ugly. Also, beauty is different than attractiveness. One can make beautiful art of ugly things that one wouldn't necessarily be attracted to. But people also often have sexual fetishes for things that most people would find abhorrent, like shit or corpses.
Then, there's people who are beautiful/handsome on the outside...UGLY on the inside. Which is worse? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Hmmmm?
Talking in riddles, hmmm? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I wouldn't fall in love with someone who's ugly on the inside; just sayin.' But, I've been there and done that. I threw the tee shirt away! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It is actually simple which is why it's beautiful. The thing is complexity made simple, i.e. not chaotic at all.
I tend to agree, but note this over-riding rule: Form follows function, and beauty follows form. I have a cockatiel, bird in the parrot family. Every aspect of her is very well designed (by evolution selection). From the hook at tip of her upper beak (for opening seeds) to the tip of her tapering tail feathers. Her powerful* wing muscles are contained in an aerodynamic efficient chest shape. Houses are normally without heat in Brazil, and it gets cold enough for a sweater indoors in winter. My bird can and does slightly increase the spacing between over lapping feathers when it is cold, etc. - A total form perfect for her functions so she is beautiful. Many items of "fashion" have inverted this rule. I.e. start with some weird designer's idea of beauty end with little function. - Take high heeled shoes for example. They have a form that function poorly so they, to me, are ugly. - I guess I have not been adequately brain washed. * We keep horizontally sliding window slightly open at both vertical edges and she flies through out the apartment where ever she likes with "unclipped wings" of course. Clipping them is a crime against nature IMHO, and certainly destructive of beauty. When she stretches her wings full out to the sides - it is beautiful and also at times functional - intimidating you if she is protecting her eggs, or food.
One way to define beauty is with the science of self observation where we look from the inside. As an experiment, find something that is beautiful to you. Next, while you feel the beauty, observe yourself and your reactions to notice what you feel and how you behave. Next, find another thing of beauty that is different. Again, observe yourself to notice what you feel and how you behave. It could be energized, wider eyes, deep breathing, etc. Ask yourself is there anything in common between these two or more examples? Beauty is a specific brain firmware output. As an analogy, all types of food can make you feel the joy of eating, although each culture may have a particular dish that works the best for most; childhood dish. Beauty works the same way but used firmware that are above the instinctive firmware (eating). It is collective human.
Humans tend to look more classically-"beautiful" if their facial features correspond more closely to the Golden Ratio (1.618...), and there is a "Beauty Mask" designed by Marquardt that gives the proportions of the face according to this golden ratio. In fact da Vinci also used the ratio within his Vitruvian Man etc... human proportions are generally perceived as beautiful when they conform to this ratio. So one could say that the beauty of the human form is made simple through such a ratio, adding to the idea that simple is beautiful. Yes, we are all unique, and we all dance around this mean of what we consider beautiful - at least physical beauty etc. But in terms of physical beauty in humans, and throughout nature, this ratio is seemingly key. It is certainly pervasive in the human body, but also throughout biology. And fractals are an example of what can look complex might in fact be rather simple.
