Thought-provoking livestream! I was pretty late to the livestream (40mins in, I think), so unfortunately I might be stating stuff that was already addressed in the video, but here are some of my thoughts anyways :P
Much like anything that’s subject to human interpretation, I think beauty does have subjective aspects, but there are common …
Thought-provoking livestream! I was pretty late to the livestream (40mins in, I think), so unfortunately I might be stating stuff that was already addressed in the video, but here are some of my thoughts anyways :P
Much like anything that’s subject to human interpretation, I think beauty does have subjective aspects, but there are common tethers that allow us to construct a de facto objective-ish standard. To use morality as an example, while I don’t think serial killers are a representation of common morality, there’s something to be said about the historical—and even current—downplaying of atrocities. However, arguably, there’s a *universal* wish to create realities in accordance with one’s values, as subjective as they may be—which begets a “meta” degree of objectivity (ie through negative rights).
It’s definitely a very extended tangent on my part, but I think it’s a helpful way to look at beauty. Of course there's considerable subjectivity to it, but those are still manifestations of innate and universal experiences—we know what feelings of awe, poignance, and disgust are, we can see signs of biological health (or lack thereof), we can resonate with things and find other things dissonant, etc. *even if different things elicit those sentiments*.
I think there’s a distinction to be made between hedonic beauty versus more eudaimonic beauty. Hedonic would be the more superficial and vapid—and thus the one that is capitalize-able—kind, while eudaimonic entails a degree of virtue (the latter appears analogous to spirituality while the former is more like a televangelist / megachurch). Of course, the latter allows room for holism, in that while someone might not look like Monica Bellucci (just to share an example), they might still have a beautiful personality, or could be virtuous through their actions.
To use the livestream’s example of a disheveled torn clothes wearing individual, a genre of music that’s quite near and dear to me is grunge—one that was infamous for killing off the ostentatiousness of hair metal in the ‘90s, and earned a fair share of ire for showing “uncool losers” / “beggar gods” in the spotlight. In that sense, someone might not find ‘grunge’ beautiful, but Alice in Chains’ MTV Unplugged performance of Frogs still reaches through to me in a way I can’t describe, and I think it’s more beautiful than a Sabrina Carpenter song—even if the latter’s aesthetic is pretty and saccharine. I think it’s up to the individual to create or find “beauty in the dissonance” (to plagiarize from a TOOL song), but unfortunately, many have shifted from advocating the individual to spurn the more superficial interpretation of beauty, to wanting collective society to disavow the tether to transcendent ideals (by equivocating them with vapidity).
The former (get the individual to be stronger) requires inner resolve, but the latter (get society to cater) inculcates fragility; funnily enough, the notion of completely subjective beauty is also a bit contradictory with notions of everyone being beautiful, since the latter is *still* an objective assertion—but I think it’s the consequence of wanting both the rush from rebelling against a norm *and* the social validation from being able to meet a standard.
I think one thing to consider might be how for all the ostensible rejection of beauty, there’s an increased premium on shallowness. Aesthetics (think anything with a "core" suffix appended to it) are extremely popular trends that urge people to adopt ephemeral images rather than creating something of beauty (or abiding by a life of it). Heck, even political correctness is a way of ensuring anodyne (or "pretty") discourse by neutering language until any potentially offensive aspects of one’s expression no longer exist—although, there's little edification in something that restrictive, and I think true beauty *is* additive. People search for the latter kind by ascribing grandiose archetypes to politicians (e.g. “Kamala Harris will battle the patriarchy”), while allowing divine aspects to get lost in our day-to-day lives.
This is definitely a long set of ramblings so I do sincerely apologize, but great points in the livestream! And beautiful gown!
These are great points!! Really interesting to consider, thanks for elaborating. I love the distinction between hedonic and eudaimonic beauty, that might solve for the difference between the "sexy/hot" idea of beauty and the idea of beauty as a virtue.
There's definitely a role for the subjective in considering beauty, which is important because that subjectivity in what we personally find beautiful is probably a function of humans being so adaptable/unique, thus it's probably what makes the art we create exist on such a huge spectrum between what's almost universally considered beautiful to what's considered beautiful by only a few. That spectrum is also probably a good way to conceive of how beauty can both be objective and subjective.
Ha, I love the grunge example re: torn clothing. I'm a huge Alice in Chains fan! That's probably my favorite grunge band. And yet both in appearance and music, there are people I'll never be able to convince of the beauty in it. I think these more niche examples are interesting blends of subjective and objective.
You also make a really fascinating point on the emphasis "prettiness" and -core culture. That's kind of my sense too, that in some way we've forgotten to think about beauty as something more meaningful and serious than just a pleasing appearance and it's leading to all kinds of problems. Despite the subjective preferences around it, the experience and recognition of beauty is universal; that means it probably does something important for us.
And so true about calling everyone beautiful being self-defeating! "....it’s the consequence of wanting both the rush from rebelling against a norm *and* the social validation from being able to meet a standard." I actually see this exact dynamic play out in a lot of things! Definitely feels like the "look" of rebellion: blue hair but ideologically conformist to what all your peers believe archetype lol.
Thank you so much for joining and expanding on the topic! I love getting another thoughtful perspective on this topic; I don't think it gets discussed enough. And thank you! That dress is one of my favorites 🙏
Thought-provoking livestream! I was pretty late to the livestream (40mins in, I think), so unfortunately I might be stating stuff that was already addressed in the video, but here are some of my thoughts anyways :P
Much like anything that’s subject to human interpretation, I think beauty does have subjective aspects, but there are common tethers that allow us to construct a de facto objective-ish standard. To use morality as an example, while I don’t think serial killers are a representation of common morality, there’s something to be said about the historical—and even current—downplaying of atrocities. However, arguably, there’s a *universal* wish to create realities in accordance with one’s values, as subjective as they may be—which begets a “meta” degree of objectivity (ie through negative rights).
It’s definitely a very extended tangent on my part, but I think it’s a helpful way to look at beauty. Of course there's considerable subjectivity to it, but those are still manifestations of innate and universal experiences—we know what feelings of awe, poignance, and disgust are, we can see signs of biological health (or lack thereof), we can resonate with things and find other things dissonant, etc. *even if different things elicit those sentiments*.
I think there’s a distinction to be made between hedonic beauty versus more eudaimonic beauty. Hedonic would be the more superficial and vapid—and thus the one that is capitalize-able—kind, while eudaimonic entails a degree of virtue (the latter appears analogous to spirituality while the former is more like a televangelist / megachurch). Of course, the latter allows room for holism, in that while someone might not look like Monica Bellucci (just to share an example), they might still have a beautiful personality, or could be virtuous through their actions.
To use the livestream’s example of a disheveled torn clothes wearing individual, a genre of music that’s quite near and dear to me is grunge—one that was infamous for killing off the ostentatiousness of hair metal in the ‘90s, and earned a fair share of ire for showing “uncool losers” / “beggar gods” in the spotlight. In that sense, someone might not find ‘grunge’ beautiful, but Alice in Chains’ MTV Unplugged performance of Frogs still reaches through to me in a way I can’t describe, and I think it’s more beautiful than a Sabrina Carpenter song—even if the latter’s aesthetic is pretty and saccharine. I think it’s up to the individual to create or find “beauty in the dissonance” (to plagiarize from a TOOL song), but unfortunately, many have shifted from advocating the individual to spurn the more superficial interpretation of beauty, to wanting collective society to disavow the tether to transcendent ideals (by equivocating them with vapidity).
The former (get the individual to be stronger) requires inner resolve, but the latter (get society to cater) inculcates fragility; funnily enough, the notion of completely subjective beauty is also a bit contradictory with notions of everyone being beautiful, since the latter is *still* an objective assertion—but I think it’s the consequence of wanting both the rush from rebelling against a norm *and* the social validation from being able to meet a standard.
I think one thing to consider might be how for all the ostensible rejection of beauty, there’s an increased premium on shallowness. Aesthetics (think anything with a "core" suffix appended to it) are extremely popular trends that urge people to adopt ephemeral images rather than creating something of beauty (or abiding by a life of it). Heck, even political correctness is a way of ensuring anodyne (or "pretty") discourse by neutering language until any potentially offensive aspects of one’s expression no longer exist—although, there's little edification in something that restrictive, and I think true beauty *is* additive. People search for the latter kind by ascribing grandiose archetypes to politicians (e.g. “Kamala Harris will battle the patriarchy”), while allowing divine aspects to get lost in our day-to-day lives.
This is definitely a long set of ramblings so I do sincerely apologize, but great points in the livestream! And beautiful gown!
These are great points!! Really interesting to consider, thanks for elaborating. I love the distinction between hedonic and eudaimonic beauty, that might solve for the difference between the "sexy/hot" idea of beauty and the idea of beauty as a virtue.
There's definitely a role for the subjective in considering beauty, which is important because that subjectivity in what we personally find beautiful is probably a function of humans being so adaptable/unique, thus it's probably what makes the art we create exist on such a huge spectrum between what's almost universally considered beautiful to what's considered beautiful by only a few. That spectrum is also probably a good way to conceive of how beauty can both be objective and subjective.
Ha, I love the grunge example re: torn clothing. I'm a huge Alice in Chains fan! That's probably my favorite grunge band. And yet both in appearance and music, there are people I'll never be able to convince of the beauty in it. I think these more niche examples are interesting blends of subjective and objective.
You also make a really fascinating point on the emphasis "prettiness" and -core culture. That's kind of my sense too, that in some way we've forgotten to think about beauty as something more meaningful and serious than just a pleasing appearance and it's leading to all kinds of problems. Despite the subjective preferences around it, the experience and recognition of beauty is universal; that means it probably does something important for us.
And so true about calling everyone beautiful being self-defeating! "....it’s the consequence of wanting both the rush from rebelling against a norm *and* the social validation from being able to meet a standard." I actually see this exact dynamic play out in a lot of things! Definitely feels like the "look" of rebellion: blue hair but ideologically conformist to what all your peers believe archetype lol.
Thank you so much for joining and expanding on the topic! I love getting another thoughtful perspective on this topic; I don't think it gets discussed enough. And thank you! That dress is one of my favorites 🙏