A Darwinian Theory of Beauty

[Coffee Crisp]

I thought this intellectual lecture was very entertaining. His ideas about how we perceive beauty and how he connected it to Darwin's theory was very clever in my opinion.

 

I concur, the lecture with intellectuality describing how beauty is perceived with some aid with the theory by Darwin was made inadvertently ingenious in my point of view.

[Moop the communist]

herpdeBUUUUUUURP

 

 

HURRP DURRRPXXXX

[Senior]

Very interesting take on the subject. I'm not sure if I fully invest into it, but it makes some good points. I like his line at the end, about "something done well". I feel like it's broad enough to cover things we feel are beautiful now, and in the future.

 

Just looking for a discussion, but can anyone find something they feel is beautiful (srs, not just for the sake of arguing), that rejects that definition?

 

What about the night sky? All the stars scattered and shining bright, would that count?

[Prez]

Very interesting piece you found here. I found how he spoke very annoying after a while, where it sounded like he was spitting or something.

[Nuada DarkHaven]

I agree with you Pres. Shadow, that was aggravating. It's like he was rolling spit in his mouth or something.

 

In terms of the night sky and stars, I guess the argument would be that is nature has done something well. I suppose it would be the mixture of light and darkness, whereas human beings normally prefer light to darkness, and the mixture of the two can probably evoke powerful emotions.

[Retarded Santa]

Or, just simply that a clear night sky implies favorable weather conditions, which would be desirable. Just like the "beautiful landscape" he describes being universally preferred.