Attractiveness is all in your head

@Johnny Fresh,

Contrary to what you seem to believe, there actually do exist individuals within society who are capable of independent thought. So, no, we don't all just go along with mainstream or popular society's conception of what it means to be 'attractive'.

@Johnny Fresh,

Great art transcends cultural boundries and directly addresses human concerns and subjective truth.
Science addresses objective truth.
It is not a matter of choosing one or the other, they are complimentary.
Beauty, great beuaty, majestic beauty needs no cultural directive.

@Johnny Fresh,

Johnny Fresh;99120 wrote:

if society teaches you that being fat is attactive. you will find fat attractive

If society teaches you to believe in God, will you believe in God?

@Pangloss,

Pangloss;99130 wrote:

Contrary to what you seem to believe, there actually do exist individuals within society who are capable of independent thought. So, no, we don't all just go along with mainstream or popular society's conception of what it means to be 'attractive'.

I think you misinterpreted him. I suppose that what he meant is that what is generally judged to be attractive is relative to the society that one lives in. In other words: There is no non-relative standard.

Though this appears to be false. Much research has been done and natural tendencies have been found. See Wikipedia on Physical Attractiveness.

@Emil,

Emil;99164 wrote:

I think you misinterpreted him. I suppose that what he meant is that what is generally judged to be attractive is relative to the society that one lives in. In other words: There is no non-relative standard.

Though this appears to be false. Much research has been done and natural tendencies have been found. See Wikipedia on Physical Attractiveness.

No, that's basically how I interpreted it, though more generally; that he was saying our beliefs are dictated by society. This can be somewhat true, but is not always the case, and certainly his absolutist type statement as such is giving too much credit to 'nurture' and not enough to 'nature'.

And as you point out, particularly when it comes to physical attraction, society has even less to do with it, as any popular societal 'belief' about rules of attraction is not so important as the underlying evolved instincts that drive attraction and reproduction. This is not to say that the two cannot coincide, but they often do not. For instance, not too long ago it really was seen as more 'attractive' in popular european culture to be 'fat', or certainly not skinny. It was indicative of good health and monetary wealth at the time. I suppose now that food is so cheap and that overweight people much more common, this no longer holds as it used to.

@Pangloss,

Pangloss;99165 wrote:

No, that's basically how I interpreted it, though more generally; that he was saying our beliefs are dictated by society. This can be somewhat true, but is not always the case, and certainly his absolutist type statement as such is giving too much credit to 'nurture' and not enough to 'nature'.

I do not think that he meant it that general. Why would anyone believe such an obvious falsity? It should be obvious to all people. He should have expressed himself more clearly though, and you should have been more charitable in your interpretation of his words.

@Emil,

Emil;99168 wrote:

He should have expressed himself more clearly though, and you should have been more charitable in your interpretation of his words.

Yes he should have. Opening a thread with a one-liner statement is not promoting insightful discussion. There's much to be left up for interpretation with this kind of thread so it's up to the OP to be more clear and concise it's not up to the members to offer charitable interpretation of a topic that's more of a statement than anything else.

From now on, threads that are opened like this one with a one-line statement, will be removed as they belong more on twitter, not a philosophy forum.

@Johnny Fresh,

Johnny Fresh;99120 wrote:

if society teaches you that being fat is attactive. you will find fat attractive

Maybe... I take note that your claim says "teaches you" - which is significant. If I'm taught something is attractive (and I'm assuming that contained in this is the presumption that I've bought-in or that 'teaching' has otherwise permeated), then I'd say on the surface this probably has some truth to it.

But if my evolution doesn't otherwise find some overwhelming attribute attractive, how might subsequent teaching be manifest, if at all?

My gut says no; the statement isn't necessarily true - but only because other, perhaps more powerful attractors/genetically-based 'repulsers' could negate such teaching.

... interesting.

@Emil,

Emil;99168 wrote:

I do not think that he meant it that general. Why would anyone believe such an obvious falsity? It should be obvious to all people.

I don't know. Why would anyone believe such an obvious falsity about the rules of human attraction being entirely socially constructed?

Quote:

He should have expressed himself more clearly though, and you should have been more charitable in your interpretation of his words.

As stated by Justin, there's not a whole lot you can do with the opening 'statement' in this thread, and so being charitable has nothing to do with it. The mods were charitable to the OP by just not closing/trashing this thread. :a-ok:

@Pangloss,

Ok well then let me give you a few examples:

- Many times men of their thirties would have sex with girls of age 10 or even younger in many earlier cultures, but in today's society people would be repulsed by this

- Being fat used to symbolize power and attractiveness in the ancient Hawaiian culture

No i do not believe that it is entirey societal, just as different people look for different things in a mate. Im just saying it is a extremely powerful subconscious thought

@Johnny Fresh,

Johnny Fresh;99120 wrote:

if society teaches you that being fat is attactive. you will find fat attractive

You don't believe there is something biological about attractiveness? I mean obviously animals select mates based on various features that are not inculcated by their society. There is a wide variability, even of "fat", but something tells me that society cannot teach that morbid obesity is attractive, and that only a small minority of people would find that to be true.

Obviously society teaches us that normal sexual attraction is to the opposite sex, but 10% of the population is homosexual -- and thus they are not only going against a population norm but also exposing themselves to ostracism. So clearly it is not just the influence of society, it's something internal that determines attraction.

@Aedes,

Aedes;99364 wrote:

You don't believe there is something biological about attractiveness? I mean obviously animals select mates based on various features that are not inculcated by their society. There is a wide variability, even of "fat", but something tells me that society cannot teach that morbid obesity is attractive, and that only a small minority of people would find that to be true.

Obviously society teaches us that normal sexual attraction is to the opposite sex, but 10% of the population is homosexual -- and thus they are not only going against a population norm but also exposing themselves to ostracism. So clearly it is not just the influence of society, it's something internal that determines attraction.

i do not believe that it is entirey societal, just as different people look for different things in a mate. Im just saying it is a extremely powerful subconscious thought. sorry for the confusion.

@Johnny Fresh,

That's certainly true in terms of fashion, so I can see how it's true for physical attractiveness too.

Philosophy Forum

Attractiveness is all in your head

Quick Links

My Account

able2know