Beauty: Objective or Subjective?

[Mike]

Or both?

I wrote a medium article on this recently and it's caused quite a sh!t storm. It was inspired by Jordan Peterson's tweet re the obese swimsuit model on Sports Illustrated. His tweet was "sorry, not beautiful". Which seems a little cold in isolation but I know exactly why he said it.

But that's neither here nor there...

In a nutshell: I argued that attractiveness is both objective and subjective. It's objective at the extremes (extreme beauty and extreme ugliness) and subjective in the middle, where we find all kinds of variations and levels of attractiveness.

I argue that extreme attractiveness and extreme unattractiveness has much more to do with biology and things like symetry, hip to waist ratio, etc than it does subjective opinion. There are quite a few men and women that the world almost unanimously agree are transcendently beautiful and others that occupy the other end of the spectrum.

It's no coincidence that nearly every man on the planet wants to have sex with Halle Berry and very few feel similarly towards, say, Whoopi Goldberg (sorry Whoopi).

In the article I try to parse out preference from objective beauty by giving the example of Angelina Jolie, who I am not particularly attracted to but am fully aware of her otherworldly beauty nonetheless.

Anyway, beauty/attractiveness isn't perfectly objective at the extremes, but mostly (and I think this is an almost infallible argument) and it's not perfectly subjective in the middle...but it mostly is.

Of course there are other qualities that make people desirable in all sorts of ways - intelligence, compassion, sense of humor etc - but I wrote exclusively about outward beauty in the article because the crux of the issue was the Sports Illustrated cover thing.

Anyway, this post is a very brief synopsis of my much larger and much more involved article here: https://link.medium.com/i6nquuO9pqb

[Merkaba360]

You are correct that there is both an objective and subjective aspect to beauty.

I don't think you are correct that it is subjective in the way you said it. I think you need to say that comparing two people that are close in beauty, then it is very subjective. If one is perhaps a 10 and another is approx. a 1, then its obvious who is more beautiful, so that is an objective choice for the winner. I think this is what you meant to say. "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" gets into this idea. How is it that sometimes its clear and unanimous which of the two is higher quality, but we can't always know exactly what makes the one higher quality. It can sometimes be impossible to describe.


Yes, what is objective is that beauty is based of of patterns of nature, the golden spiral curve and the balance and symmetry of that geometry. That is an objective fact. It is also a fact that health plays a role, which correlates to the golden ratio form pattern. There may be a few other patterns that correspond to beauty.

however, geometry exists in a perfect ideal intangible realm. When it is reflected in the physical it is less perfect and has some randomness and chaos. Like if your body was a perfect geometry, flawless math in form, then I think that would look kind of weird and fake or whatever. So, everything in the physical is chaordic, not perfectly ordered. So, in one sense, maybe we can say that the chaordic paradox and simplexity of nature is the most awesome. I guess that beauty needs to heavily follow the geometries of beauty, but the subjective aspect of chaos blurs things a bit. Opinionated debate then comes in to play.

Like what if we all went to another world and everyone was extremely beautiful based on a pretty strict standard. Over many years would we tire of that limitation and start to sway our perception, preferring to try some more unique forms of beauty because it is rare and exotic. The current somewhat rarity of extreme beauty is an interesting point of discussion. What happens if we can genetically engineer everyone to make extreme beauty very common. Would we start nitpicking more and turning people down with minor flaws? lol Or just enjoy beauty everywhere and be less concerned about it.

[apokalypse]

definition of beauty is really depended on individuals in time or location, i believe we have programmed to think beauty have a criteria meeting the standard...what exactly is beauty? if we take a girl from jungle somewhere or village to city everyone will say she's not beautiful but after few years then everyone say she's one of most beautiful but she's still who she is..due to the environments that she's in have made her to meet the "standard".

I never find photos on media like in SI never beautiful, just doesn't matter who's that person are...too many agenda and programming. so we considered Obese is normal and beauty not really promoting being healthy.

[Johan (Keyholder)]

Just finished reading your article above, Mike! It's quite a read, I enjoyed it.
In a little while you actually could make a real living I think, just by writing! (for when is your first book?)

As for transcendent beauty. The likes of Grace Kelly, Audrey Hepburn... Even there some subjectivity can apply I think.

Oh, and by the way... there were actually 10 c**t(s) in the article, not 6. LOL (plurals DO count)

[Merkaba360]

Posted by apokalypse (here)
definition of beauty is really depended on individuals in time or location, i believe we have programmed to think beauty have a criteria meeting the standard...what exactly is beauty? if we take a girl from jungle somewhere or village to city everyone will say she's not beautiful but after few years then everyone say she's one of most beautiful but she's still who she is..due to the environments that she's in have made her to meet the "standard".

I never find photos on media like in SI never beautiful, just doesn't matter who's that person are...too many agenda and programming. so we considered Obese is normal and beauty not really promoting being healthy.

for sure these sorts of things fall into the subjective. Many other aspects of what we want in life can create illusions or biased to our perception of beauty. Like being super rich or talented. Many kinds of environmental, social, economic preferences we have confusing the issue of physical beauty.

To be clear, that doesn't take away the universal patterns of life that are always (objectively) positively correlated with physical beauty, like balance, symmetry, golden ratio, health ,etc.

[Vangelo]

Very well done ! I stopped reading anything coming from medium about a year ago because it was all the same BS and I promised myself to never return. After reading your article, I searched for my login and gave it a thumbs up.

May I suggest an edit to the 'nutshell' statement in your opening post above? Your article is about the 'War on the Obvious' and uses the topic of beauty to make the more important and profound point on the insidious war being waged on societal norms. The War on the Obvious is the same war fascists and communists of the pasts have waged on their societies to take them down. Their goal is to remove foundational truths from the psyche of the population so that they are confused, afraid and dependent upon an 'authoritarian' figure to lead them to 'the promised land'.

Thanks again for the post.

[RunningDeer]

Good article, Mike.
Jordan Peterson says, ”Bye for now.” - MAY 16,2022
..........

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/...39000230481100

UPDATE: - MAY 25, 2022

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/...58946893156352

[Mike]

Thanks Paula!

Peterson has been talking about getting off Twitter for a while now. He openly admits that it stresses him out enormously. Very sensitive man.

In a way it saddens me a little. It makes him look weak to certain people. More ammunition for the haters.

But if it means he'll have more energy to pour into his other stuff, great!

I really haven't watched many of his videos in a while. Like most people and things I get enthusiastic about I imbibe it all to excess, and then I calm down and revisit them later without all the excitement and see what I've missed. I'll do that soon with him

[Mike]

Posted by Vangelo (here)
Very well done ! I stopped reading anything coming from medium about a year ago because it was all the same BS and I promised myself to never return. After reading your article, I searched for my login and gave it a thumbs up.

May I suggest an edit to the 'nutshell' statement in your opening post above? Your article is about the 'War on the Obvious' and uses the topic of beauty to make the more important and profound point on the insidious war being waged on societal norms. The War on the Obvious is the same war fascists and communists of the pasts have waged on their societies to take them down. Their goal is to remove foundational truths from the psyche of the population so that they are confused, afraid and dependent upon an 'authoritarian' figure to lead them to 'the promised land'.

Thanks again for the post.

"remove foundational truths". Well said there. I wish I would have used that phrase. Damn. Well I can edit it in.

Thanks so much for reading. The article clocks in as a 22 minute read, and when I finished it I never dreampt anyone would actually read the whole thing. But I've been pleasantly surprised.

I used some good information Bill supplied recently, and even stole his line: These people are mentally ill.

I really had to drag myself to the finish line with that article. It was a labor of love. I would have been able to write it much quicker a year or so ago, when I was ranting endlessly about all this crap. I was much sharper then. My mind is funny..once I rant and rave and write, some part of me is satisfied and I almost just forget it all. I had to take a little refresher course to write the piece.

[Mike]

Posted by Johan (Keyholder) (here)
Just finished reading your article above, Mike! It's quite a read, I enjoyed it.
In a little while you actually could make a real living I think, just by writing! (for when is your first book?)

As for transcendent beauty. The likes of Grace Kelly, Audrey Hepburn... Even there some subjectivity can apply I think.

Oh, and by the way... there were actually 10 c**t(s) in the article, not 6. LOL (plurals DO count)

Thanks Johan!

Yes i messed up the "c**t" count. Math was never my thing

[Mike]

Posted by Merkaba360 (here)
You are correct that there is both an objective and subjective aspect to beauty.

I don't think you are correct that it is subjective in the way you said it. I think you need to say that comparing two people that are close in beauty, then it is very subjective. If one is perhaps a 10 and another is approx. a 1, then its obvious who is more beautiful, so that is an objective choice for the winner. I think this is what you meant to say. "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" gets into this idea. How is it that sometimes its clear and unanimous which of the two is higher quality, but we can't always know exactly what makes the one higher quality. It can sometimes be impossible to describe.


Yes, what is objective is that beauty is based of of patterns of nature, the golden spiral curve and the balance and symmetry of that geometry. That is an objective fact. It is also a fact that health plays a role, which correlates to the golden ratio form pattern. There may be a few other patterns that correspond to beauty.

however, geometry exists in a perfect ideal intangible realm. When it is reflected in the physical it is less perfect and has some randomness and chaos. Like if your body was a perfect geometry, flawless math in form, then I think that would look kind of weird and fake or whatever. So, everything in the physical is chaordic, not perfectly ordered. So, in one sense, maybe we can say that the chaordic paradox and simplexity of nature is the most awesome. I guess that beauty needs to heavily follow the geometries of beauty, but the subjective aspect of chaos blurs things a bit. Opinionated debate then comes in to play.

Like what if we all went to another world and everyone was extremely beautiful based on a pretty strict standard. Over many years would we tire of that limitation and start to sway our perception, preferring to try some more unique forms of beauty because it is rare and exotic. The current somewhat rarity of extreme beauty is an interesting point of discussion. What happens if we can genetically engineer everyone to make extreme beauty very common. Would we start nitpicking more and turning people down with minor flaws? lol Or just enjoy beauty everywhere and be less concerned about it.

Where the hell were you when I was writing the article? I like how you describe the nature of objective beauty.

The notion of beauty is very Zen, actually. I sat with the idea for days and it was giving me quite a headache. I almost had to let go of my mind for the proper words to arrive.

[RunningDeer]

Posted by Mike (here)
Thanks Paula!

Peterson has been talking about getting off Twitter for a while now. He openly admits that it stresses him out enormously. Very sensitive man.

In a way it saddens me a little. It makes him look weak to certain people. More ammunition for the haters.

But if it means he'll have more energy to pour into his other stuff, great!

I really haven't watched many of his videos in a while. Like most people and things I get enthusiastic about I imbibe it all to excess, and then I calm down and revisit them later without all the excitement and see what I've missed. I'll do that soon with him

There’s a fairly new category called “Sigma Men and Women”. It’s part of the empathic spectrum. It wouldn’t surprise me that Jordan Peterson is a Sigma Male.. The same goes for some Avalon members.

Here are a couple of channels that cover the topic:

• “Discover Empaths”
• “Bloke Box”

7 Traits of a Sigma Male Empath (11 min)

A Sigma Male Empath is a man who prefers to live his life outside of society's standard social hierarchy. He values independence, freedom, and solitude over money, position, and fame. He is more interested in adventure and knowledge than in worldly stuff.

So, what makes a man a Sigma Male Empath?

00:29 1. A Sigma Male Empath is a Lonewolf.
01:44 2. Sigma Male Empath is very adaptable.
02:42 3. Sigma Male Empaths Treats everyone around them the same
04:03 4. Sigma Male Empath is Adventurous & Nomadic.
05:56 5. Sigma Male Empath is Self-aware.
07:31 6. Sigma Male Empath Can't Be Told What To Do
08:15 7. A Sigma Male Empath is Confident

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=rNgvGCSW0sQ

Hidden Superpower 15 Sign You Are a SIGMA EMPATH (12 min)

The sigma empath makes for one of the rarest combinations of personality types that exist in the general population. They possess many of the same abilities as a classic empath, but manifest them in very particular ways. Empaths are those with an especially strong ability to feel the emotions and moods of others. They are highly sensitive, and described as “emotional sponges” by Dr. Judith Orloff, researcher and author of the book “The Empath’s Survival Guide: Life Strategies for Sensitive People.”

In her book, Dr. Orloff suggests that the empath’s sensitivity is the result of lacking the same emotional filters that most people employ to protect themselves from being affected by their surroundings. Sigma empaths, on the other hand, are highly attuned to the emotional states of others, yet they possess an inner sense of groundedness and confidence that allows them to resist being overpowered by the feelings of others.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=l2SvS9JCO2g

[Vicus]

lets talk dirty...will ya?

by now in previous post was about : a) objektiv / subjektiv B) golden ratio

I agree with both, what about biology?

There are zillons study's from biology, evolution phycology, and what not about how people "select" their partners for different outcomes...

just for sex (hier and right now) for long term partners, and for procreation.

this studies use young people from colleges ( when humans are in their best physically form )

Result goes on which Merkmals from each sex found attractive for the opposite sex ..."for different outcomes"

Results:

1) in only 3 seconds people decide if they could be" intim " or not with the "newbie"...

such experiments goes about showing photos, arranging meetings, etc.
Another " " " " ( for females) sniffing used T-shirts from males...during and after their menstruation cycles...

Result: during menstruation females prefer "perceived" not aggressive odor from males aka protective type, for to cuddle, aka beta man types...

not been in "cycles" females prefer aggressiver odor from males... aka females are in "heat" aka they want an Alpha male...

2) typically physically signs people can "reed" on the "other" that are attractive to them...

females look/are attractive to: streng jug , broad shoulders, high, not a sloppy body, confidence.

males " " : Brust(not flat) , hips, long legs, long hair, silky skin, voluptuous mouth, firm butt, feminine.


If somebody got an eye higher than the other one, is not harmonious (golden ratio) therefor cant not be perceive beautiful...


Beauty is another word for Harmonie, in biology translate to health (wicht males translate in too in good reproduction...)

A skinny female and/or obese don't "translate/communicate" to men...)

Runt all you want or not that's our "programing"

warning for females! : hormones contain in the "Pille" change your moods, therefor you are in danger to "select" the wrong partner, altering/bypass your "normal instinct"

[Vicus]

lets talk dirty...will ya? second part.


The socio-sexual hierarchy (about men)


When we examine any conventional human social circle, we reliably observe a broader range of distinctly identifiable social archetypes that go well beyond mere sexual activity. And it is based on these observations that I have expanded the Alpha-Beta division into a hierarchy that covers the broad spectrum of socio-sexuality.


Alpha: The alpha is the tall, good-looking guy who is the center of both male and female attention. The classic star of the football team who is dating the prettiest cheerleader. The successful business executive with the beautiful, stylish, blonde, size zero wife. All the women are attracted to him, while all the men want to be him, or at least be his friend. At a social gathering like a party, he's usually the loud, charismatic guy telling self-flattering stories to a group of attractive women who are listening with interest. However, alphas are only interested in women to the extent that they exist for the alpha's gratification, physical and psychological, they are actually more concerned with their overall group status.

Lifetime sexual partners = 4x average+.

Beta: Betas are the good-looking guys who aren't as uniformly attractive or socially dominant as the Alpha, but are nevertheless confident, attractive to women, and do well with them. At the party, they are the loud guy's friends who showed up with the alcohol and who are flirting with the tier one women and cheerfully pairing up with the tier two women. Betas tend to genuinely like women and view them in a somewhat optimistic manner, but they don't have a lot of illusions about them either. Betas tend to be happy, secure in themselves, and are up for anything their alpha wants to do. When they marry, it is not infrequently to a woman who was one of the alpha's former girlfriends.

Lifetime sexual partners = 2-3x average.



Delta: The normal guy. Deltas are the great majority of men. They can't attract the most attractive women, so they usually aim for the second-tier women with very limited success, and stubbornly resist paying attention to all of the third-tier women who are comfortably in their league. This is ironic, because deltas would almost always be happier with their closest female equivalents. When a delta does manage to land a second-tier woman, he is constantly afraid that she will lose interest in him and will, not infrequently, drive her into the very loss of interest he fears by his non-stop dancing of attendance upon her. In a social setting, the deltas are the men clustered together in groups, each of them making an occasional foray towards various small gaggles of women before beating a hasty retreat when direct eye contact and engaged responses are not forthcoming. Deltas tend to put the female sex on pedestals and have overly optimistic expectations of them; if a man rhapsodizes about his better half or is an inveterate White Knight, he is almost certainly a delta. Deltas like women, but find them mysterious, confusing, and are sometimes secretly a little afraid of them.

Lifetime sexual partners = 1-1.5x average


Gamma: The introspective, the unusual, the unattractive, and all too often the bitter. Gammas are often intelligent, usually unsuccessful with women, and not uncommonly all but invisible to them, the gamma alternates between placing women on pedestals and hating the entire sex. This mostly depends upon whether an attractive woman happened to notice his existence or not that day. Too introspective for their own good, gammas are the men who obsess over individual women for extended periods of time and supply the ranks of stalkers, psycho-jealous ex-boyfriends, and the authors of excruciatingly romantic rhyming doggerel. In the unlikely event they are at the party, they are probably in the corner muttering darkly about the behavior of everyone else there... sometimes to themselves. Gammas tend to have have a worship/hate relationship with women, the current direction of which is directly tied to their present situation. However, they are sexual rejects, not social rejects.

Lifetime voluntary sexual partners = .5x average




Omega: The truly unfortunate. Omegas are the social losers who were never in the game. Sometimes creepy, sometimes damaged, often clueless, and always undesirable. They're not at the party. It would never have crossed anyone's mind to invite them in the first place. Omegas are either totally indifferent to women or hate them with a borderline homicidal fury.

Lifetime sexual partners < 2


Sigma: The outsider who doesn't play the social game and manage to win at it anyhow. The sigma is hated by alphas because sigmas are the only men who don't accept or at least acknowledge, however grudgingly, their social dominance. (NB: Alphas absolutely hate to be laughed at and a sigma can often enrage an alpha by doing nothing more than smiling at him.) Everyone else is vaguely confused by them. In a social situation, the sigma is the man who stops in briefly to say hello to a few friends accompanied by a Tier 1 girl that no one has ever seen before. Sigmas like women, but tend to be contemptuous of them. They are usually considered to be strange. Gammas often like to think they are sigmas, failing to understand that sigmas are not social rejects, they are at the top of the social hierarchy despite their refusal to play by its rules.

Lifetime sexual partners = 4x average+.



Lambda: Those men who have quite literally no interest in conventional male-female sexual relations. They clearly have their own hierarchy of sorts, but I can't say that I know much about it other than it appears to somehow involve youth, free weights, and mustaches.

Lifetime sexual partners = 10x average+


Now, it is important to keep in mind that it serves absolutely no purpose to identify yourself in some manner that you think is "better" or higher up the hierarchy. No one cares what you think you are and your opinion about your place in the social hierarchy is probably the opinion that matters least. There is no good or bad here, there is only what happens to be observable in social interaction. Consider: alphas seemingly rule the roost and yet they live in a world of constant conflict and status testing. Sigmas usually acquired their outsider status the hard way; one seldom becomes immune to the social hierarchy by virtue of mass popularity in one's childhood. Betas... okay, betas actually have it pretty good. But the important thing to keep in mind is that you can't improve your chances of success in the social game if you begin by attempting to deceive yourself as to where you stand vis-a-vis everyone else around you.



https://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2...hierarchy.html

[ZenBaller]

There is objective beauty based on universal archetypes like mathematics. For example, the use of the golden ratio throughout nature, architecture or the human body, truly creates masterpieces.

However, using your heart center and loving deeply everything and unconditionally can make you see the beauty of God in everything, even in the most "ugly".

[Harmony]

Being a woman, I think my perspective would be different. I think as you get past just the looks of a person and see the true depth of a person, that level of looking from a “default” survival mode way that is built in for a likely reason that all animals possess, to protect the genes of future generations physically is important to a degree only.


When we are thinking from a deeper place, a person’s looks are only a fraction of their make up, and no longer even the most beautiful part, as their inner beauty takes over and becomes the reason you would want to be around them and close to them.


It will be a good day when all levels are considered important for the continuation of humanity and all aspects of a person be brought into awareness to bring it to it’s most beautiful fullness.


The woman in the picture looks the shape of goddess statues of fertility. When I see those I feel they mean there is rich fertility in a the feminine energy that is there to give birth to more energy. The energy is in giving more and not in seduction and “getting” or trying to attract but bringing forth in a symbolic way.


I don’t mean all woman should be overweight and not their healthiest, but not self condemning and being what others expect either. Men don’t always realise what woman’s hormones are like, they play a big role in weight gain, mood changes any many other things that do indeed make them different then a man. Woman are not men with with boobs. There are too many factors to go into that make us who we are and can only be simplified in a post.


Somehow it makes me sad to see what is happening in the manipulation of perspectives, labelling, turning things around backwards etc., and as an individual we need to keep our awareness sharp and not be moulded by others ideals.

[onawah]

The more I look at the way Marxism is laying waste to the people of China, the more obvious it is that what is really behind that false mask of virtue is actually the elimination of the Individual and the glorification of Hive Mind, where discernment is meaningless and all that matters is "saving face" ie Conformity.
Everything you have written about, Mike, ultimately leads to the same thing.
Much of what the Deep State intends and what the so-called Woke are furthering, with their intentions of destroying Western values and culture, is actually based on the same blueprint, the end game being dehumanization--beginning with the social credit system and ending with utter slavery.
It's a misguided and wholly destructive manifestation of the urge to return to Oneness, not recognizing that the One is not separate from the Many.
(Just my 2 cents and quite irrelevant, but I think Angelina Jolie looks are freakish.)

[Merkaba360]

Posted by ZenBaller (here)
There is objective beauty based on universal archetypes like mathematics. For example, the use of the golden ratio throughout nature, architecture or the human body, truly creates masterpieces.

However, using your heart center and loving deeply everything and unconditionally can make you see the beauty of God in everything, even in the most "ugly".

Yes. ITs even more than the heart center. Full kundalini raising changes the third eyes way of perception as well.

One time, my plant buddies helped me to see. I was with a friend watching the beautiful river scene. Later we walked to a bar and the waitress happened to have gone to my high school. She was absolutely not my type. Extremely round face, overweight and had extreme acne in high school making her face very bumpy.

When she came over to the table to take our order and chat with us, I was in awe and fascinated with her face. Felt strong love in the moment and appreciation for the uniqueness and details of her face. Like every face was a masterpiece work of god's art. It takes suspension of judgement and removing the filters to perceive fully.

A gorgeous woman's face would have captivated me all the same and im sure I would have still preferred the gorgeous woman, but it was an honor to be able to see that there is truth to beauty and illusion. I wish i could be enlightened enough to see everyone like that at all times.

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Bravo Mike on the article, brave as hell, but very well said with everything. I don't know much about Sports Illustrated or its history, but regarding the front cover pin-up - are said swimsuit models required at any point to prove (to the magazine) that they can actually swim? Thinking rationally this occurred to me, and I think they really should. I don't expect Yumi Nu to be swimming very far in a pool or in the sea (except in a downwards direction).

I understand that may sound 'fattist' or whatever the term is, I don't mean it to be. We are all beautiful - but we are not our bodies, we merely have bodies, and unfortunately not all bodies are beautiful. If they were all beautiful, 'beautiful' as an adjective would cease to exist as I think you mentioned.

So something of the gesture here - that we are all beautiful - is totally correct and I am fully behind that, but S.I. have not done it in the right way at all. In fact, quite the opposite, by virtue of the skimpy bikini they put her in and the pose they have her perform. The effect, by design, is to draw your attention to the body, not the person. Their only goal, it seems, is to 'normalise' obesity.

That is what these wokesters are all about anyway: championing the image one presents, not the inner essence. It's about subverting (if not perverting) moral principles, and to wherever possible upturn convention, socialise aberration, and evangelize if not outright fetishise mental illness. Ultimately its aim is to force us to not only accept the unacceptable, but celebrate its existence.

It wouldn't at all surprise me if we are soon presented with trans-models posing on the front cover embracing their 'beautiful womanhood' - complete with banana-hammock on display. And they will expect us to clap and fawn in admiration.

[Strat]

Slam dunk, nothing really needs to be said. From now on when I hear Foo Fighter's "My Hero" I will think of you typing away at your keyboard. "There goes my hero, watch him as he goes"