Our Perception of Beauty - Essay Example

Our Perception of Beauty Introduction This paper to analyzes and discusses the idea about our perception on beauty and how it is influenced. It maintains that there are two kinds of beauty, one is expressed when we are in a group and the other is done in our individual or private way. Analysis and discussion Discussion about perceptions of beauty prompts one to start with what expressions are commonly heard about the word “beauty.” Skin-deep beauty is one and the other is fat is beautiful. Let us proceed knowing the first. What is skin-deep beauty? Nehamas (2005) in his article “Beauty: Skin-Deep, in the Eye of the Beholder and Valuable?” discusses beauty where he said: “There is such a thing as beauty that is only skin-deep.  It is the beauty of appearance, what we call "looking good."  It has little to do with personality, character, wit or morality, and that is because anything that applies to how things look is not a reliable guide to many of their other qualities.” This the kind o beauty that people attributes to contest like the Miss Universe pageant. How beauty of appearance is established? Psychologically in our minds, we do process the information. Nehamas (2005) said: “The beauty of appearance -- what we can judge, say, by looking at a photograph of a face -- is something that psychologists have been investigating a lot recently.  In general, they show people photographs of faces and ask them to rank them in terms of their beauty.  Since these are digital photographs, it is possible to combine them into composite photographs.  What seems to be the case is (1) the larger the composite photograph (the more features of individual faces it combines) the more people are likely to consider it beautiful and (2) there is remarkable agreement, both within and between different cultures, about which faces are more beautiful than which.” In said context, beauty is agreed upon by a group. I then call this, a beauty that is defined when we are in a group. Is group beauty explained by any theory? Nehamas (2005) stated that several hypotheses have been offered to account for these phenomena, and it seems agreed that they have something to do with the likelihood of reproductive success.  Thus, he said that the more features a face combines, the more average it is.  In explaining further, he argued that now it is very counterintuitive to say that the average is what strikes us as beautiful (since the people or works of art we find beautiful usually stand out against their background), but it turns out that average members of groups are less likely to be subject to external evolutionary pressures and more likely to be healthy and survive in the long run (Paraphrasing made). Agreement among different groups produces beauty, that could be passed on to others and media could actually do something about it. Could we then say that people have tendencies to agree on something? I believe so. In a group decision making only two things could happen if they are confronted whether a person or thing is beautiful or not. The first is that they do not talk and the other is that they will express their feelings. The latter is the most logical thing to happen; hence group beauty is a reality. Alexander (2006) agreed with us when the he talked about cultural images influencing our perception of beauty after citing a study, saying “to show that what we think is attractive, or beautiful, is whatever requires the least amount of effort.” There is therefore ease in expressing what I earlier called ‘group beauty’. Would a ‘group beauty’ always hold true? I believe the answer is in the negative, because, logically seldom will everybody agree in a group decision. Our perception is influenced by culture and when we say culture, we also deal with fashion or fad. So how do we account for those who see differently? Perception is the missing link, that is, each person differently. Nehamas (2005) agreed with us when he said: “Now, not only are these psychological results counterintuitive -- they also contradict another aspect of everyday experience. Most people in the known universe have, at some time or other, loved someone and most people in the known universe have, at some time or other, been loved by someone, though that is not always, unfortunately, the same person. But the point is (here I am being very dogmatic) that it is impossible to love someone or something that you do not find beautiful. And so, since most people in the world are not, by the evolutionary standards above (or even by the standards applicable to supermodels, male and female) beautiful, either most people in the world are deceived all the time or there is more to beauty, so to speak, than meets the eye.” It is clear that if we have group beauty, we can also have individual or private beauty. This is based on premise at it is impossible to love somebody or something that you don’t find beautiful as what is meant in the passage above. How to react then if there are two kinds of beauty? A discerning person then must be able to see the difference between the two kinds of beauty. Nehamas (2005) advised, “We must be careful here, for the easy way out is to say that there is such a thing as "inner" or "psychological" beauty, to be contrasted with the beauty of appearance. But that is only easy, and nothing else -- in particular, it is not true. For even if you love someone on account of their character or wit or whatever, these features will manifest themselves in the appearance of the person in question: you will literally perceive them in their face, their posture, their voice and their behavior. That is, a person you love will not appear to you as they do to others who don't love them or as they appear to you when you are indifferent to them.” What then is true beauty? Beauty is perception and therefore it proceeds from the operation of the mind. It is a decision or a conclusion that must be made by the mind. If it is conclusion, as to what is true will depend upon the premise. If we are in a group, what we proclaim to be beautiful must be accepted as it is subject to the allowance of possible deception by our senses. If then we are in our private life, what is beautiful may be same but may be different as when we are in a group. The private kind of beauty offers us more choices since we will have the greater opportunity to express love. For Nehamas (2005), he called such private beauty as “unlike the good looks of the sort psychologists investigate that is very controversial.” He noted the reasons why we keep asking ourselves what our friends see in the people they love, but whom we can't stand, prompting him to say, “The sense in which there is more to beauty than meets the eye is not that it is "inner," but that it is not likely to meet many eyes. That is, beauty, generally considered, is a product of love and not, in general, its antecent cause. That's what locates it in the eye of the beholder. BUT BEAUTY THAT IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER IS NO LONGER ONLY SKIN-DEEP.” Nehamas (2005) also found said beauty to be philosophically interesting and important, where he saw equal application to people and things, particularly works of art. He then attributed value to it, along with the value of all the "aesthetic" features that are associated with it, pointing out that it is very different from the moral values that seem to have acquired a monopoly over human life in philosophy and public discourse. In distinguishing moral values from beauty, he found that the former depends on the similarities and connections that require us to treat each other impartially, fairly and equally while the latter depends on the differences between various human beings, where there is preference as to individuality, autonomy and personal style (Paraphrasing made). Could a fat person then be beautiful? By all means, the answer is in the affirmative. Max (2006) in discussing “Fat is beautiful!” talked of Heather Boyle who had said: “It’s sexually exciting to me to be fat… If I had a choice to be thin, I’d turn it down. I’m 422 pounds, and there’s nothing wrong with me.” Max (2006) also had good words for admirer of fat women by quoting Boyle to have said, “Fat admirers are mostly strong, intelligent men, who say, ‘I can’t change it, and I’m going to enjoy it,’” hen we’re cool.”  Conclusion Our perception on beauty gets influenced and it changes and is relative. As part of a group we have a conception of what is beautiful which is different in our private or individual life. The one that is part the group has the characteristic of changeability as times changes but one that is private has the characteristic of permanency for in the latter a relation is built. In the physical feature, being fat is beautiful and such perception could be from free media influence. As one’s private way of appreciating beauty if the one is in love to that fat person, that fat person is actually the most beautiful person in the world. References: Alexander, B. (2006), Why beauty is in the eye of the beholder? {www document} URLhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15098830/, Accessed October 18, 2006 Max, J. (2006), FAT IS BEAUTIFUL—AND SO AM I! {www document} URL http://www.nypress.com/19/12/news&columns/nystory1.cfm, Accessed October 18, 2006 Nehamas (2005) Beauty: Skin-Deep, in the Eye of the Beholder and Valuable? {www document} URL http://theblog.philosophytalk.org/2005/03/beauty_skindeep.html, Accessed October 18, 2006 Read More