Please Explain How Our Most Noble Species of Poo-flinging Super-Chimps Evolved a Sense of Beauty?

[Sunstone]

Right. That's the one. So, perhaps the feelings are related to it. "Feel good" is the indicator that makes the non-verbal animal able to make a decision "I want to eat it." kind'a thing.

You know, this might be stretching it (or it might not be), but the impulse many of us seem to feel to pick a beautiful flower could be an extension of that "Looks good, let's eat it" impulse.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Neither of the two assumptions you mention are ones that I actually make. It's only that I have poorly chosen my words in this case.

No worries then!

I think our tendency to fling certain substances comes with our primitive sense of humor, which appears to be very similar to what amuses chimps, at least, which is why the Three Stooges and Wile E. Coyote and Bevis and Butthead, etc., are so popular.

 

[George-ananda]

How do we know higher-level animals don't enjoy beauty? I just have a guess they probably do. Like many intellectual things, it is just more advanced in man.

 

[crossfire]

A sense of beauty originates in the evolutionary advantage of pattern recognition.
Aspects of it....
- Facial symmetry is linked to better genetics.
- Efficiency of tool design is a relationship between appearance & function.

I would go further to say that beauty is "harmonious imperfections." Our attention is naturally drawn towards imperfections--the dangers, the things that are not-quite-right, probably as a survival tactic. The pattern recognition kicks in looking for something to base a friend-or-foe judgement upon. If you can't readily find a pattern by which to make such a judgement, one might be drawn in for a closer look--hence the seductive quality associated with beauty.

 

[Ouroboros]

You know, this might be stretching it (or it might not be), but the impulse many of us seem to feel to pick a beautiful flower could be an extension of that "Looks good, let's eat it" impulse.

I think it could be. Consider babies looking at things and everything, literally everything has to be tasted. Pick up a rock. It goes into their mouth. Pick up a dirty gum on the ground, also goes into their mouth. So it seems to be some innate behavior or need.

 

[crossfire]

I think it could be. Consider babies looking at things and everything, literally everything has to be tasted. Pick up a rock. It goes into their mouth. Pick up a dirty gum on the ground, also goes into their mouth. So it seems to be some innate behavior or need.

That behavior might have something to do with acclimating to their environment--this rock is a normal, inert part of the environment--no need to send the immune system out after it; this dust I'm playing in is also an inert part of the environment--no need to cause an allergic reaction to this, either; etc.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

That behavior might have something to do with acclimating to their environment--this rock is a normal, inert part of the environment--no need to send the immune system out after it; this dust I'm playing in is also an inert part of the environment--no need to cause an allergic reaction to this, either; etc.

While I agree that tasting/testing everything might have a positive survival value for small children who may then survive into adulthood, the construction of animate and inanimate/inert differs between cultures, and even in Western culture, younger children attribute being, intention and action to rocks, water, toys, and so on. And even adults who "know better" often attribute traits of living things to what we in the West classify as inanimate objects.

 

[Deidre]

Maybe it's wrapped up in the fact that altruism is part of evolution, and in that...we have grown to have empathy for one another. Compassion. This is what leads us to finding beauty in the world. And not just merely competing for survival. (that emoji is totally irrelevant but I've always wanted to use it so....)

 

[dust1n]

Just curious why or how our species of super-sized chimpanzees evolved into folks who can find beauty in a flower, a sunrise, a child's face, etc.? What is the evolutionary advantage of having a sense of beauty? That is, why would someone with a sense of beauty have a significantly greater chance of passing on his or her genes than someone without?

Bonus Question: What brain mechanism, if any, is responsible for the blissful ecstasy that @Debater Slayer feels when reading, in a letter or note from his beloved, a perfectly punctuated paragraph?

Apparently someone saw patterns in the poo.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Just curious why or how our species of super-sized chimpanzees evolved into folks who can find beauty in a flower, a sunrise, a child's face, etc.? What is the evolutionary advantage of having a sense of beauty? That is, why would someone with a sense of beauty have a significantly greater chance of passing on his or her genes than someone without?

Bonus Question: What brain mechanism, if any, is responsible for the blissful ecstasy that @Debater Slayer feels when reading, in a letter or note from his beloved, a perfectly punctuated paragraph?

Sensory inputs which evoke a pleasure response in humans are thoroughly integrated with our pattern association and recognition skills.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

You have successfully just refuted more than half of aTheist evolutionary theory.
Aesthetics has negative value from a purely survival point of view.

 

[Sunstone]

You have successfully just refuted more than half of aTheist evolutionary theory.
Aesthetics has negative value from a purely survival point of view.

In what sense does aesthetics have negative value? Or do you mean no value?

By the way, even if it were true that aesthetics had no value in terms of survival, an aesthetic sense could have still evolved due to genetic drift, sexual selection, or as a spandrel.