Trusted, Automoderated users
17,538
edits
Beauty: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Evolution of beauty
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
Objective beauty has likely mostly evolved by a preference for simplicity (aesthetic sexual selection) which is common to many higher animals.<ref>https://www.apa.org/monitor/oct06/pretty</ref> This means members of a species tended to choose objectively/mathematically beautiful mates and hence species evolved to be beautiful and beauty became an important factor of attraction. | Objective beauty has likely mostly evolved by a preference for simplicity (aesthetic sexual selection) which is common to many higher animals.<ref>https://www.apa.org/monitor/oct06/pretty</ref> This means members of a species tended to choose objectively/mathematically beautiful mates and hence species evolved to be beautiful and beauty became an important factor of attraction. | ||
Complex ornament and [[few millimeters of bone]] likely cannot entirely be explained by mathematical simplicity because they | Complex ornament and [[few millimeters of bone]] likely cannot entirely be explained by mathematical simplicity because they are unnecessary specific and complex. The simplest nose shape would be simply two nostrils as found in some apes, after all. | ||
Either there are functional constraints<ref>Price T, Langen T. 1992. ''Evolution of correlated characters.'' [[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21236041 Abstract]]</ref> preventing a simpler shape, or feedback loops in sexual selection such as [[Fisherian runaway]] and ''sensory bias''<ref>Fuller, R. C., Houle, D., & Travis, J. 2005. ''Sensory Bias as an Explanation for the Evolution of Mate Preferences.'' [[https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/444443 Abstract]]</ref> resulted in arbitrary shapes becoming increasingly sexually attractive, which in turn, overcomplicated or exaggerated them. | Either there are functional constraints<ref>Price T, Langen T. 1992. ''Evolution of correlated characters.'' [[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21236041 Abstract]]</ref> preventing a simpler shape, or feedback loops in sexual selection such as [[Fisherian runaway]] and ''sensory bias''<ref>Fuller, R. C., Houle, D., & Travis, J. 2005. ''Sensory Bias as an Explanation for the Evolution of Mate Preferences.'' [[https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/444443 Abstract]]</ref> resulted in arbitrary shapes becoming increasingly sexually attractive, which in turn, overcomplicated or exaggerated them. | ||
Such feedback loops can explain the immense sexual attraction to superficial traits that humans exhibit, which have barely any relevance for survival except "social survival". | Such feedback loops can explain the immense sexual attraction to superficial traits that humans exhibit, which have barely any relevance for survival except "social survival". | ||