most people have a very monodimensional understanding of looks

[kathisterima]

I'm not talking about regular people of course, whose ignorance is excused, but the so-called looks experts of shitskinmax and truerateme, who really fail to grasp what aesthetics truly is about. I'm not trying to gatekeep looks but I really want to make those insufferable Indians giving these ratings shut up cuz they don't know shit.

[MysteriousWeeb420]

looks are subjective

[kathisterima]

looks are subjective

[MysteriousWeeb420]

looks are subjective

hahaha reddit bad SOY!

[Honest]

What are aesthetics truly about?

[kathisterima]

What are aesthetics truly about?

it's art and words are too flaccid to define it

[MysteriousWeeb420]

What are aesthetics truly about?

it's art and words are too flaccid to define it

and interpretation of art is individual. jfl at making fun of redditors for being correct

[Gatekeeper]

looks can be quantified mostly objectively

[kathisterima]

What are aesthetics truly about?

it's art and words are too flaccid to define it

and interpretation of art is individual. jfl at making fun of redditors for being correct

to an extent yes but your statement is inherently wrong, there's no point arguing over this since science has laid down the facts and I'm pretty sure you know that already

[MysteriousWeeb420]

What are aesthetics truly about?

it's art and words are too flaccid to define it

and interpretation of art is individual. jfl at making fun of redditors for being correct

to an extent yes but your statement is inherently wrong, there's no point arguing over this since science has laid down the facts and I'm pretty sure you know that already

science is an art - it's all relative

[kathisterima]

it's art and words are too flaccid to define it

and interpretation of art is individual. jfl at making fun of redditors for being correct

to an extent yes but your statement is inherently wrong, there's no point arguing over this since science has laid down the facts and I'm pretty sure you know that already

science is an art - it's all relative

I perceive this comment as agreeing with me, so thank you for affirming my perception

[Duncan_]

opry is the only good looking male

[MysteriousWeeb420]

and interpretation of art is individual. jfl at making fun of redditors for being correct

to an extent yes but your statement is inherently wrong, there's no point arguing over this since science has laid down the facts and I'm pretty sure you know that already

science is an art - it's all relative

I perceive this comment as agreeing with me, so thank you for affirming my perception

think about it this way: if you had pictures of 100 faces and asked 10,000 people to rank them in order of attractiveness, do you think they would all coincide?

of course they wouldn't because people value traits differently, whether by social and cultural exposure or by variation in underlying genetic brain structure 

sure you could try and appeal to some "average" or "social consenus" but at that point you have already left the realm of objectivity

[Honest]

to an extent yes but your statement is inherently wrong, there's no point arguing over this since science has laid down the facts and I'm pretty sure you know that already

science is an art - it's all relative

I perceive this comment as agreeing with me, so thank you for affirming my perception

think about it this way: if you had pictures of 100 faces and asked 10,000 people to rank them in order of attractiveness, do you think they would all coincide?

of course they wouldn't because people value traits differently, whether by social and cultural exposure or by variation in underlying genetic brain structure 

sure you could try and appeal to some "average" or "social consenus" but at that point you have already left the realm of objectivity

If you had a set of 100 numbers and asked 10,000 people to rank these numbers numerically, you would expect to see some variation. This doesn't mean that numerical rank is subjective.


Anyway, I think this topic is pretty pointless to pursue, seeing as we all lack the ability to fully communicate our "subjective opinions" in an objective way - if we could, then we would find that subjective/objective classification to be a false dichotomy.

[kathisterima]

think about it this way: if you had pictures of 100 faces and asked 10,000 people to rank them in order of attractiveness, do you think they would all coincide?

an evident pattern would be formed like in all attractiveness studies

you could ask 100 people to point at you the center of a shape, and their centers might be off, but that doesn't mean the center is up for interpretation

of course they wouldn't because people value traits differently, whether by social and cultural exposure or by variation in underlying genetic brain structure 

sure you could try and appeal to some "average" or "social consenus" but at that point you have already left the realm of objectivity

that might be true up to a certain extent 

attractiveness is not a personal affair it's so stupid that you attribute this to "social consensus" when it transcends our time on this planet as organized societies and even our species