jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (5 posts)

How can you define beauty?

  1. shwetha123 profile image74
    shwetha123posted 6 years ago

    How can you define beauty?

  2. family2010 profile image60
    family2010posted 6 years ago

    many would say that beauty would come from the inside out and would reflect on the outside. I could not take the idea of my  obesity and I can tell you that I just did not and could not think being beautiful form the inside is alone enough. No it has to come from the outside too. Many make over are changing the lives of many, and when shown the before and after pictures, they say we have more self-esteem and self awareness of our inner beauty now with confidence.

  3. formosangirl profile image80
    formosangirlposted 6 years ago

    Are you talking about people? It's a broad question. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, no doubt. This week, I made a comment that this cursive writing on a sheet of paper that a colleague scribbled for a person across the hall from me was beautiful. Immediately, the guy was shocked. He said that he questioned my definition of beauty. He scribbled something, and I told him that his writing was illegible. I didn't tell him that in my opinion, his writing was far from beautiful.

    Science tries to define beauty in people. Society tries to set unrealistic photo-shopped standards. Sometimes beauty is connected with familiarity. I knew an unattractive person in my high school. She was the first person in high school to find a husband.

    Some times a person may be beautiful on the outside, but just gosh darn ugly on the inside.  Is that person beautiful anymore? People tend to stay away from things that are not beautiful. So, if you stay away from a person who is not beautiful on the inside, is that person still beautiful?

  4. Borsia profile image45
    Borsiaposted 6 years ago

    Research has shown that, in people, there are formulas of dimensional ratios that are considered beautiful.
    They came up with this by taking a great numbers of both photographs and drawings and having a large number of people grade them on beauty.
    They discovered that certain combinations were preferred more or less globally.
    Different combinations seemed to work with different races and such but those were also fairly universal.
    In other words the White person chose the same characteristics for a Black or Asian person as those chosen by Blacks or Asians and vice versa.
    Color did seem to matter when they used drawings with neutral shading VS the same drawings with lighter and darker shading the lighter shadings came out ahead with people from all races, though they believe this is social conditioning more than anything else, it is universal.
    The advantage of this method of testing is that there is no personality involved and because it is completely anonymous there is no peer pressure.
    Of course there are no hard rules and there are always exceptions when you start dealing with real people, where expressiveness and personalities come into play results will vary. That however is attraction rather than beauty.
    It was also noted that sometimes extremes of characteristics that break the rules are considered beautiful by those who otherwise fit the standards.

    There is a college professor who is pushing the idea that ugliness is as sever a handicap as any other, such as race, gender or physical handicaps.
    He claims that UgloAmericans are turned down for jobs, not chosen for projects, make considerably less money for an equal job, etc.

  5. moonfairy profile image83
    moonfairyposted 6 years ago

    beauty truly is in the eyes of the beholder....so I think the definition is different for everyone.

 
working