I found the section of the Ted Talk discussing how natural selection made mates and children beautiful so we would not eat them extremely interesting. As a BSE major, I find this conflicting.
The biology side of me thinks this makes sense at first glance, that in order for our species to survive we need to mate and reproduce, so making mates and children aesthetically pleasing would keep our species alive. However, most humans do not have the biological desire to kill people they find unattractive, so I am not sure where I stand on this.
The society part of me thinks this argument is merely extrapolated biological theory when the only thing influencing our desires for mates and children are societal. Science does not work in a vacuum, and whether we like it or not, we are influenced by other people. Obviously our biological need to mate is in our genes, but as a species we have become too complicated to have our desires explained by the easy answer of "it's in our genes".
Now because I am in BSE, I can make connections between the two. For example, jealousy has often lead humans to killing each other. A social problem like infidelity in a relationship could end up with the cheated murdering the cheat-ee. But why? The hormones (biological) released from feeling betrayed (social) cloud a persons brain and lead them to do things they normally wouldn't. Then there is also the idea of rules and laws, and if you murder someone, you go to jail. If murder were legal there would be a lot more human death, and legality is a social construct, not genetics.
However, with domestication of animals it all falls on the "cuteness" of an animal. In our culture we slaughter cows and pigs and chickens every day, but we could never think of having a puppy slaughtering farm for dog meat. You could argue "cuteness" is a social construct, though, as other cultures would be okay with eating dogs and other domesticated animals.
So I guess my conclusion is that I do not fully agree with Dutton's statement, but there is definitely some merit to it.
I do understand that when it comes to defining and seeing what beauty is and essentially when we see it in a scientific perspective , is hard. Because as I have mentioned on my blog, I see beauty in a outer perspective from science. I rely more in my personal experiences, as we know that many of us do. I agree with you that "cuteness" is a social construct, because we all have different views, values and live in different settings in which makes us come up with what is "cute" and what is not. In a way I do agree, that biologically there is not such thing as defining beauty.
ReplyDelete