Human faces

What is art? What is beauty?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
chasw
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:21 pm
Location: Seattle USA
Contact:

Human faces

Post by chasw » Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:01 pm

What constitutes a beautiful, or near perfect, human face? A standard of beauty for the rest of our bodies seems much clearer. All humans alive today are very closely related, a single species descended from a common ancestor a mere 180,000 years ago. Accordingly, very fit people, such as well-rounded athletes, exhibit bodies that conform to an evolutionary standard which applies fairly evenly to most breeding populations (demes) around the globe. The same evolutionary pressures requiring people to run for long distances, carry heavy objects and wield weapons have shaped all humans more or less equally. People generally recognize this standard of physical conformation as beautiful. Consider Usain Bolt or Rhonda Rousey as exemplars.

Human faces, however, are different. They are heavily adapted to two environmental conditions unique to humans: talking and eating cooked food. Nearly every external feature above the neck has been heavily modified during the last 1.8 million years of evolution by these conditions, compared to our Australopithecine and Simian ancestors. Our ears are fixed and pointing in the right direction for hearing others around us speak, our eyes have expanded their sclera so we can easily see where our companions are looking, our throats are heavily adapted for speech and our dental arcades reduced because we no longer have to tear into raw meat. For reasons not entirely clear, this results in a much wider variation among the various extant breeding populations. Hair texture, skin color, shape of nose, ear, etc. vary more than body shapes do, due to environmental conditions, even within populations.

Because we are sentient beings, breeding populations have developed cultural biases for what constitutes a beautiful face. But even within populations, opinions about facial beauty vary widely. The conventional wisdom is that facial beauty is "in the eye of the beholder". Sexual dimorphism plays a role too. Humans are attracted to each other in part by the perceived beauty of their faces. Over time, selective pressure should affect facial conformation of succeeding generations. Yet, after more than a hundred thousand generations of anatomically modern humans, we still exhibit a wide variety of visages. It seems that our lack of consensus about facial beauty has left our heads to continue to be shaped almost exclusively by their basic functions for sensing, eating and speaking.

What do you think? Why do people consider some faces beautiful and others "homely"? Why is there no generally accepted standard, even within individual breeding populations? - CW

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Post by TSBU » Sun Jan 22, 2017 6:32 pm

There isn't a clear standard with bodies (out of healthy, not old, and after sport, that are very common things). You just have to go to any porn site, and you'll see many kind of bodies.

Well, with faces it is the same, it's a matter of having an exact image in our brain. That's impossible, and blind people like bodies too, the more exact the detail in your taste, the more strange it would be to have it in our genes. Faces are smaller XD. So, symetry, good teeth, healthy, not old, and happy, are the most common things. The rest is secundary, for exammple, male faces are usually more attractive if they have big angles etc, cause the same things that change the bodie to make it strong with hormons are what change the face, long hair can be attractive because we have that tradition, women with long hair... etc.

Why do you ask that? XD

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Human faces

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Sun Jan 22, 2017 8:20 pm

Screen Shot 2017-01-22 at 19.19.22.png
Screen Shot 2017-01-22 at 19.19.22.png (98.36 KiB) Viewed 2104 times
Here is the answer.

marjoram_blues
Posts: 1629
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 12:50 pm

Re: Human faces

Post by marjoram_blues » Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:48 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Screen Shot 2017-01-22 at 19.19.22.png

Here is the answer.
A deep, knowing gaze ?

User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Human faces

Post by Harbal » Sun Jan 22, 2017 11:08 pm

marjoram_blues wrote:
A deep, knowing gaze ?
I wonder what he knows.

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Human faces

Post by Walker » Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:50 am

chasw wrote: Yet, after more than a hundred thousand generations of anatomically modern humans, we still exhibit a wide variety of visages. It seems that our lack of consensus about facial beauty has left our heads to continue to be shaped almost exclusively by their basic functions for sensing, eating and speaking.

What do you think? Why do people consider some faces beautiful and others "homely"? Why is there no generally accepted standard, even within individual breeding populations? - CW
Fact check: Is that an accurate number? Figuring 3 generations every 100 years, that’s 30 generations every 1000 years, or 150 generations for 5000 years, about as long as man has been out of the caves. Even considering possible lost civilizations of 15,000 years ago would amount to only 450 generations. By that reckoning, 100,000 generations equals 3.3 million years, which is longer than man has been modern.

Faces that exhibit particular mathematical proportions are objectively recognized as beautiful from an anatomical perspective. However, most often the beauty of the life and intent that empowers motion of form also enables the beauty represented by form to transcend these mathematical proportions. Artistically presenting the mathematical proportions in form figuratively presents the naturally full expression of uncorrupted human evolutionary capacity, which is an ideal and sometimes an actuality, but is representative of the beautiful life that empowers the form … no matter the form of the life.

In other words, Mona Lisa ends up with a lopsided smile.

What monstrosities would walk the streets were some people's faces as unfinished as their minds.
- Eric Hoffer

User avatar
chasw
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:21 pm
Location: Seattle USA
Contact:

Re: Human faces

Post by chasw » Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:48 pm

Walker wrote: "Fact check: Is that an accurate number? Figuring 3 generations every 100 years, that’s 30 generations every 1000 years, or 150 generations for 5000 years, about as long as man has been out of the caves. Even considering possible lost civilizations of 15,000 years ago would amount to only 450 generations. By that reckoning, 100,000 generations equals 3.3 million years, which is longer than man has been modern."

Thanks, Walker. My mistake, I meant to say 100,000 generations since the appearance of Homo erectus 1.8 million years ago (not AMHs 180my) and assumes a new generation every 18 years. It was H. erectus which likely began to talk in predicate sentences, controlled fire and cooked their food.

"Faces that exhibit particular mathematical proportions are objectively recognized as beautiful from an anatomical perspective. However, most often the beauty of the life and intent that empowers motion of form also enables the beauty represented by form to transcend these mathematical proportions. Artistically presenting the mathematical proportions in form figuratively presents the naturally full expression of uncorrupted human evolutionary capacity, which is an ideal and sometimes an actuality, but is representative of the beautiful life that empowers the form … no matter the form of the life. "

Excellent description, I like the idea of mathematical and symmetrical proportions contributing to beauty. Also, youth has something to do with it. - CW

...snip...

What monstrosities would walk the streets were some people's faces as unfinished as their minds.
- Eric Hoffer

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Human faces

Post by TSBU » Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:42 pm

Harbal wrote:
marjoram_blues wrote:
A deep, knowing gaze ?
I wonder what he knows.
Image

I hate when people want to believe that faces and thoughts are related.

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Human faces

Post by Walker » Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:02 pm

TSBU wrote:
Harbal wrote:
marjoram_blues wrote:
A deep, knowing gaze ?
I wonder what he knows.
I hate when people want to believe that faces and thoughts are related.
"Stop hatin. Start participatin."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_pqFqYME68

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Post by TSBU » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:30 pm

Walker wrote:
TSBU wrote:
Harbal wrote: I wonder what he knows.
I hate when people want to believe that faces and thoughts are related.
"Stop hatin. Start participatin."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_pqFqYME68
"stop being retard and demanding, start paying (if you can)"

duszek
Posts: 2250
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Thin Air

Re: Human faces

Post by duszek » Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:46 pm

I suppose that we call a face beautiful if it creates good feelings in us when we watch it.

An empty or bored or scared or mischievous face cannot appear beautiful to the beholder.
Unless he has some very unusual personal predilections.

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Human faces

Post by Walker » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:31 am

chasw wrote: Thanks, Walker. My mistake, I meant to say 100,000 generations since the appearance of Homo erectus 1.8 million years ago (not AMHs 180my) and assumes a new generation every 18 years. It was H. erectus which likely began to talk in predicate sentences, controlled fire and cooked their food.
I think a lot of lifespan averages include infant mortality, which accounts for only 18 years for a lifespan. Those who reached maturity probably lived longer than 18 years. 30 years for one who survived childhood is likely more accurate. But that's just an unresearched hunch backed by reasoning.

In that vein, I think this is one of the reasons why the USofA fares so poorly in infant mortality statistics. Premature babies are counted as born, and when they can’t survive they go into the infant mortality stats. In other countries without advanced NICU depts., nature would take its course and those babies would be counted as still-births, and not part of infant mortality stats.

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re:

Post by Walker » Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:41 am

TSBU wrote:
Walker wrote:
TSBU wrote:
I hate when people want to believe that faces and thoughts are related.
"Stop hatin. Start participatin."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_pqFqYME68
"stop being retard and demanding, start paying (if you can)"
Magnanimity allows that something was lost in the translation, and generosity grants that it was worthy of attention for those inured to the banal who are awaiting an indication of honest insight and perhaps less pandering to base ignorance, and kind encouragement considers that the gif of the Irish kid was a good start for chuckles.

Now behave and stop your hatin, Pookie. Propriety, intelligence, compassion, experience, and a stockroom filled-up with tedium demand it.
Or, would that be hatein.
Hatin still fits the link though. Pimp hatin.

Every situation is workable.
- Trungpa Rinpoche

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 824
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Re:

Post by TSBU » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:04 am

Walker wrote:
Stupidity allows that something was lost in the translation, and my ego grants that it was worthy of attention for those inured to the banal who are awaiting an indication of honest insight and perhaps less pandering to base ignorance, and the weed considers that the gif of the Irish kid was a good start for chuckles.

Now behave and stop your hatin, Pookie. Me,myself, I, Walker, and a retarded ego filled-up with quotes of death people to feel intelligent demand it.
Stop lying to yourself, or, if you do it, at least let other people get away from you.

Walker
Posts: 6688
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Human faces

Post by Walker » Tue Jan 24, 2017 1:08 am

Why ... you're just a sourpuss.

Maybe your favorite gif just needs a bit of awesome music for you to appreciate it.
Click the link.

Image

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgV39850BqA

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest