Is beauty universal? Or is it a completely subjective opinion?

One theory is that beauty is evolutionary - if something is ';beautiful'; to humans, then it should be considered beautiful to almost all humans, because we are all genetically similar, and should have similar preferences.





Another theory is that the concept of beauty is subjective and that we all look at the same thing completely differently. In other words, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.





What do you think?Is beauty universal? Or is it a completely subjective opinion?
I'd go for the second theory.





I believe so because not everyone thinks Riyo Mori (Miss Universe 2007) is beautiful. Seriously...





We humans only have the same body structures (i.e. eyes, lips, etc.), and some even have more or less of it. But we are created very unique from each other that even none of our fingerprints are alike. Amazing, right?Is beauty universal? Or is it a completely subjective opinion?
The ';universal'; theory goes back much further to Plato. There is in the realm of ideas ';the beautiful,'; ';the good,'; etc. That which we see merely partakes of the (real) beautiful. The evolutionary, empirical, materialistic theory you suggest as ';universal'; is actually about the opposite of this. It would imply that what is beautiful today is not necessarily the same as it was for Plato, which Plato would not allow. In this evolutionary theory, as you put it, the individual would have a perception of beauty as unique and subjective as ones DNA and environment.
I'd go with subjective. If you talk to anyone you know it's particularly obvious, because otherwise every person would find the same people attractive which doesn't happen. Everyone likes different people, otherwise half the population might be alone because they are not considered beautiful by a collective. Even the kind of people that a lot of people may universally find unattractive are still deemed attractive by some people. For example a mother will always think her own children are beautiful even if nobody else does. It's just your own opinion.
humans thinking other humans look beautiful is much more complex than just appearance,there is genetics witch we sense by smell,and aspects of personality that can effect the way we judge other peoples appearance,as for people liking art work I think it's simply a matter of what you've seen before and what you can relate it to.some one who's been at war might not like the picture of the poppy Fields,it symbolizes pain death and fear,some one who hasn't sees a beautiful Field of flowers.I think it's alot about what it symbolizes to us rather that what it actually is.
Beauty is universal. Things that are symmetrical, balanced, have a logical order/pattern, or move in rhythm are beautiful. Analogy: Music is beautiful because of the balanced rhythm and logical order of the notes played. If we just strike randomly at an instrument, we would create an ugly sound due to its lack of order and balance. Everything in the Universe appreciates balance.
The answer is ironically both. We live our lives out as a subjective species, able to think, feel and have opinions.





However, we, as humans, also pride ourselves on society and within society emerges social standards, norms and practices - including what we define as beautiful.





It is hard to say without a controlled environment, whether any one choice is because of the human spirit of choice, or because of social influences.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder....





Also a person can be dead sexy and have the lousiest personality, that can make them less attractive and vice versa.





I personally think it's sometimes the flaws one has e.g. a gap in a tooth, etc.. that makes them even more beautiful.
Media brain washing and billions spent on advertising. Pure propaganda and a very bad influence on society and family values. All that, the fabric of this nation has been largely destroyed by the media owners and their cohorts in the advertising industry. You can just lump it all into the effects of greedy, ruthless immoral people who are behind it all.
I think both are true. but it really depends on the circumstance. if you want to go for your own opinion then definitely the second theory. btw, I like the second one more. coz you know.. whatever floats your boat isn't it? ;) so yeah I'd agree more that beauty is completely someone's subjective opinion.
Its a combination of both, yes, we are all similar genetically. But at the same time the experiences we have throughout our lives change the way we think, and with it what we can consider beautiful.
Both. Symmetry, as well as certain ratios, are indicative of reproductive health and good genes, and thus are attractive to all humans. Beyond that, it's determined by cultural norms and personal preference.
I think you are exactly right. It is subjective. All and sundry are beautiful. Everyone or thing has its unique beauty. And the beauty may differ according to the tastes of the beholder.
beauty is universal. it is the dream of every girl. here's the equation for beauty:


style added to fashion multiplied by personality is equal to attraction divided by men
for me subjective...


but..for example, one person says that i like______ beauty cause maybe... she/he looks like her.


or


i like _( RACE)_ cause.. maybe shes looking at the eye's shape or nose...=+



the beauty is for all ,universal is ,the opinion is for everyone in this world.



Beauty is definitely subjective, subject to the eyes of the beholder.



varies between different cultures and social groups etc etc.


but also very subjective.
Beautiy is in the eye of the beholder. Take me for an example. I only like Asian girls. I would not care if they were fat too. They r so cute
Definitely eye of the beholder or BEERHOLDER depending on the circumstance
its subjective opinion.
subjective
it is subjective.
I do not beleive the evolutionary perspective would be limmited to universitality though i see whre you are comeing from.





Something that bothers me about many - maybe even most - women is that they do not find the male body or at least the male genitals sexually appealing or beautiful. In an evolutionary sense this makes no sense. Why would they find something necessary to procreation repulsive. Surely this is not a commonality amongst men when referring to female attributes. But for whatever reason, as we can see here, is a theme not universal but particular to the various sexes.





And perhaps, the point in instilling the concept of ';beauty' in our minds was not just to draw us towards things that benefit our survival but for us to appreciate life. Life has many forms, there are infinate combinations of things, and conceptual and emotional attatchements that we make to the suymbols around us and in this giant collage of life perhaps it would be too complex for evolution to give us ';specific things'; to find beautiful.





But there are sort of universitalities we taste things as sweet that are consumable for the most part, (antifreeze exluded) and find discusting what is not consumable. (Oysters as an exception :P) When we see shiny things we often find this pleasent, maybe this sense of beauty is in us because in nature all that is shiny is water and we must find the sparkles of water beautiful to be drawn to it better.





I think that there are things that are nearly universal that people find beautiful, like sunsets and star skapes. We were evolved into this world and have evolved to find it beautiful. Some things are subjective. Like furniture. I like tacky happy furniture and my wife likes fancy stuff. The universitality and subjectivness are both a part of perception of beauty. It is the specific reasons why that is speculative.