Of course, Marcus Aurelius was way ahead of us here: 'We should remember that even Nature’s inadvertence has its own charm, its own attractiveness. The way loaves of bread split open on top in the oven; the ridges are just by-products of the baking, and yet pleasing, somehow: they rouse our appetite without our knowing why...in. And anyone with a feeling for nature—a deeper sensitivity—will find it all gives pleasure. Even what seems inadvertent. He’ll find the jaws of live animals as beautiful as painted ones or sculptures. He’ll look calmly at the distinct beauty of old age in men, women, and at the loveliness of children. And other things like that will call out to him constantly—things unnoticed by others. Things seen only by those at home with Nature and its works.' Meditations 3.2. (Hays translation)
In my life I see phases where I've embodied each of these personas. Initially, I leaned towards being a bit of a snob, evolved into something akin to a ghost as a young adult, and now, I'm much more pollyanish. But not always. Isn't life more of a dynamic spectrum than a fixed point? Doesn't make more sense to think of it as a fluidity shifting between these states, rather than confining ourselves to a single label? Seems far more reflective of the human experience.
Anyway, thank you for sharing this – it definitely gave me some food for thought 😄
This creation exemplifies beautiful artistic work!
While engaging with this piece, I couldn't help but envision its potential to seamlessly integrate into a philosophical dialogue reminiscent of Plato's works, particularly exploring the essence of beauty. In such a discourse, Socrates would undoubtedly reveal the flaws in both Pollyannas and snobs. A Pollyanna, with their overly optimistic and naive outlook on life, tends to encounter beauty and goodness at every turn, inadvertently disregarding the existence of ugliness. However, it is crucial to consider the significance of beauty in the absence of ugliness; its value becomes obscured. Likewise, the true meaning of goodness remains elusive without the presence of evil in the world. On the other hand, the snob resides on the cynical end of the spectrum, incapable of recognizing beauty in anything. Both Pollyannas and snobs possess flawed perspectives when it comes to beauty and aesthetics.
By perceiving beauty without acknowledging any flaws or ugliness, Pollyannas forfeit the capacity to genuinely appreciate or distinguish between objects of varying quality. Consequently, their discernment fails, preventing them from acknowledging the most genuinely beautiful aspects of life. Conversely, snobs possess an excessive amount of cynicism and a tendency to be overly critical. As a result, they struggle to appreciate or recognize the allure present in ordinary occurrences. Their capacity to discover instances of beauty scattered throughout their everyday existence becomes constrained. Moreover, this disposition implies that snobs may inadvertently overlook opportunities to partake in meaningful and pleasurable experiences that others readily embrace.
In order for beauty to possess true significance and worth, it must be acknowledged within the context of its opposition to flaws, imperfections, or plainness. Without the existence of these contrasting elements, the concept of beauty becomes devoid of meaning and purpose. If everything were to possess beauty or if nothing were to possess beauty, the very essence of the concept itself would be rendered insignificant and devoid of any genuine understanding. However, as you aptly observe, perceptions can undergo transformation. This suggests that beauty encompasses facets that depend on individual perspectives and experiences, while also including elements in the world that possess inherent qualities of beauty and ugliness.
The perception of beauty involves intricate dynamics between external attributes and internal cognitive factors. As for individuals who tend to have an excessively Pollyanna outlook on life and those who possess a haughty and elitist attitude, a Pollyanna disregards the objective and inherent qualities of objects and instead solely focuses on subjective perception. They are highly inclined to find beauty in places where it might not actually exist, relying solely on their subjective interpretation rather than objective merits. A snob excessively fixates on their own narrow criteria of beauty, disregarding the potential for others to perceive beauty differently. They fail to acknowledge the subjective nature inherent in assessing beauty.
As you suggest, an optimal viewpoint should consider both the measurable characteristics of the object or situation being discussed and also take into account how it could be deemed aesthetically pleasing from a subjective standpoint, influenced by an individual's unique perspective and personal experiences. Neither optimists nor arrogant individuals can achieve this equilibrium. Pollyannas overlook the objective qualities associated with beauty, while snobs are excessively fixated on their own subjective perspectives.
This Aristotelian mean between the two provides a methodical perspective for comprehending and appreciating beauty at a profound and significant level, while concurrently participating in conversations pertaining to the fundamental nature of beauty that is always ongoing.
I know a croissant 🥐 snob, that prefer I bring no croissant to brunch than a bad croissant 😉
More seriously, how come subjectivity is not a coherent concept? If our perception of beauty is changing according to our state of mind or our previous experience. Isn’t that subjective?
Si on définit « subjectif » comme étant tout ce qui dépend de l'état d'esprit d'une personne, oui, le mot a du sens. Mais en pratique, le sens plus courant de « subjectif » ressemble la plupart du temps à « arbitraire », ou « sans lien avec la réalité objective » ce qui est une mauvaise description de ce qui se passe dans l'esprit, puisque l'état d'esprit est une réalité objective (l'état des neurones dans le cerveau, etc.) et dépend de l'environnement qui est lui aussi objectif. Une autre façon de le dire serait que la subjectivité n'est pas l'opposée de l'objectivité.
Personnellement, je pense subjectif comme « expérience humaine », les perceptions qu’un individu a du monde, grâce à ces sens. Objectif plus comme des mesures avec des instruments. Je ne décrirais pas la réalité ni l’environnement d’objectif. Genre, je ressent des tremblements = subjectif. Mesure du sismographe=objectif. Réalité=techtonik party
Thank you for this beautiful and thoughtful essay about the things we notice and the ways we choose to frame them. I can’t help but be more mindful of my attitudes after reading.
This is such a useful heuristic to carry around. Another brilliant essay Étienne, thank you
Agree wholeheartedly. A great piece of work
Thank you both!
Thanks for sharing this. I love how this shift in perception can suddenly happen and change everything.
"Clouds come floating into my life, no longer to carry rain or usher storm, but to add color to my sunset sky.” ~ Rabindranath Tagore
A beautiful quote, thank you
Of course, Marcus Aurelius was way ahead of us here: 'We should remember that even Nature’s inadvertence has its own charm, its own attractiveness. The way loaves of bread split open on top in the oven; the ridges are just by-products of the baking, and yet pleasing, somehow: they rouse our appetite without our knowing why...in. And anyone with a feeling for nature—a deeper sensitivity—will find it all gives pleasure. Even what seems inadvertent. He’ll find the jaws of live animals as beautiful as painted ones or sculptures. He’ll look calmly at the distinct beauty of old age in men, women, and at the loveliness of children. And other things like that will call out to him constantly—things unnoticed by others. Things seen only by those at home with Nature and its works.' Meditations 3.2. (Hays translation)
In my life I see phases where I've embodied each of these personas. Initially, I leaned towards being a bit of a snob, evolved into something akin to a ghost as a young adult, and now, I'm much more pollyanish. But not always. Isn't life more of a dynamic spectrum than a fixed point? Doesn't make more sense to think of it as a fluidity shifting between these states, rather than confining ourselves to a single label? Seems far more reflective of the human experience.
Anyway, thank you for sharing this – it definitely gave me some food for thought 😄
Yep, going through phases — and reflecting on the process — is the healthiest way to go about it!
This creation exemplifies beautiful artistic work!
While engaging with this piece, I couldn't help but envision its potential to seamlessly integrate into a philosophical dialogue reminiscent of Plato's works, particularly exploring the essence of beauty. In such a discourse, Socrates would undoubtedly reveal the flaws in both Pollyannas and snobs. A Pollyanna, with their overly optimistic and naive outlook on life, tends to encounter beauty and goodness at every turn, inadvertently disregarding the existence of ugliness. However, it is crucial to consider the significance of beauty in the absence of ugliness; its value becomes obscured. Likewise, the true meaning of goodness remains elusive without the presence of evil in the world. On the other hand, the snob resides on the cynical end of the spectrum, incapable of recognizing beauty in anything. Both Pollyannas and snobs possess flawed perspectives when it comes to beauty and aesthetics.
By perceiving beauty without acknowledging any flaws or ugliness, Pollyannas forfeit the capacity to genuinely appreciate or distinguish between objects of varying quality. Consequently, their discernment fails, preventing them from acknowledging the most genuinely beautiful aspects of life. Conversely, snobs possess an excessive amount of cynicism and a tendency to be overly critical. As a result, they struggle to appreciate or recognize the allure present in ordinary occurrences. Their capacity to discover instances of beauty scattered throughout their everyday existence becomes constrained. Moreover, this disposition implies that snobs may inadvertently overlook opportunities to partake in meaningful and pleasurable experiences that others readily embrace.
In order for beauty to possess true significance and worth, it must be acknowledged within the context of its opposition to flaws, imperfections, or plainness. Without the existence of these contrasting elements, the concept of beauty becomes devoid of meaning and purpose. If everything were to possess beauty or if nothing were to possess beauty, the very essence of the concept itself would be rendered insignificant and devoid of any genuine understanding. However, as you aptly observe, perceptions can undergo transformation. This suggests that beauty encompasses facets that depend on individual perspectives and experiences, while also including elements in the world that possess inherent qualities of beauty and ugliness.
The perception of beauty involves intricate dynamics between external attributes and internal cognitive factors. As for individuals who tend to have an excessively Pollyanna outlook on life and those who possess a haughty and elitist attitude, a Pollyanna disregards the objective and inherent qualities of objects and instead solely focuses on subjective perception. They are highly inclined to find beauty in places where it might not actually exist, relying solely on their subjective interpretation rather than objective merits. A snob excessively fixates on their own narrow criteria of beauty, disregarding the potential for others to perceive beauty differently. They fail to acknowledge the subjective nature inherent in assessing beauty.
As you suggest, an optimal viewpoint should consider both the measurable characteristics of the object or situation being discussed and also take into account how it could be deemed aesthetically pleasing from a subjective standpoint, influenced by an individual's unique perspective and personal experiences. Neither optimists nor arrogant individuals can achieve this equilibrium. Pollyannas overlook the objective qualities associated with beauty, while snobs are excessively fixated on their own subjective perspectives.
This Aristotelian mean between the two provides a methodical perspective for comprehending and appreciating beauty at a profound and significant level, while concurrently participating in conversations pertaining to the fundamental nature of beauty that is always ongoing.
I know a croissant 🥐 snob, that prefer I bring no croissant to brunch than a bad croissant 😉
More seriously, how come subjectivity is not a coherent concept? If our perception of beauty is changing according to our state of mind or our previous experience. Isn’t that subjective?
Si on définit « subjectif » comme étant tout ce qui dépend de l'état d'esprit d'une personne, oui, le mot a du sens. Mais en pratique, le sens plus courant de « subjectif » ressemble la plupart du temps à « arbitraire », ou « sans lien avec la réalité objective » ce qui est une mauvaise description de ce qui se passe dans l'esprit, puisque l'état d'esprit est une réalité objective (l'état des neurones dans le cerveau, etc.) et dépend de l'environnement qui est lui aussi objectif. Une autre façon de le dire serait que la subjectivité n'est pas l'opposée de l'objectivité.
Ah ok, oui, en effet!
Personnellement, je pense subjectif comme « expérience humaine », les perceptions qu’un individu a du monde, grâce à ces sens. Objectif plus comme des mesures avec des instruments. Je ne décrirais pas la réalité ni l’environnement d’objectif. Genre, je ressent des tremblements = subjectif. Mesure du sismographe=objectif. Réalité=techtonik party
Mais bon selon le dictionnaire j’ai tord 😅
La définition du mot « subjectif » est, de toute évidence, subjective :p
😅
Thank you for this beautiful and thoughtful essay about the things we notice and the ways we choose to frame them. I can’t help but be more mindful of my attitudes after reading.