A question for evolutionists.

</p>

Why do we find nature beautiful? What reason would Darwin give for us enjoying bird-song or having our breath taken away by the sight of a mountain or a sunset?</p>

 

Because we are natural beings.</p>

 

No, you racist.

</p>

I mean what part would it have played in natural selection?</p>

 

RE: No, you racist.

Well the more intelligent of us would develop into appreciating the natural world around us and finding beauty and enjoyment in it.</p>

The rest developed into the type of person that sits in The Eaststand.</p>

 

RE: No, you racist.

</p>

Why do you think the East Stand's beautiful though?</p>

 

RE: No, you racist.

The buidling itself is nice. The racists and perverts that sit in it are a different matter sithi.

 

Oi I read that ...

.... I'll have you know that i often admire the aesthetic beauty of the sunset over the ponte as I'm bored shitless with what's on the pitch !!!

 

ha ha ... racists and perverts.... and you sit in the ponte ?

....good un !!!

 

Finding nature beautiful is a matter of opinion, nothing to do with natural selection or creationism. Also there are things in nature which are ugly, so does this mean god didn't create these ones? And finally, its not evolutionist, its naturalist, as in naturalism (The philosophy that everything should be justified based on scientific method). I would probably say I am a naturalist/evidentialist. Good day to you sir!

 

The home of all that is knowledgable and good, thankyou very much

&quot;here's your ticket for the East Stand&quot;</p>

&quot;i see dead people&quot;</p>

 

Psychologists might argue that it's part of our genetic programming from our earliest experiences. The mountain may symbolise a destination to which our ancestors travelled or one that signalled 'home', while bird-song and sunsets might be emotional triggers to show us that we'd survived another day and that we now need to prepare for a new day, or rest after a day's hunting/gathering.

Me - I think they're pretty. Except when they wake me up.

 

No, it's evolutionist. You're trying to find philosophical answer to a scientific question.

</p>

Why is our appreciation of nature so emotionally seated? What possible effect could it have had on natural selection? There must be an effect on the chances of procreation for something to exist so strongly in a species.</p>

 

Do ALL humans appreciate nature ?

If so why do Barnsley Council allow house building on green belt land ?

 

I'm not happy with that.

</p>

I think Ug had far less chance of passing his qualities on to his offspring if he was always leaving them to go mountaineering and even less chance of them growing up to be like him if he took them with him.</p>

And I'd have thought the far stronger emotion at sunset and the onset of evensong would be that of fear of marauding night-creepers.</p>

 

Maybe it wasn't Ug though? Maybe Ug's mate Ng kept suggesting to Ug that he ought to go mountaineering so that Ng could have his way with Ug's wife, Janet? Maybe it's Ng and Janet's genetic coding that most us have. Except Brain Blessed and a few others.

 

You might be onto something with the mountains thing.

</p>

Maybe Ug was the original mountaineer. They all look the same don't they? Brian Blessed, Chris Bonnington, they've all got gret beards and squinty eyes.</p>

 

There are two different questions there

1. Why do we find some other species attractive?
2. Why do we find the world around us beautiful?
Since I work on floral evolution, I am reasonably well qualified to address the first one.
Flowers have evolved to attract pollinators, usually insects. The eyes of insects are receptive to different wave-lengths of light to ours, so we don't find all flowers attractive. But there are enough similarities between the chemistry of insects and human eyes (and smell receptors for that matter) that generally we find similar things attractive.

The second question is not really my area. But I suspect it is less valid as a question, because there is more cultural variation in what we find attractive in the countryside. A colleague of mine is involved in asking the public what the find attractive about the countryside. The replies they give are not the same as mine. And I suspect he would get very different responses in different countries.

 

Excellent!

</p>

A very eloquent and informed demonstration of the difference between a response and an answer.</p>

 

However

Your question seems to imply there must be an adaptive explanation for everything in a Darwinian world.
This is not necessarily true. It’s very difficult to think of an evolutionary advantage for smoking, yet people do it, because it tickles a few pleasure receptors in the brain that have evolved for other reasons. Perhaps the same is true for the sunset.

 

RE: However

</p>

Now that's an answer. I've got a new question now but I want to see if I can work it out myself first.</p>