scientific studies on the degree of importance of physical appearance in interpersonal relationships have found a big boost since 1960. The impact that physical beauty has on our lives is remarkable , there is an 'influence not only with regard to the relational aspects but also in many other areas: attractive people are valued even more skilled and competent in their work or in school, with greater ability to control and influence social and even less responsible in the event of crime. Often good looking matches.
Since ancient times we tried to identify criteria that can define beauty. But it was the Greek culture to focus on the fees intended as geometric relationships between the different physiognomic attributes. He was described as a canon of beauty derived from the use of so-called "golden section". From greek Policleto our Leonardo da Vinci continues the tradition of studying and enhancing the human body based on a defined set of geometric proportions.
triggering the mechanism of attraction of a face is probably the proportional relationship that exists between the various constituent parts. This relationship of perfect proportion (The golden section above) is one of those mathematical pattern that is pleasing to the eye a kind of predisposition to perceive them as harmonics. Basically those biological organisms whose individual parts have relationships with each other due to the golden section are perceived as beautiful because they are seen as devoid of anomalies. Then the functional to the continuation of the species.
same view of an anthropological you have to define, in the centuries of beauty for both male and female bodies.
As for the female body should be borne in mind that the calories needed for reproduction are between 50,000 and 80,000 and from 500 to 1,000 per day for breastfeeding are complete. On this basis, natural selection operated in such a way that women sexually mature more or less ¼ weight (about 16 pounds that correspond to 144,000 calories) is made up of fat deposited on breast and sides (the well-known measures 90-60 -90 correspond roughly to that condition). Then selective pressures mean that the brain of man is programmed so as to identify and prefer the signals that ensure a good balance in the female hormone, and then strong fertility and offspring. Basically, over the centuries, the human brain has been addressed, in principle, and unconsciously, to find the very attractive features that show a good brood mare.
For the human male characteristics that, beyond time and culture, are considered more attractive are the skin and hair healthy, sit down hard, life is not too thin compared to the hips, proportionate legs, broad shoulders. These traits are sufficiently indicative of dominance, health, strength, fertility and genetics competitiveness, qualities that women want to send their children (Attia, 1999, Contemporary Psychology, 156: 38-47).
Sexual selection, which is what is made by females when choosing their partners, but can go in the opposite direction of the natural one which provides benefits for the species. A clear example concerning height. The early hominids had a height much lower than the average current of our species, in terms of biological survival of the lower buildings have an advantage: they are more agile in their movements, they need a lower contribution of metabolic and heart pump less blood. Despite this, if our evolutionary history is marked by a progressive increase in height, this is partly attributable to the fact that women tend to perceive as the most attractive males are higher than average population. The hairless, in our species, unique among primates (Morris, 1967, "The bee naker, Cape, London) is the result of sexual selection: women prefer hairy men just see themselves more attractive without hair. This trend is "supernormalizzata" in the daily act of males to shave his beard and hair of the females (but in recent years in Western countries, even the younger males shave) in order to have the body as smooth as possible.
I mentioned, quotes above, the stimulus "supernormal." I am referring to a recent theory that somehow exceeds that of the middle part and prototypicality. If it is true that the prototype, for example, the average face is considered attractive, it is not the most attractive (Alley and Cunningham, 1988, Psychological Science, 2:123-125): forme che esulano dall’ordinario possono attirare l’attenzione più di forme che rientrano nella media. Occhi e labbra più grandi, per esempio, sono considerati più attraenti (Farkas et al.. 1987, Antropometric facial proportional in medicine, Thomas, Springfield ). Anche quanto riguarda il colore preferito della pupilla (il blù ed il verde sono preferiti benchè più rari) e dei capelli (laddove i castani sono più diffusi, non raccolgono preferenze) dimostra che non sono comunque gli individui ordinari o prototipici quelli che attraggono di più.
Since ancient times we tried to identify criteria that can define beauty. But it was the Greek culture to focus on the fees intended as geometric relationships between the different physiognomic attributes. He was described as a canon of beauty derived from the use of so-called "golden section". From greek Policleto our Leonardo da Vinci continues the tradition of studying and enhancing the human body based on a defined set of geometric proportions.
 |
| "Andromeda" by Tamara De Lempicka |
The current hypothesis explaining interesting about the fees to determine the beauty of Darwinian derivation and refers to average features of all faces: natural selection, which operates according to guidelines normalizing and stabilizing, would tend to favor characters that are close to the mean. Thus, individuals with characteristics of this type tend more likely to be free from harmful genetic mutations, and then would be favorites. So if the average values \u200b\u200bare preferred to extremes, the faces that represent the average of all the faces are preferred because they are more normal than others. In fact, in several tests (Langlois and Roggman, University of Texas, 1990, Psychological Science 1: 115-121; Pollard, University of Canterbury, New Zealand, 1995, International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 8: 77-83) , designed and built to the computer as the average of the features of a large number of faces of men and women of different ethnic groups (a kind of prototype) were judged by all the people whose opinion had been submitted, the more attractive the individual faces used.
Even in very young children there is no unanimity of evaluation, which in their case is expressed with more attention and more time spent looking at the picture more attractive. The developmental psychologists prefer to explain the attraction of the beautiful baby to the faces using the concept of "archetype" or assuming a pattern of perception of species-specific innate structure of the face. In this scheme, when viewed would instinctively reported to be compared. A triggering the mechanism of attraction of a face is probably the proportional relationship that exists between the various constituent parts. This relationship of perfect proportion (The golden section above) is one of those mathematical pattern that is pleasing to the eye a kind of predisposition to perceive them as harmonics. Basically those biological organisms whose individual parts have relationships with each other due to the golden section are perceived as beautiful because they are seen as devoid of anomalies. Then the functional to the continuation of the species.
same view of an anthropological you have to define, in the centuries of beauty for both male and female bodies.
As for the female body should be borne in mind that the calories needed for reproduction are between 50,000 and 80,000 and from 500 to 1,000 per day for breastfeeding are complete. On this basis, natural selection operated in such a way that women sexually mature more or less ¼ weight (about 16 pounds that correspond to 144,000 calories) is made up of fat deposited on breast and sides (the well-known measures 90-60 -90 correspond roughly to that condition). Then selective pressures mean that the brain of man is programmed so as to identify and prefer the signals that ensure a good balance in the female hormone, and then strong fertility and offspring. Basically, over the centuries, the human brain has been addressed, in principle, and unconsciously, to find the very attractive features that show a good brood mare.
For the human male characteristics that, beyond time and culture, are considered more attractive are the skin and hair healthy, sit down hard, life is not too thin compared to the hips, proportionate legs, broad shoulders. These traits are sufficiently indicative of dominance, health, strength, fertility and genetics competitiveness, qualities that women want to send their children (Attia, 1999, Contemporary Psychology, 156: 38-47).
Sexual selection, which is what is made by females when choosing their partners, but can go in the opposite direction of the natural one which provides benefits for the species. A clear example concerning height. The early hominids had a height much lower than the average current of our species, in terms of biological survival of the lower buildings have an advantage: they are more agile in their movements, they need a lower contribution of metabolic and heart pump less blood. Despite this, if our evolutionary history is marked by a progressive increase in height, this is partly attributable to the fact that women tend to perceive as the most attractive males are higher than average population. The hairless, in our species, unique among primates (Morris, 1967, "The bee naker, Cape, London) is the result of sexual selection: women prefer hairy men just see themselves more attractive without hair. This trend is "supernormalizzata" in the daily act of males to shave his beard and hair of the females (but in recent years in Western countries, even the younger males shave) in order to have the body as smooth as possible.
I mentioned, quotes above, the stimulus "supernormal." I am referring to a recent theory that somehow exceeds that of the middle part and prototypicality. If it is true that the prototype, for example, the average face is considered attractive, it is not the most attractive (Alley and Cunningham, 1988, Psychological Science, 2:123-125): forme che esulano dall’ordinario possono attirare l’attenzione più di forme che rientrano nella media. Occhi e labbra più grandi, per esempio, sono considerati più attraenti (Farkas et al.. 1987, Antropometric facial proportional in medicine, Thomas, Springfield ). Anche quanto riguarda il colore preferito della pupilla (il blù ed il verde sono preferiti benchè più rari) e dei capelli (laddove i castani sono più diffusi, non raccolgono preferenze) dimostra che non sono comunque gli individui ordinari o prototipici quelli che attraggono di più.
