Welcome to Objectivism Online Forum

Welcome to Objectivism Online, a forum for discussing the philosophy of Ayn Rand. For full access, register via Facebook or email.

RandsPitbull

Newbies
  • Content count

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About RandsPitbull

  • Rank
    Newbie

Previous Fields

  • Country United States
  • State (US/Canadian) Texas
  • Relationship status No Answer
  • Copyright Copyrighted
  • Biography/Intro I like truth.
  • Experience with Objectivism I know everything about it.
  • Occupation Truth

Recent Profile Visitors

103 profile views
  1. From an evolutionary perspective, good looks are considered those features that tell others that you are healthy and have good genes and that your off spring will have a higher chance of reproducing himself since he will inherit half of those genes. As such, even features, prominent gender specific physical characteristics that give away proper hormone levels, etc are objectively preferable (because the genes are objectively better) to uneven features, lack of symmetry and so forth. According to this logic we can objectively say that James Dean, for example, is objectively better looking than the Elephant man. However, for people who are normal looking and do not have any genetic defects or uneven features the debate over if that person is good looking or not seems endless. For example, a lot of people find Emma Watson very good looking, while a lot do not find her good looking. We could basically take every celebrity and for each and every one of them there will be people in both camps (good-looking/not good looking). Even if we were to compare someone who from an evolutionary perspective has superior physical characteristics to someone who has worse features there will still be people who will find the one with worse features better looking than the other one, but if looks are objective...how is this possible? If you take Brad Pitt and Jared Leto, for example, is there any way in which you could objectively say that one is better looking than the other? And if not, does not this mean that looks are subjective since there is no objective standard for measuring beauty? So...are looks objective or subjective? Or are they both?! But how could something be both subjective and objective?! Would not this be logically impossible? What do you think?
  2. If you are not physically insecure yourself, you sure have met people who are. I think that shame/fear/anxiety/depression/self-isolation/etc caused by this, sometimes life debilitating, insecurity is one of the most prevalent psychological issues of our times. Do you have any physical insecurities? If, yes what are they and what lays at their origins? I am wondering where does all this come from? What are its roots? Why and whom of us develop insecurities in the looks category? And most importantly, what is the antidote to it?