I firmly believe that ugliness is the absence or subversion of expected intentional order, and that ugliness is absent from nature because we don't model nature as having aesthetic intentions.
-
Show this thread
-
Parts of nature may be *disgusting*, but never *ugly*. Animals with ugly faces just prove the rule because their ugliness stems from looking too much like a human in all the wrong ways; a subverted expectation of the order of a human face. Faceless animals are never ugly.
3 replies 4 retweets 27 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @CurlOfGradient
Counterproposal: any species with eyes and assortative mating has ugly members.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ObjectOfObjects
Countercounterproposal: each species considers many of the things produced by its own members ugly, but don't consider anything outside the species' sphere to be ugly.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
Rather, those species may have members that are ugly according to their own preferences, but not according to the preferences of humans.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.