Experiencing Beauty in Everyday Life:

Anna Lena Knoll et al., 2023:

"Beauty surrounds us; we may seek out beauty intentionally or happen upon it by accident. Humans’ ability to perceive and appreciate beauty, their sense of beauty, has been found to have a number of influences, including guiding attention, eliciting and enhancing emotions, and reducing stress5 . But why are we able to see and appreciate beauty in the first place? And what determines what we find beautiful? Evaluations of beauty are at least partly subjectiv, but there appears to be stronger agreement for natural stimuli (e.g., faces) than man-made stimuli (e.g., art). From an evolutionary standpoint, our ability to notice and appreciate beauty must have served a purpose in our evolutionary past or present. Thus, natural stimuli — such as faces — are evolutionarily relevant in that, for instance, their symmetry might be an indicator of genetic quality. Yet, symmetric faces are also perceived as more beautiful. Consequently, choosing a mate with a "beautiful face" is argued to also help us choose the mate with better genes. For man-made stimuli (e.g., art), evolutionary functions are less obvious. But does that mean that beauty we see in manmade objects is simply a by-product? Verpooten8 describes two opposing evolutionary accounts: 1) The standard evolutionary account of aesthetics that argues for direct selection, i.e. beauty helps us in selecting good mates (as in the example above) and suitable environments. Beauty in man-made objects is simply a by-product.) An opposing co-evolutionary account which proposes indirect selection by which aesthetic preferences shape aesthetic traits, such as the peacock’s tail. Beauty (or having a large tail) may start as an "honest cue" (larger tails = stronger mate) but then becomes a goal in and of itself (tail length is no longer indicative of mate quality). Beauty in man-made objects is a result of this runaway process. Currently, the literature mainly supports the standard account. This account suggests that people see beauty mostly in nature. Accordingly, a number of studies have shown preferences for natural landscapes over man-made environments, or what has been termed biophilia: a tendency to prefer life or lifelike objects and environments. Viewing such stimuli can affect emotions and well-being positively (e.g., increase happiness). Most people, however, spend more time in man-made environments, with urban areas estimated to house 60% of the world population by 2030. While urban areas are often limited in their access to nature they still hold great potential for beauty.

Within urban environments some elements are more likely to be seen as beautiful than others. For example, a study in Malaga, Spain found leisure sites, sites of cultural history, and places with panoramic views to be more appreciated than residential and industrial areas. Similar sites can be found in many cities, though their specific appearance may vary from city to city. Further, depending on the time of day, skylines may be appreciated as much as nature. Specifically, night-time skylines and natural landscapes are rated higher than daytime skylines. Yet, man-made environments with natural features (e.g., trees) are often preferred over those without. Nonetheless, these findings cannot differentiate if man-made beauty is a by-product (standard account) or an end-result (co-evolutionary account). Furthermore, the role of individual differences remains unclear. ... there are many other man-made stimuli in everyday life that we can appreciate for their aesthetic value. Following the idea of cultural evolution, other knowledge besides that of art may be relevant to the appreciation of everyday (man-made) aesthetics. For instance, forming connections to city environments (city relatedness) by experiencing urban life may shape aesthetic preferences towards the man-made direction, and connections to nature (nature relatedness) may strengthen the natural tendency for biophilia. Nature Relatedness (NR) entails people’s appreciation (including aesthetic), knowledge, and experience of nature. Since aesthetic appreciation (of nature) is part of NR it may affect what people find beautiful in their everyday lives. While exposure to nature can increase NR, many people are mainly exposed to urban environments. Thus, instead of, or in addition to, NR, people may develop City Relatedness (CR), referring to attitudes towards and experiences of city environments. Both can influence how we perceive the world around us and thus may affect evaluations of beauty in everyday (urban) environments. Finally, these accounts are domain-specific, however, our ability to perceive beauty can also be seen as domain-general. Here, appreciation of beauty is conceptualised as trait(-like) emotional and cognitive involvement with beauty, either on its own as Engagement with Beauty, or as part of the broader Big-5 personality trait ’Openness to Experience’. While everyone can appreciate beauty, someone with a high level of engagement may find more beauty within everyday life by intentionally seeking it out or simply noticing it more. People who have a higher appreciation for beauty in one domain (e.g., art) generally also have it in other domains (e.g., music) . However, it is also possible for people to have more appreciation for one domain than another."

-----

Beauty surrounds us on a daily basis and we find it in nature, in particular. This supports beauty as a relevant factor in our evolutionary past and present. While beauty’s original usefulness might lie in increasing evolutionary success, beautiful environments appear rewarding in and of themselves—encounters with beauty have a mood-boosting impact.