Apparently not so. A recent study has shown that infants recognize and draw towards more attractive faces. Obviously this study is flawed. The scientists themselves must be biased to determine who is attractive in the first place, right? How do they possibly know that the baby is choosing the 'hottie' without a standard for beauty? How can they possibly pick a 'beautiful' face for the line-up without revealing their own bias.
Is there a standard for beauty?
Or...is it all subjective and changing with a culture? Hm. Seems pretty obvious. The standard of beauty changes, therefore flawed study. On the other hand, there might be a standard of some basic requirements like regularity of feature?
I think you will find that much of our concept of beauty is not culturally determined, but is ingrained within our brain by evolution. While there are small variations (such as hair colour or style, and skin tone), the concept of what is beautiful is very similar for all cultures. That is exactly what this study has shown - that, regardless of what 'objective beauty' is, both infants and adults have similar views on it, thus suggesting there is a genetic component.
I assert the same about morality. A society where it is right to kill infants is not going to be selected for, but one where it is wrong to pass up the opportunity to help another will do well. This also explains why we have so much trouble determining whether medical treatments such as stem cell therapy, cloning and genetic modification - those are things which we haven't been exposed to before, so couldn't have been selected for.
™ Version 4.2
