2006-08-16 09:11:47 · 30 answers · asked by Xo 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
I'VE SUFFERED ALL MY LIFE AND I'M STILL BEAUTIFUL AND GETTING MORE BEAUTIFUL EVERY DAY
AB
2006-08-22 06:42:00 · answer #1 · answered by alice b 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
If you approach this from a theological view, beauty exists in Nirvana or Heaven with out suffering present. Since there is no want in those places, they demonstrate the removal of desire can eliminate suffering. So, a long as desire is avoided, beauty can be experienced without suffering.
If you approach this from a philisophical view, the existence of beauty can exist by only having the knowledge of suffering. This is because intelegent beings should only require a point of reference to be able to reasonably establish a fact. If people create suffering, but they know how to avoid creating it, it isn't necessary that suffering exist. This shows that beauty can exist and poeple could be unaware that it is beautiful because they have nothing to compare it to. Therefore, the existence of beauty is relative to the experiences of the person witnessing it, which is a long-winded way of agreeing with camillon.
2006-08-16 16:45:07 · answer #2 · answered by superfastmoto 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Suffering is the obsessive human response to being hurt, physically, mentally, or psychically. Beauty exists only in opposition to ugliness, and is a subjective experience within each of us, as in "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". To recognize beauty in any situation, even in the midst of pain and suffering can transform that experience and sometimes alleviate the suffering, although not necessarily the pain that brought on that suffering. I do not agree that suffering is necessary at all and certainly not necessary to recognizing beauty in its many forms.
2006-08-24 13:56:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
maybe not a Necessity. . . but suffering makes beauty more poignant, no? also beauty is personal. . . not everyone loves sunsets and some people prefer blondes over brunettes and vice versa.
a picture of a gorgeous colored sunset might evoke positive comments or be hung up on the wall. but a picture of a beautiful sunset over the blood of a battlefield is more intense because of the juxtaposition. that such beauty exists in the midst of such suffering is moving in a way that beauty isolated may not be.
2006-08-24 11:03:47 · answer #4 · answered by serasotto 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Assuming there is agreement on what beauty actually is, I would say suffering does not need to be part of the picture. Recall the ad during the Super Bowl last year that asked the question "what is beauty?" Perhaps you did not see that TV ad... that company knows this question can be answered in a million ways.
2006-08-23 20:06:16 · answer #5 · answered by clophad 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good question. I guess it depends on what you think beauty is. I don't know if suffering is a necessity for beauty to exist, but I do find beauty in unexpected places.
2006-08-16 16:38:45 · answer #6 · answered by hpotter4ever2000 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not. Unlike good and evil, beauty is not contingent on the existence of one for the other. Beauty is a subjective perception that can exist independent of other things, and it is not inherently a judgement upon moral character. The better analogy would place ugliness where sufferage is. Beauty is pleasing, and I do not need to see the displeasing to have any semblance of an idea of what beauty is.
2006-08-16 16:25:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Beauty will exist regardless of mankind and mankinds idea of "suffering". It is to spite suffering that beauty exists. No matter what, nature will grow where ever it wants. In my nicely paved driveway, there has developed a crack, and when last I looked there was a just budding out lovely single dandelion.... lol. It did not grow there to provide me a moment of etherial beauty just for my enjoyment. It is there to spite MY picture of a beautiful drive. And it sits perfectly so that my truck doesn't run it over. Nature and its ferocity and beauty will exist always...whether we are here to enjoy it or not.
2006-08-24 14:10:50 · answer #8 · answered by drmrsgal 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Imagine if everything came without suffering ?? .. life will lose its meanings .. like if a child came without 9 monthes of pregnancy and how hard to get him out to this world and to teach him and to raise him .. etc.. You wont feel you have a kid if you are a mother without suffering ..
Same about money .. if you found you have 10000000 $ in your account you will waste them because you Never suffered for them .. then the more the suffer the more you feel better
No Pain No Gain
2006-08-16 16:19:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Beauty is subjective, so the answer would be, yes.
Especially the Chinese practice of binding female children's feet. It went on for a thousand years. It was horrific. But of course, perpetuated by each generation of "mother love" so their daughters would be seen as attractive to men and have a better chance of marrying well. Pretty and tiny "lotus" feet, as they were called.
During the last couple of centuries, in Europe and America, girls as young as 12 had their waists extraordinarily tightened, which caused some pretty awful diseases and suffering. The Padaung women who have brass coils wound around their necks to inordanately stretch them, are regarded as beautiful too. There are also societies whose women have their lips and ears stretched in the name of beauty.
Today's cosmetic surgery and body piercing is simply a progression of the same cultural beautification.
It's not for me, thanks!
2006-08-16 17:16:50 · answer #10 · answered by copperyclover 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would that be? You have to have something to measure beauty by but I don't see how suffering enters into it. Ok bring out the 4" heels, the corsets, etc but that is fashion not natural beauty
2006-08-19 15:47:46 · answer #11 · answered by flower wanda 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋