Is there a evolutionary explanation for cuteness?

Question

some animals are cute. Some are gross. Why? Someone ones suggested that it was so we wouldn't eat the gross one's and we rely on the cute one's. Thats not consistent since we eat lambs (cute) and lobster (not cute)

Answer 1

The simple answer is yes, there is an evolutionary explanation for "cuteness", and it goes something like this:

The first thing to remember is that human beings are exceptionally good at recognizing patterns and features of things. We're much better at it than just about any other animal is. We're so good at it, in fact, you don't need to show us an entire object in order for us to know what the entire pattern is.

Ever taken an IQ test, and gotten to the part where there are a bunch of incomplete shapes and the instructions say to complete them? That's what it's testing... just how well your mind can fill in the blanks and construct a complete pattern out of the incomplete set of features of the whole which have been presented to you, and more often than not, even small children have relatively little trouble "filling in the gaps".

The second thing to bear in mind is that humans don't have the easiest time reproducing. It's a hit and miss proposition for getting our females pregnant, it takes a long time for them to gestate young once they are, and we have exceptionally underdeveloped and helpless offspring when they give birth.

Once we do have offspring in hand, we're looking at years of them being so helpless we have to care for their every need constantly, and more than a decade after that of nearly constant support and attention to raise them.

That's an unheard of burden when it comes to producing offspring. It takes us a lot of energy and a lot of time, and we can't readily replace the children we have with a new round of kids if our current batch gets killed off halfway through like, say, a dog can.

All of that sums up to mean that in order to survive, we have to be exceptionally dedicated parents for a very long time (the more dedicated we are, the more likely we are to successfully raise offspring which will pass on our genes to the next generation and all that).

One of the things which helps assure we will be is that we're psychologically programmed to find things with neonatal (newborn) features-- large eyes in relation to head size, large head size in relation to body size, soft body features, relative helplessness, etc-- especially attractive, and have such features provoke an urge in us to care for and protect whatever it is which triggers that response.

Again, that's entirely functional since such an urge would provoke us to seek out our children, to want to look at them (which would make it more likely for us to notice things like injuries and parasites), to want to watch them (which allows us to make sure they aren't putting themselves in any danger), and makes us automatically more responsive and pliant to their needs and demands.

For instance, if a child approaches you, even a strange one, and says "do you have anything to eat? I'm hungry!" and starts crying, what's your first urge going to be? You'll probably want to look for something to feed it. If it seems cold and lost, you'll probably take your own jacket off, wrap it around the child, and start looking for its parents... and all without once wondering just why you're putting yourself out for a complete stranger.

Anyway, the instinct's meant to motivate us so we'll provide for and protect our young, but since we're very good at "filling in the blanks", when we see something outside our own species which has features similar to those found in immature humans, our mind will "fill in the blanks" and more often than not, we'll think the animal we're looking at is cute, too.

Think about it. What are the features which make an animal cute or not? Let's take that example of the lamb and the lobster...

Lambs have nice, big eyes. They have babyish facial features, and a very soft body. They're obviously young and immature, and they do seem largely helpless. So, they're cute.

Lobsters, on the other hand, have beady little eyes, hard shelled bodies, long antennae, and many alien features to them, none of which resembles features found on our own infants in the least. So, not cute.

Unfortunately, both animals end up being really delicious, so cute or not, they're food for quite a few people, though many more people object to eating lamb on the grounds they're too cute to kill. Still, that's why one animal is cute and another one isn't (and can you think of an animal which doesn't have at least some features similar to an infant or child's that you honestly think is cute).

It's a bleed over from one of our instincts to care for our own young.

Answer 2

Cuteness is relative.

You think something is cute because of many different factors , not the least of which is the environment you were raised in. How and where you were raised would affect what sounds and smells you find acceptable and what sorts of things you find visually appealing.

When you look closely at why plants and animals look the way they do or have certain unique distinguishing features and behaviors, there is always a fairly logical explanation based on biological adaptation. If there isn't it's probably because nobody has yet figured it out.

Nothing is cuter to a lobster than another lobster!

Answer 3

here's my guess: if an animal is cute, then it doesn't appear threatening. that of course won't save it from predators, but it will save it from other animals that might otherwise attack it to protect their territory or out of self-defense. that's most likely why babies, cubs, etc. tend to be cute.

it might also work the other way around, that we're more likely to perceive an animal as cute if we believe that it's harmless. for example, bees are actually beautiful creatures, but I wouldn't be all "aww" when I see one, whereas a ladybug or a butterfly would be a different story.

Answer 4

male aggressiveness is primarily genetic. Pump a woman full of testosterone and she'll become aggressive, too. Men murder at more than ten times the rate women do, and this tendency spans cultural, ethic, racial and geographical boundaries, and has throughout history. And while the hell would you want to limit it? If we didn't slaughter each other, this planet would be so crowded I wouldn't WANT to live.

Answer 5

Yes - big eyes and juvenile features in mammals tend to be "cute" features. They make one want to protect and nurture that particular animal, resulting in it growing up and living longer to be able to pass on its traits. That's why baby animals (and baby humans) can be considered "cute". it's all bout pasisng on the genes.

Answer 6

The animals which find mates will reproduce. Whatever attracts a mate and ennables the offspring to survive is an evolutionary plus.

Answer 7

i dont think theres an evolutionary trait that's cuteness. there may be some genes passed on that make it LOOK cute, but cuteness is judged based upon opinion. not everyone thinks lambs are cute.

Answer 8

i see your point but you have to understand that some people find certain animals cute that others don't. Example being, i think snakes and big fuzzy spiders are adorable, my little cousin shrieks at the top of her voice if she sees one, let alone you try to get her to touch it.

Answer 9

babies are cute to their parents so that they wont eat them and will instead care and nurture them. animals that eat other animals dont see what they eat as cute.

except for humans. we eat animals because theyre delicious.

Answer 10

It helps procreation! ~