6 ms·

You simply do not understand what cosmetics is about. As Many others in sub-replies to this one. One could say you do not understand human nature, DNA or anthro

You simply do not understand what cosmetics is about. As Many others in sub-replies to this one. One could say you do not understand human nature, DNA or anthropology. Cosmetics is not about something "unnecessary" it is about increasing your chances with reproduction. And now tell me what more important thing that reproduction could be encoded in our genes? Second to reproduction is feeling well. For whatever strange reasons our history shaped society, people today have to live in it and they, of course tend to try to maximizes their happiness. Some People feel better when they get attention (again DNA and anthropology). Of course YOU want to go to space. And by you I mean all in this thread who despise cosmetics in favour of space travel, simply. Because humans are not simple we have deep contradictions embedded in our DNA and society forged traditions. Yes I agree with you all very much we should go to space BUT to be able to do so we first need to find consensus on each individual happiness weighted against the demands for happiness from other people, of the whole world. Its as simple as that. And I don't have to tell you that concepts like nations do not necessarily help in achieving that. We are moving up the ladder(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale), towards a global society. In that we can not ignore a single persons mischief as we do today. I hope you see see that its not about "superficial" cosmetics, but about us as humans. And how to be happy, all around the world. We can and should do it but it will look very different to what the world looks today. And of course our anthropology is fighting us here hard again. We want the result of change but not change what is necessary to do that, that is to change ourselves (To acknowledge other people, be more peaceful and thoughtful about resources, etc..) So again what do you think about cosmetics?

paulvs 10y ago
Some would argue that going to space has much more to do with human survival than our current reproduction problem, which is actually an overpopulation problem rather than an underpopulation one.
- sangnoir 10y ago
  > which is actually an overpopulation problem rather than an underpopulation one. Serious question: what overpopulation problem is the human race currently facing? We have a distribution/underdevelopment problem, but not an overpopulation one as we have enough resources for not just 7 billion people, but multiples of that.
hutzlibu 10y ago
>So again what do you think about cosmetics? There would certainly be no less reproduction, if cosmetics are given up. Also no general health loss, probably even improvements, with no more side effects. (and no more apes tortured to death by trying to remove the side effects) From my point of view, cosmetics is about lying to each other, how we really look ... so you could argue, that it would be even better for the best genes to be choosen, if the real informations are not hidden and falsified with makeup etc
- NotUsingLinux 10y ago
  You might see cosmetics as an atempt to maximize the result of ones own reproduction potential. About lying to each other, another contradiction. Of course everyone wants honesty, as long as it doesn't hurt oneself.
  - hutzlibu 10y ago
    Yes, of course it is meant to maximize the potential of the individual ... but that doesnt mean it is useful from a objective view, meaning is it useful to humanity as a whole. (The whole discussion is a theoretical "wouldn't it be nice if" ...) For example we value clean skin ... maybe because people with clean skin are probably less likely to get skin cancer ... but with cosmetics people are just hiding their not perfect skin ... and maybe even improve their chances of skin cancer with side effects. So from a idealistic point of view, I think it would be better to accept that most of us don't have perfect clean skin, so what? Where is the point in spending so much effort in hiding it?
threatofrain 10y ago
Cosmetics is a cause that justifies itself, an escalation of "arms" that encourages others to race to the bottom in cosmetics spending, a race in which the richest are the fittest. There's no intuition for us to entertain the idea that a world without cosmetics is a world with less happiness or biological fitness, but this world would probably never happen. Space travel, and with it, scientific understanding, space mining, and perhaps colonization, is an abstract thought that goes beyond thinking of local maxima, and that's what makes it deep, as opposed to the cosmetics arms race that is myopic in what it maximizes. That's what makes it shallow. People naturally have many values, and these values often come in conflict. How we resolve these conflicts can demonstrate a direction toward broad vision and aforethought -- or shallow local maxima. Anyways, I don't believe that the underlying point of cosmetics argument is about cosmetics. I think it's about the activity of moral posturing, as opposed to a sincere moral commitment toward moral results.
- NotUsingLinux 10y ago
  Yes exactly my point(people having conflicts) but to resolve them we can't simply "stop" doing cosmethics, we have to be concious about why we use so much of that ( human nature + history) and then think of alternatives. If you like we need ome kind of migration or negoating strategy. The problem is people do not live in a vacuum , we live in a attention economy. And people go straight for what they where thaught with ( tradions and values from social environment) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs Love (cosmetics) is at a lower level ( which means it has a higher priority for most people) then Self-actualization or Self-transcendence (space). Do not forget where we came from, thousands of years there were concepts like cosmetics. But space is alien to most people they can not touch it, they can not percieve or concieve it. Thats the problem we should tackle IMO.
danbruc 10y ago
I don't think you can easily explain the use of cosmetics with things as fundamental as genetics. Not that it would be impossible to be sex specific, but the huge differences in use of cosmetics between sexes and also between societies and times strongly hints at social instead of genetic reasons.
lanna 10y ago
Cosmetics are heavily used by women long past their reproductive age

paulvs 10y ago

Some would argue that going to space has much more to do with human survival than our current reproduction problem, which is actually an overpopulation problem rather than an underpopulation one.

sangnoir 10y ago
> which is actually an overpopulation problem rather than an underpopulation one. Serious question: what overpopulation problem is the human race currently facing? We have a distribution/underdevelopment problem, but not an overpopulation one as we have enough resources for not just 7 billion people, but multiples of that.

hutzlibu 10y ago

>So again what do you think about cosmetics? There would certainly be no less reproduction, if cosmetics are given up. Also no general health loss, probably even improvements, with no more side effects. (and no more apes tortured to death by trying to remove the side effects) From my point of view, cosmetics is about lying to each other, how we really look ... so you could argue, that it would be even better for the best genes to be choosen, if the real informations are not hidden and falsified with makeup etc

NotUsingLinux 10y ago
You might see cosmetics as an atempt to maximize the result of ones own reproduction potential. About lying to each other, another contradiction. Of course everyone wants honesty, as long as it doesn't hurt oneself.
- hutzlibu 10y ago
  Yes, of course it is meant to maximize the potential of the individual ... but that doesnt mean it is useful from a objective view, meaning is it useful to humanity as a whole. (The whole discussion is a theoretical "wouldn't it be nice if" ...) For example we value clean skin ... maybe because people with clean skin are probably less likely to get skin cancer ... but with cosmetics people are just hiding their not perfect skin ... and maybe even improve their chances of skin cancer with side effects. So from a idealistic point of view, I think it would be better to accept that most of us don't have perfect clean skin, so what? Where is the point in spending so much effort in hiding it?

threatofrain 10y ago

Cosmetics is a cause that justifies itself, an escalation of "arms" that encourages others to race to the bottom in cosmetics spending, a race in which the richest are the fittest. There's no intuition for us to entertain the idea that a world without cosmetics is a world with less happiness or biological fitness, but this world would probably never happen. Space travel, and with it, scientific understanding, space mining, and perhaps colonization, is an abstract thought that goes beyond thinking of local maxima, and that's what makes it deep, as opposed to the cosmetics arms race that is myopic in what it maximizes. That's what makes it shallow. People naturally have many values, and these values often come in conflict. How we resolve these conflicts can demonstrate a direction toward broad vision and aforethought -- or shallow local maxima. Anyways, I don't believe that the underlying point of cosmetics argument is about cosmetics. I think it's about the activity of moral posturing, as opposed to a sincere moral commitment toward moral results.

NotUsingLinux 10y ago
Yes exactly my point(people having conflicts) but to resolve them we can't simply "stop" doing cosmethics, we have to be concious about why we use so much of that ( human nature + history) and then think of alternatives. If you like we need ome kind of migration or negoating strategy. The problem is people do not live in a vacuum , we live in a attention economy. And people go straight for what they where thaught with ( tradions and values from social environment) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs Love (cosmetics) is at a lower level ( which means it has a higher priority for most people) then Self-actualization or Self-transcendence (space). Do not forget where we came from, thousands of years there were concepts like cosmetics. But space is alien to most people they can not touch it, they can not percieve or concieve it. Thats the problem we should tackle IMO.

danbruc 10y ago

I don't think you can easily explain the use of cosmetics with things as fundamental as genetics. Not that it would be impossible to be sex specific, but the huge differences in use of cosmetics between sexes and also between societies and times strongly hints at social instead of genetic reasons.

lanna 10y ago

Cosmetics are heavily used by women long past their reproductive age