6 ms·

> It is interesting that we appreciate part of another life form's reproductive cycle in a relatively non-utilitarian way Flowers evolved to attract insects to

> It is interesting that we appreciate part of another life form's reproductive cycle in a relatively non-utilitarian way Flowers evolved to attract insects to aid in reproduction. Accidentally it also turned out that humans would also be attracted by them and aid in their reproduction by farming them.

bobm_kite9 5y ago
Is it just accidentally?
- robotresearcher 5y ago
  Yes. There’s no look-ahead in evolution.
  - Smaug123 5y ago
    Well, I think one could plausibly argue that the early small mammals which liked to be around flowers were more likely to survive because they could eat the abundance of insects attracted to the flowers. That effect compounds, and in general, places with lots of flowers (in the ancestral environment) tend to be pretty busy ecosystems full of things to eat. Which is not to say that this is in fact how it came about, but it's plausible enough that I wouldn't be comfortable asserting "it's pure coincidence". (By the way, David Deutsch asserts that flowers are, in some sense, objectively beautiful. I think he's wrong, but The Beginning of Infinity contains quite a bit on this subject.)
    - alisonkisk 5y ago
      Evolution creates by coincidence and perpetuates by utility.
  - 13of40 5y ago
    In recent centuries, flowers have evolved to be more attractive to humans because we've intentionally manipulated the evolutionary pressure on them. So it's not accidental, but it's our volition driving it, not the flowers'.
    - robotresearcher 5y ago
      Sure, once we were already interested enough in flowers to bother doing that.
abeppu 5y ago
Sure, but insects get a pretty direct benefit from their roles in helping flowers reproduce. But when we collect or grow flowers for plants which don't also produce useful fruits (e.g. roses vs orange blossoms), we're enjoying a pretty indirect benefit of aesthetic value. How and why did we become fixated on flowers in the first place? Sure, they're sometimes brightly colored and can have complex forms -- but why do those appeal to us?
- dylan604 5y ago
  >How and why did we become fixated on flowers in the first place? Is this really a hard thing to think about? Flowers brighten up any room. If they are fragrant, they can even liven up a room with their fragrance. It could have also been some sort of show of wealth. You had to have money to have a nice enough garden to have flowers available to cut. The oils from flowers have been used for perfumes for centuries. To me any room with no plants feels dead. Just something in the corner that is green and leafy makes a huge difference. Flowers also add color to that. There's lots of reasons for people to want flowers. Unless you are super sensitive with allergies, you kind of have to be a little dead on the inside to not see the appeal.
  - abeppu 5y ago
    > Unless you are super sensitive with allergies, you kind of have to be a little dead on the inside to not see the appeal. I have dahlias and roses growing right now. It's not that I don't experience the appeal ... It's that I'm curious how flowers initially became appealing. I think it's a failure of imagination to just claim that flowers are intrinsically attractive and not ask any further questions. I think you're begging the question, as someone who enjoys flowers and descends from many many generations who have enjoyed flowers. When do you suppose the earliest ancestor who gathered flowers for aesthetic appreciation was? Chimps don't do it, so far as I know. Other great apes don't. The rest of the animal kingdom doesn't use them as we do. So a whole long chain of ancestors didn't care about flowers from an aesthetic perspective, and then perhaps there was a transitional period, and now modern humans really like them. What happened? The idea of flowers as a display of wealth or the appeal to cultural use of oils from flowers all seem too late as explanations, in that they presume that flowers in particular were already appealing. For color and fragrance, why don't we value other natural sources in the same way? Beetle carapaces or bird feathers can be colorful and all sorts of organic matter can be fragrant. But we aren't drawn to use them in the same way, for the most part.

bobm_kite9 5y ago

Is it just accidentally?

robotresearcher 5y ago
Yes. There’s no look-ahead in evolution.
- Smaug123 5y ago
  Well, I think one could plausibly argue that the early small mammals which liked to be around flowers were more likely to survive because they could eat the abundance of insects attracted to the flowers. That effect compounds, and in general, places with lots of flowers (in the ancestral environment) tend to be pretty busy ecosystems full of things to eat. Which is not to say that this is in fact how it came about, but it's plausible enough that I wouldn't be comfortable asserting "it's pure coincidence". (By the way, David Deutsch asserts that flowers are, in some sense, objectively beautiful. I think he's wrong, but The Beginning of Infinity contains quite a bit on this subject.)
  - alisonkisk 5y ago
    Evolution creates by coincidence and perpetuates by utility.
- 13of40 5y ago
  In recent centuries, flowers have evolved to be more attractive to humans because we've intentionally manipulated the evolutionary pressure on them. So it's not accidental, but it's our volition driving it, not the flowers'.
  - robotresearcher 5y ago
    Sure, once we were already interested enough in flowers to bother doing that.

abeppu 5y ago

Sure, but insects get a pretty direct benefit from their roles in helping flowers reproduce. But when we collect or grow flowers for plants which don't also produce useful fruits (e.g. roses vs orange blossoms), we're enjoying a pretty indirect benefit of aesthetic value. How and why did we become fixated on flowers in the first place? Sure, they're sometimes brightly colored and can have complex forms -- but why do those appeal to us?

dylan604 5y ago
>How and why did we become fixated on flowers in the first place? Is this really a hard thing to think about? Flowers brighten up any room. If they are fragrant, they can even liven up a room with their fragrance. It could have also been some sort of show of wealth. You had to have money to have a nice enough garden to have flowers available to cut. The oils from flowers have been used for perfumes for centuries. To me any room with no plants feels dead. Just something in the corner that is green and leafy makes a huge difference. Flowers also add color to that. There's lots of reasons for people to want flowers. Unless you are super sensitive with allergies, you kind of have to be a little dead on the inside to not see the appeal.
- abeppu 5y ago
  > Unless you are super sensitive with allergies, you kind of have to be a little dead on the inside to not see the appeal. I have dahlias and roses growing right now. It's not that I don't experience the appeal ... It's that I'm curious how flowers initially became appealing. I think it's a failure of imagination to just claim that flowers are intrinsically attractive and not ask any further questions. I think you're begging the question, as someone who enjoys flowers and descends from many many generations who have enjoyed flowers. When do you suppose the earliest ancestor who gathered flowers for aesthetic appreciation was? Chimps don't do it, so far as I know. Other great apes don't. The rest of the animal kingdom doesn't use them as we do. So a whole long chain of ancestors didn't care about flowers from an aesthetic perspective, and then perhaps there was a transitional period, and now modern humans really like them. What happened? The idea of flowers as a display of wealth or the appeal to cultural use of oils from flowers all seem too late as explanations, in that they presume that flowers in particular were already appealing. For color and fragrance, why don't we value other natural sources in the same way? Beetle carapaces or bird feathers can be colorful and all sorts of organic matter can be fragrant. But we aren't drawn to use them in the same way, for the most part.