1.
Thinking in
Mountainous Forestland
After exploring the domain
of aesthetics, my final viewpoint is very close to common peoples’ opinions， which are seemly very extreme, in that “A
lady is beautiful in the eyes of her lover”; “The harder it is to obtain, the
more beautiful the object will be”. I concluded that the more we want to come
near some objects for the sake of need, the more beautiful they will be; need
arouses not only the differentia of the beauty sense, but also the beauty
sense; need and desire create beauty sense, which further excites need and
desire to a greater extent. This rule is not only applicable to mankind, but
also to the animal world. When I say that I have discovered the mystery of
beauty sense, I actually mean that I have discovered the answer for the mystery
of why human thinking has been puzzled by the relationship between beauty and
utility, and have found the explanation from the viewpoint of natural science
of “beauty comes from desire”.
Why am I, a graduate from an
engineering institute, interested in this research? It is a long story. When I
was in high school, I borrowed a popular science book on Darwin’s theory of
evolution from my classmate Cao Hong, who is the vice chairman of Xuanzhou
Literature and Arts Union now. The book was so old that the pages looked
yellow, but it had many pictures with abundant information and hence was very
attractive. Because of the Great Cultural Revolution, this kind of books was
very rare. After several days, the world had totally changed in my mind. Before
reading this book, I had heard about Kant’s cosmic theory of original nebula.
How was the world evolving from Kant’s original nebula to current nature and
human society? Darwin’s theory greatly broadened my insight. Since then the
evolution theory has been firmly implanted in my mind.
Soon after, I graduated from
high school and went to the countryside. I worked at a forest farm, called the
Forestry Team, owned by a collective group of peasants. Except for planting
trees and growing sweet potatoes, guarding the forest was most regular work.
City residents now must
admire my working as a forest guard. I often climbed to the mountaintop with a
woodcutting knife in hand, and sat on rocks where eagles often rested. Under
the rocks were fox burrows. Beside the rocks, snakes, some of which are longer
than a man, often whished across the grassland and bushes. There were various
wild flowers and fruits on the hillside. Especially, in the summer, purple
prunella vulgaris grew all over the hillside; the wild berries were everywhere
along the dam of the reservoir in the valley.
Fortunately, I had read the
book about the evolution theory. It was joyful to think of the skill and
harmonization of nature after working hard. I realized that wild flowers are
flamboyant and aromatic specifically for attracting bees and butterflies to
collect the pollen for cross-pollination between different flowers; fruits are
tasty for animals to swallow their seeds to spread everywhere through dejecta.
I thought about whether or not the plant had painful feeling. The conclusion
was “no” because painful feeling was only for urging the body to move to avoid
being hurt. The plant could not move; therefore did not have any painful
feeling. Why did berries and many fruits taste good to human and many animals?
It was because of their nutrition. Good taste would inspire us to eat more,
which is necessary for survival. Did apples taste good to wolves and eagles?
The answer was “no”. Otherwise, they would not have eaten only other animals.
Was the sweetness of the apple the property of the apple itself? It should not
be because the functions of human feelings came into being only for the need of
survival.
On the other hand, why were
peppers and Chinese medicine hot or bitter even if they were good for human
health? What happened to tobacco, liquor, and opium, which probably tasted good
but were harmful to human health? The answer was that while the evolution was
still progressing, the flaws would gradually be eliminated.
At that time I did not
realized that I was following the path designated by Darwin’s principle of the
survival of the fittest towards thorough biological utilitarianism. That is to
affirm that not only the human body’s structure, but also the human functions
of sensations and feelings, have been developed for the need of survival, or
say, have been preserved by natural selection because they are necessary to
survival. Later, I realized that Darwin had not been so affirmative as I was
about the biological utilitarianism.
2.
Biological Utilitarianism and Esthetic Utilitarianism
I was lucky to be admitted
by Nanjing Aeronautic Institute, whose name has been changed into Nanjing
University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, after passing the first examination
for choosing university students after the Great Cultural Revolution at the end
of 1977. My major was airplane manufacturing. I entered this institute only
because my assignment was prescribed rather than selected. I dared not to
choose a university or institute related to military affairs because my father
was accused rightist in 1958 and jailed for several years. We had not lived
together for long time. I was afraid that some one would write letters to the
university and I would be expelled from studying in the university; therefore I
didn’t tell friends and classmates for several months.
Since I was interested in
literature, I read many worldly famous literature works and many literature
magazines, and also read some articles of aesthetics. Because of my thinking in
mountainous forestland, once I was exposed to various esthetic standpoints, I
felt they lacked fundamental support of natural science and must be incorrect. From
the beginning, I have believed that the problem in aesthetics is essentially
the same problem as that with beauty sense, and the problem with beauty sense
is actually the problem with how human function of beauty sense came into being
and was evolving. This is a biological problem. We should be able to find the
answer from Darwin’s theory.
At the time my classmate and
the class’s Youth League secretary Diao Yuzhang borrowed Darwin’s book “The
Origin of Species” from the library. I thought that I should have read this
book earlier. After reading the book, I had a more comprehensive understanding
about Darwin’s theory of evolution. I was especially interested in the rich
descriptions and discussions about animal’s beauty sense. However, Darwin was
uncertain as to how animals obtained the beauty sense functions.
A billion years ago, the
Earth was a bleak place without any creatures. Now the flowers are gorgeous and
the fruits are polychrome, the birds unfold magnificent feathers. How did these
happen? Darwin explained that every detail of structure of biology has been
produced only for the good of its possessor. The fragrance and flamboyance of
flowers were preserved by natural selection because they could attract insects
to pollinate flowers. The sweetness and beauty of fruits were preserved by
natural selection because they could attract more birds and beasts to swallow
their seeds to spread through dejecta. The bird had magnificent feathers
because they were helpful for birds to obtain the love of isomerism so as to
win in sex selection. However, why did insects, birds, and beasts possess these
kinds of pleasant feeling functions or mentality？Darwin wrote in “The Origin
of Species”:
“How the sense of beauty in
its simplest form—that is, the reception of a peculiar kind of pleasure from
certain colours, forms, and sounds--was first developed in the mind of man and
of the lower animals, is a very obscure subject. The same sort of difficulty is
presented, if we enquire how it is that certain flavors and odors give
pleasure, and others displeasure. Habit in all these cases appears to have come
to a certain extent into play; but there must be some fundamental cause in the
constitution of the nervous system in each species.”[1]
Darwin finally proposed a
systematical solution in “The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex”.
However, from my viewpoint, this book is not able to resolve the mystery of why
the functions of beauty sense of animals came into being. It has greatly
weakened the universal significance of the principle of natural selection by
adding the principle of selection according to beauty to the principle of
natural selection!
On the one hand, aesthetics
needs the biology as a foundation; but on the other hand, biology itself is
perplexed by the problems with beauty sense. For this reason, I read massive
esthetic works including Li Zehou’s “Aesthetics Corpus”, Zhu Guangqian’s
“History of Western Aesthetics”, Beijing University Philosophy Department’s “On
Beauty and Beauty sense by Western Estheticians”, and Kant’s “The Critique of
Judgment”. Because Aesthetics involves the theory of reflection, I read many
books about the general sensations, especially about color vision, which
resulted in my other discoveries in areas of color vision and information theory.
I believe Darwin’s principle
of the survival of the fittest and biological utilitarianism based on this
principle are correct. The question is how to explain various esthetic
phenomena of human kind and animals, and to resolve the contradiction between
the utilitarianism and the anti- utilitarianism in aesthetics?
The biological
utilitarianism affirms: biological structures, including those feeling
functions, have been produced and developed only for the good of its possessor.
The esthetic utilitarianism affirms: an object is beautiful because it is
useful. The esthetic utilitarianism was first proposed and propagandized by
Socrates in ancient Greece. It is natural to affirm the esthetic utilitarianism
when one affirms the biological utilitarianism. For example, it is said that
apples and grapes are beautiful because they are useful to human bodies (upon
esthetic utilitarianism); and the functions of human taste and beauty sense
inspire people to eat more to get nutrition from apples and grapes (according
to biological utilitarianism). Two types of utilitarianism support each other.
Esthetic utilitarianism has
several fatal defects and hence has been criticized by many estheticians
including Plato, Kant, and Hegel. We can say that the history of aesthetics is
the history of arguments between utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism. One of
the defects of the utilitarianism is that the above utilitarian explanation
does not accord with esthetic experience. For example, according to the
viewpoint of “Beauty relies on utility”, Socrates obtained results: his big
mouth was beautiful because it was useful for eating; a dung basket was
beautiful because it was useful. Clearly, the results are against common sense.
The second defect of the utilitarianism is that the experience tells us that
beauty sense comes from intuition. It does not create beauty sense, but
diminishes beauty sense, to consider the utility of an object. For example, a
young man with his own wishful thinking falls in love with a girl. He can perceive
beauty sense when he sees her. But, if he considers whether she is useful to
him or whether she will bring happiness to him, he will be satisfied with
imagination or suffer disappointment. Regardless, this consideration will not
increase beauty sense, but only diminish beauty sense.
It is very difficult to
remedy these two defects at the same time. To remedy the first defect, we can
explain in this way: being useful only means being useful to the onlooker; an
object is beautiful only because it is useful to the onlooker. Socrates’ big
mouth was not beautiful because it was useful only to himself rather than to
onlookers. The dung basket was not beautiful because it was useful only to its
user rather than to onlookers.
However, it will be more
difficult to make up the second defect after emphasizing utility to
appreciators since the object appreciated generally is not useful to the
appreciator. For example, other’s homestead from a vagrant’s view is beautiful;
yet, the vagrant cannot regale on the utility.
For this reason,
utilitarianism was developed into the social utilitarianism by Russian
esthetician Nikolai Chernyshevsky (1828-1889) and others to make up the second
defect of the utilitarianism. For example, Chernyshevsky said: “I appreciate
another’s farmland without thinking whether it is mine and whether I can get
money from it; yet I cannot help thinking: The corn grows so well! How much
happiness will it bring to the people?”
Estheticians in China ever
universally accepted this viewpoint. However, with understanding more western
aesthetics and analyzing problems with aesthetics more carefully, the
estheticians in China gradually gave up the social utilitarianism.
The reason is that the
feeling attained when one realizes that the corn brings happiness to people is
actually not beauty sense, but only a glad feeling, which is a pleasant feeling
generated by rational cognition. As a representative, Chinese esthetician, Li
Zehou, changed his viewpoint from the social utilitarianism into the practice-affirming
theory, which does not explain beauty sense with utility any longer, but with
some spiritual victory. According to this viewpoint, when human kind
successfully reconstructs and conquers nature, it will see itself intrinsic
power from objects and hence obtain a pleasant feeling — a glad feeling. As to
how to explain the intuitional and innate properties of beauty sense, Li Zehou
proposed the deposition theory, by which, through historical deposition，the satisfaction from the
successes of practices in human history was transferred into beauty sense, or
say, cognitive pleasant feeling was transferred into intuitional beauty sense.
In my viewpoint, it
contradicts biological conclusion to affirm that the glad feeling from the
social practices in human history was deposited into esthetic mentality because
genetics tells us that the acquired characteristics coming from habit cannot be
inherited. However, children innately have beauty sense without any education.
Where is the way for the deposition? On the other hand, the gladness from
seeing success is actually a cognitive pleasant feeling, which is essentially
different from beauty sense. There is no evidence to show that the glad feeling
can become beauty sense.
Most rationalists at the
very start all agreed that beauty was related to utility, and the utility was
related to human subjective cognition. However, subjective cognition is not
helpful to produce beauty sense. In appreciating beauty, glad feeling and
despondent feeling can only diminish beauty sense, such as when a vagrant views
another’s cozy homestead. So, many rationalists turned to seek cognitive
satisfaction or spiritual victory, such as the satisfaction when one saw
himself intrinsic power or when the object subjectively accorded with his purpose
(they still explained beauty sense by a glad feeling). Yet these explanations
can only make the problem more mysterious and actually resolve nothing. This is
why aesthetics puzzled us so much.
3.
The Unforgettable
Time
I clearly remember the scene
when I realized the breakthrough in thinking the cause of beauty sense. On a
day in 1981, I walked slowly on a road from the classroom to the eatery for
lunch. I lowered my head in deep meditation. My thinking was suddenly
enlightened when I approached the eatery, although the noise from bowls, spoons
and chopsticks was very aloud. I ask myself: “Why do we use satisfaction,
physical or mental satisfaction, to explain the cause of beauty sense? Why is
it unable to explain the cause of beauty sense by dissatisfaction itself?”
Someone treks in a desert, I reasoned, can perceive a strong beauty sense from
oasis and spring because of his great thirst. It was the cause of beauty sense
that he desired to approach the oasis and spring (it is another matter whether
he can reach them, and the feeling from considering the .possibility of
reaching them is another kind of feeling—a glad feeling or despondent feeling).
Also, a young man with his own wishful thinking falling in love with a
neighboring girl can perceive strong beauty sense when he watches her without
any consideration or imagination. His desire to approach before is just the
cause of .his beauty sense. From the viewpoint of cybernetics, beauty sense is
just a positive feedback signal, which stimulates the man to approach objects.
The intension of a feedback signal lies on the difference between ideal and
reality. So, the more unsatisfied instead of satisfied the man is with the
object, the stronger the beauty sense will be. If the man is really satisfied
with the object without desire, then the beauty sense as stimulus will not be
as necessary as before and hence will be weaker (I do not deny that a man can
innately perceive beauty sense in seeing some forms. However, I believe it is
also because of the sake of human’s need in history).
Actually human thinking has
been following a quotidian doctrine “satisfaction generates a pleasant
feeling”. Without finding physical or mental satisfaction when beauty sense is
perceived, philosophers then were disappointed and hence explained the cause of
beauty sense with the formal beauty itself or with “subjective accordance with
human purpose”, as did by Kant; or explained with some spiritual victory, as
did by Li Zehou as the representative of the practice-theoretical estheticians.
Yet, the mystery of beauty sense rests with facts that 1) The beauty sense is a
sensual pleasant feeling and related to human need, emotion, and desire, and
hence related to the earlier cognition about objects (later, I shall explain
that the other pleasant and unpleasant feelings are also related to human need,
emotion, desire, and the earlier cognition). 2) There is no satisfaction
generated when the beauty sense is perceived, if we do not consider seeing or
hearing itself as satisfaction. It is my great discovery that the
dissatisfaction is the cause of beauty sense. Before long, I extended my
research from beauty sense to general need, and obtained the more general rule
of need evolution: Paths become purposes.
I was anxious to declare my
great discovery and to write my life’s first article “Beauty and Natural
Selection”. I began with “Satisfaction is the necessary condition of pleasant
feeling (for example, I feel pleasant because I am eating apple; I am happy
because I succeeded or imagined to have succeeded). This quotidian causality
like 1+1=2 is so ineradicable that no one explores its inevitability. It seems
that the inevitability rests with the phenomenon itself. Almost all estheticians in all ages based
their esthetic theories on this doctrine without any doubt. The utilitarianism
accepts this doctrine in saying that the cause of beauty is utility that
satisfies us. The anti-utilitarianism also accepts this doctrine in saying that
the beauty has nothing to do with utility because beauty sense is perceived
without any satisfaction. However, I doubt this doctrine now!”
The article introduced my
above discovery and described the synergic evolution of flowers and fruits with
animals’ functions of pleasant feeling. I still keep the mimeograph copy of the
article now. My classmate Diao Yuzhang gave me great help. It may be said that
he is my first supporter of my academic researches. He and I alternatively
lettered for the article. He found a place where we could do mimeographs. I
remember that when we were copying, someone came seemly to see if we were
copying counteractive flyers.
I mailed the article to two
journals for publication, but without any response. It is understandable to get
this result. In those ages, the practice deposition theory and the labor
creation theory of aesthetics were so popular that no one could accept my
viewpoint that animals can also perceive beauty sense. About my viewpoint that
beauty sense rests with the relationship of needs, Professor Zhao Yuzhuo of
Shandong Arts Institution gave me a pertinent opinion: “Your theory can simply
explain well beauty sense and its differentia between different people with
different needs. The problem is also here. It will greatly decrease the
noble-minded property of beauty sense to relate physical need with beauty
sense, and hence the theory is difficult to be accepted by most scholars.”
Yes! It is noble for a man
to produce pleasant feeling, beauty feeling, in seeing that the intrinsic power
of mankind was approved. Yet, according to my theory, the beauty appreciation
cannot be so noble because it is related to physical needs. However, I have to
say that we cannot do scientific research with our own wishful thinking. The
theory of natural selection reveals the cruelty of biological evolution and
affirms that mankind was evolving from the ape, which could not be accepted by
most people in the very beginning. It is the requirement of carrying out the
principle of natural selection and biological utilitarianism to relate human
needs with beauty. It also accords with esthetic experience to do so. I believe
that the obstacle will be eliminated with people have a better understanding of
science.
Also, some people criticize
my viewpoint that need determines beauty sense because they do not attend that
the need exists before appreciating beauty. I affirm that beauty sense comes
from intuition and any physical or mental satisfaction will eliminate beauty
sense as well as many anti-utilitarians.
4.
Changing
Battlefields
After graduating from the
university, I continue the part time researches of aesthetics and need theory
with infatuation. Before long, I established the theory: “Paths become
purposes” about the evolution of need, which also includes the theory on the
origin of beauty sense, and wrote many articles that could not be published.
Nevertheless，from 1983, I gradually
delved into new researching areas. I first turned to the mathematical and
philosophical problems of color vision, and then to the generalized information
theory, and later the portfolio theory.
In 1983，trying to mix myself in the
procession of normal philosophers, I passed the examination with excellent
grades for master’s graduate students with major natural dialectic and was
almost accepted by a famous university in Beijing. However, because of my
ineffable fault, the university canceled my entrance (and gave up the
recruitment for this major that year) according to the request from the unit I
was working for. So, I was doomed to be a forest outlaw in academic society,
and to endure transnormal hardship. I swore that I must open the gate of
philosophy with power some day. My power is more knowledge of natural science.
About in 1984, I visited
Dalian Natural Museum, where the explanation about peacocks caught my
attention. There was a statement “what the peacock mostly likes to eat are
bacca-like fruits” in the explanation. I thought my guess that need determines
beauty sense could also be corroborated by the animal kingdom. For example, the
peacock’s hobby of eating bacca-like fruits produced their corresponding
function of beauty sense, and then the male’s appearance with similar form to
the bacca would cause the female peacocks’ beauty sense and hence win more
female’s favor and result in more offsprings.
After seeing the explanation
about peacocks, I realized that Marx’s principle of historical materialism:
“social being determines social consciousness and social consciousness reacts
on social being”, could also be extended to biological field.
In 1987, Nature
Information published my article “Trying to resolve the problem about
fragrance, sweetness, and beauty left by Darwin”【4】 after being reviewed by
Professor Wang Shenli. In succession, Journal of Changsha University published
my article “On Beauty as Feedback Signal to Spirit up Love Emotion”【5】.
Since 1985, I published many
articles on “Potential Science”, “Dynamics of Psychology”, “ACTA OPTIC SINICA”,
“Dynamics of Philosophy”, “J. of China Institute of Communications”,
International Journal of General System and so on, and published two monographs
“Generalized Information Theory” and “The Entropy Theory of Portfolio and
Analyses of Risk Control of Stocks and Futures”【6-16】 (see my personal website
http://survivor99.com/lcg).
I remember the lines in Rabindranath Tagore’s (1961-1941) poem “Two Acres of Land”:
“I
met countless surprising luxury and beautiful scene; yet what I cannot forget
all the time is the two acres of land.” I have similar mood. I was in and out
off many different battlefields including theoretical and non-theoretical fields. For
livelihood, I also fought in stock markets and futures markets with excellent
performance, which was much beyond my initial expectation.
Yet, what I mostly esteem is
my earliest research on aesthetics, biology, and philosophy because they are
related to human purpose and significance, and can increase the happiness of
mankind.
Recently, on occasion I saw
Liu, Xiaochun’s monograph “From Animals’ Pleasant Feeling to Human Beauty
sense”【17】, which stirred my
long-cherished wish to go back to the esthetic battlefield. Combining biology
and aesthetics, Liu’s book discusses esthetic phenomenon of animals, and
explains that human esthetic mind was evolving from animals’ functions of
visual and acoustical pleasant feeling, and possesses the significance of
survival. This viewpoint is very identical to mine. Yet, the difference is that
his book draws more attention to “What is it”, instead of my attention to “Why
is it so”. His book finally goes back to the standpoint of the practice
aesthetics and affirms that the labor creates human esthetic mind, and even
unwillingly declare or does not dare to declare that the animal’s visual
pleasant feeling is beauty sense, and says nothing of relating beauty sense
with individual needs to establish the detailed control model of causality as I
did. However, I felt that there have been some people who moved from side to
side of the exit of the esthetic maze. From the reaction on the Internet, I can
see this book is welcome, which reveals that the cultural environment in China
has improved and more and more people are accepting the scientific thought.
About biology and aesthetics, I decided not to keep silent any longer. So, I
wrote this book.
When I searched for the
pictures for explaining animals’ esthetic phenomena, I was surprised to find
that the feather with spherical form of the peacock is absolutely not the only
phenomenon. In addition to the figure of bacca, we could also find the figures
of rice, wheat, pine, water wave, spiral shell, and even clam on birds’
feather. Those figures all reflect the need for food of corresponding birds. I
believe that if I have enough time, I will be able to find more evidence for
explaining that beauty sense reflects need — the rule of animals’
appreciating beauty.
Readers can find that in
comparison to popular esthetic and philosophical works, this book does its best
to avoid vague words and to envisage various problems. I think vague language
comes from vague thought to scientific or philosophic works instead of
diplomatic documents.
Readers may also find that
this book presents many extreme viewpoints that look very contradictive to most
people. For example, the book extends the principle of the survival of the
fittest in biology to human esthetic phenomenon, and also carries the viewpoint
of the historical materialism through biological field. The book affirms that
beauty sense is a sensual pleasant feeling as sensualism does, and also affirms
that beauty sense is related to volition and desire as voluntarism does, and also
affirms that beauty sense is finally related to material requirements as
materialism does. The book affirms that beauty sense is related to utility, and
also admits that beauty sense is generated without necessarily any
satisfaction. It admits that there existed imbalance between the development of
the economy and the development of literature and arts, and also admits that
arts and literature reflected the economic foundation. It approves the
principle of the survival of the fittest, and also approves man’s purpose —
pleasant feeling and happiness. It accepts that sensations are only symbols and
are dissimilar to material properties, and also accepts the basic viewpoint of
the theory of reflection.
The book proves that these
contradictions do not really exist. If we change our habit of thinking, such as
abandon the doctrine “satisfaction produces pleasant feeling”, give up the
factitious limit between mankind and animal kingdom and view the nature from
the standpoint of historical materialism, dismiss the opinion that the same
language is based on the same sensations… then we shall see a very harmonious
world.
After finishing this book, I
wrote another book: “Mystery of Color Vision and Fundamental Question in
Philosophy”. These two books respectively involve motivational relationship and
cognitive relationship. The two books with different contents can complement
each other. It will help the readers roundly understand my viewpoints to read
both of them.
If my effort is helpful for
readers to understand this world and the Life’s happiness, then I will be
greatly gratified[2].
Lu,
Chenguang
Oct.
28, 2002
Personal English websites: http://survivor99.com/lcg/english