On Beauty Feeling as the Feedback Signal of Exiting Loving Passion

1. The Theoretic Model of Loving Passion

According to the theory of natural selection, man's ability of experiencing pleasant and unpleasant feelings must have come into being and got developed because basically they agree with the requirements for man's existence. From the viewpoint of control theory, what man's feelings do is to adjust his psychology and behavior. Winer, the initiative of cybernetics, had affirmed this point, saying that man's feeling mechanism, namely his ability of experiencing pleasant and unpleasant feelings is a feedback mechanism, that positive mechanism (namely, his ability of experiencing pleasant feelings) promotes his behavioral process, and that negative mechanism (namely, his ability of experiencing unpleasant feelings) restrains his behavioral process[1]. In my opinion, the way man's feelings adjust his psychology and behavior conforms to the pattern in which machines make adjustments. To explain this point, let's first look at Figure 1, which shows the process of controlling the direction of a ship.

Figure 1 Model of the direction control of a ship

This is a typical control process, which Winer repeatedly mentioned in Cybernetics. The steer controlling section includes steam-driving process. The purpose of the control is to gear the practical direction of the ship to the expected direction. The controlling process is as follows:

Perhaps because there is change about the formerly expected direction or because of wind or currents, the practical direction of the ship does not conform to the expected direction. To decrease the deviation, people adjust the steering to change the deflection angle; at this time, steam value opens. The steam overcomes the friction and the resistance of water and quickly gears the steer to an expected angle. Gradually, the practical direction coincides with the expected direction and the steering and steam driving stops.

There are two feedbacks in the controlling process. One is steady feedback and the other is voluntary feedback. The former can be called negative feedback and the latter positive feedback. Temperature control and many other controls share the same pattern, even river flows can be described with similar figure( see Figure 2).

Figure 2 model of river control

Aristotle classified the relationship between man and the outside into two: recognition relation and desire relation. In my view, man's behavioral process involving desire relation shares the same pattern with the direction controlling process and river controlling process (see Figure 3).

Figure 3 model of desire control

Man's voluntary controlling process of desire for water, for example, is as follows: when there is a lack of water in a body, the person will be thirsty and he will have the desire to drink water. The degree of the desire is proportional to the degree of the lack. When he drinks water, he will have pleasant physical feeling. The pleasant feeling, in turn, will stimulate his desire to drink more water. Gradually, the body gets more and more water ant the person will be less thirsty. As a result, the desire to drink water becomes weaker and the pleasant feeling also becomes weaker. Eventually, when the need for water is met, the desire and pleasant feeling will disappear. Man's eating bread and fruits also share the same pattern. According to the above model, the degree of desire and pleasant feeling is determined by the difference between requirement and satisfaction, namely the degree of the lack or the need. This conforms to common sense.

According to the above views, the relation between sentiment and desire is just like what between the steam-driving and steering. The orientation of river-bed and water flows are causes and results for each other, with the latter as the more fundamental cause. Steam device in a ship is meant for more effective steering, likely, man's ability of experiencing pleasant feelings is meant to solidify and promote his desires. The erosion of water flows gradually forms the river-bed. Once formed, the river-bed will have its relative stability. Likely, once man's ability of experiencing pleasant feelings forms for the sake of his desire, it will be relatively independent.?

In my view, desire relation can also be roughly classified into three kinds. The first kind is perceptual relation and its result is the satisfaction of man's various physical needs. What maintains the relation is man's various physical desires and relative pleasant and unpleasant physical feelings (namely his feelings about fragrance and stink, sweetness and bitterness, pleasure and pain, etc.). The second kind is perceptive relation (which can be described as aesthetic relation) and its result is for man to approach or avoid certain objects in space. What maintains the second relation are man's loving or loathing passion and relative feelings of beauty or ugliness. The third kind is rational relation and its result is for man to gain certain objects. What maintains the third relation is man's wishes for certain events to happen ( or for material gains, and their relative pleasure of satisfaction or bitterness of disappointment). Kant had ever had similar assertions, saying that man had three kinds of relations related to pleasant and unpleasant feelings and what corresponded them were pleasure(mental pleasure), beauty, and goodness(?2?,154). The relationship between the three kinds of desire relation is shown in Figure 4 (which is a detailed figure of Figure 3, with negative feelings and the corresponding objects omitted).?

Figure 4 the detailed figure of model of desire control

In the following, I am going to explain how the conclusions from the above models is consistent with common knowledge.

2. The Reasonability of Deductions from the Model

It was frequently mentioned that beauty and love are closely related. L.A. Muratori (Italian, 1672-1750) said that beauty was something that could arouse pleasure and love in our hearts(?2?,89). A.G.Baumgarten(Germany,

1714-1762) said that beauty itself could arouse love and that ugliness invited loathing(?2?,142). E. Bueke(English,1729-1797) said that what people referred to as beauty was some characteristics of things that could arouse love or similar

passion; ...that whenever we saw men, women, or animals and felt pleased, they aroused our loving them and we would like their approaching us(?5?,119). Pay attention, here Bueke meant that beauty could attract people). Many other aesthetes had also had similar remarks. What makes sense is that almost every nation has such proverbs as "In the eyes of the lover, his beloved is a beauty" and "It is not beauty that arouse s love, it is love that arouses beauty". Obvious, what shows in Figure 4 is consistent with what above aesthetes said, especially with above proverbs.

Almost all aesthetes identically believe that beauty needs images(including those formed by sound and voice). Most aesthetes believe that visual and aural organs are aesthetic organs. From Figure 4 we can get conclusions which agree with the above views. Since the action of beauty feeling is to excite people to love an object and approach it in space, people can only approach objects with visual images or objects that can produce sound or voice, such as a person, a tree, certain environment, or a source of sound. People can approach them because they have orientations, which are not present in a physical property, a concept, or an event. Therefore, only objects with visual images, sound, or voice can possess beauty. Obviously, it is more natural to explain the figurativeness of beauty in the above way than in "perceptive manifestation of rational concept".

Many people hold that beauty does not lie in objects, nor does it lie in people's heart. Its origin is the relationship between people and objects. In fashionable terms, it is the objectification of man's intrinsic power. Figure 4 confirms that beauty is the feedback signal that makes man approach an object. In other words, beauty does not lie in an object, nor does it lie people's hearts. It is the action of an object on man(beauty feeling can be regarded as counteraction), but it is also related with man's loving passions.

In the eyes of country folks, bright buildings are beautiful. For people in big cities, quiet forests and wilderness are beautiful. Old people who want to live a long life appreciate pictures of pines and cranes, which symbolize longevity. Country girls like colorful clothes. Arabians suffering from the terrible heat of deserts especially feel that the moon, appearing at cool nights, is beautiful and they compare young girls to the moon. Tibetans at the foot of snow mountains especially feel that the

sun is beautiful, therefore they compare young girls to the sun. For young lovers, paths in forests and moonlit fields are very beautiful. For peasants suffering from the scorching sun, an old elm with heavy shade, even a piece of white cloud will be very beautiful... All these can be reasonably explained with relations shown in Figure 4.

3. How to Consider the Relation between Beauty and Utility

There are two implications about the utility of beauty. One is from the viewpoint of the outcome of beauty or from the action of beauty on life, which obviously is asserted in this book. The other is from the viewpoint of the cause of beauty. In this case, the utility of beauty can be classified into two kinds. One is that the features of the object are helpful for itself or that conform with the purpose of the object. The other is that the features of the object are useful for the aesthetes(if the aesthetes can obtain the object), which is one of the major discussion points in aesthetics and will be discussed in the following.

The reasons that utilitarian affirms the relation of beauty to utility are

1. that most beautiful objects, besides their beauty, also possess the characteristics of being good, kind-hearted or useful;
2. that it makes easy explanation of the necessity of beauty feeling, which for materialists, especially historical materialists is more important since only the affirmation of the relation between beauty and utility makes it possible to explain man's aesthetic activities and the development of art with the development of his material need, even to solve the difficult biological problems left by Darwin[3].

Anti-utilitarian may have several seemingly convincing arguments to negate the relation between beauty and utility. Firstly, they believe not all useful objects are beautiful and some beautiful objects can be useless. Secondly, beauty feeling

does not arise when man realizes the usefulness of an object. Thirdly, despite the usefulness of a beautiful object, the aesthete often cannot get it.

Obviously in this assay the author affirms the relation between beauty and utility, yet he does not agree with that there is necessary causality between the two. He believes that utility is the necessary premise of beauty, but not the full premise and that only those objects that are useful, yet are scare or wanted and enjoyed by man cab be beautiful. In the light of the basic idea expressed in Figure 4, the author, to some extent, affirms the above three arguments of anti-utilitarian, but he does not agree with that they are enough to negate the relation of beauty to utility or to man's desire.

Let's look at the first argument that not all useful objects are beautiful and not all beautiful objects are useful. People have used many examples to show that not all useful objects are beautiful, such as a pig's nose by E. Bueke([2],120), levers by V. Cousion(French,1792-1867, see ?2?,232), Socrates' big mouth by C. Santayana(America, 1863-1952, see ?2?,283), and manure baskets, raw meat, soil, machines and the like by many others.

But all these cannot shake the affirmation of the relation between beauty and utility shown in Figure 4. A pig's nose and a man's big mouse are useful only for the objects themselves, not for people who watch them and people generally do not like to approach them, therefore they do not possess beauty. Levers, manure baskets, raw meat, soil and the like may be useful for people who see them(if they can get them), but they do not possess beauty because they are too ordinary to be wanted and appreciated by people or because they are too dirty or too greasy, people do not like to approach them, therefore they do not possess beauty.

Bueke and many others have used smoothness, softness, brightness of colors, etc. to show that all is not useful that possess beauty. In fact, viewed at present, some forms seem to be some forms them seem to be beautiful. But tracing back to

the origin of beauty feeling, we can find the cause of the utility of beauty. People regard those forms as beauty only because man's function of beauty feeling, like the river-bed, has its relative independence, people regard those forms as beauty itself. The reason that smoothness are beautiful than roughness is that smooth objects, such as various metal or china utensils, slates, new desks and chairs are usually expensive, clean or feel comfortable so that people like to touch them. Rough objects, on the other hand, do not have those characteristics and they cannot receive the same treatment as smooth objects. The reason that softness is more beautiful than stiffness is that soft objects, such as tigers' skins, wool, sponges, new towels usually keep warm, make no harm for the skin and feel good. As a result people like to touch them. Stiff objects do not share those characteristics. Beauty in other forms can also be reasoned by analogy. In fact, beauty of these forms is not unchangeable. It changes as the content changes. Are smooth worms, soft caterpillars, and flies with red heads and green bodies beautiful? That their outer appearances are not beautiful is because they do not have good content, people do not like them even always avoid them.

Some beautiful forms of human body(such as ruddy complexion, bright eyes, and well-proportioned figure) and some ugly forms(such as disability, deformity, and ill-looking) also share the same reason.

Just like some people who can only see the orientation of the river-bed to water flows and nothing of the washing of water flows, which made the river-bed. Bueke and many others see only that beauty arouses loving passion, they do not see that loving

passion can beautify the object. It is just here that their mechanism lies.

Next we come to the second argument of anti-utilitarian that beauty feeling does not arise because people take the use of an object into consideration. An example will clarify this. When a person sees a grape trellis heavy with clusters of grapes, he will have beauty feeling out of his intuition, not his consideration whether he will have any grapes. If he considers whether he will be able to get any grapes, what he will have is mental pleasure(which some people call sense utility) or bitter disappointment. All these experiences are far from being beauty feeling. Instead, they will ruin beauty feeling(refer to Kant's exposition(?2?,159)).

I also agree with that mental pleasure and beauty feeling are different things subjected to different desire relations. Firstly, they have different objects. The object of beauty feeling is an image, which can be expressed with a noun; whereas the object of mental pleasure is an event that should be expressed with a sentence. Secondly, they come from different ways of perception. Beauty feeling comes from sense intuition while mental pleasure comes from rational cognition. However, all these differences do not interfere with our affirmation of relation between beauty and utility. Man's consideration of the utility will spoil beauty feeling, but this is not the fault of the utility of grapes. It is the result when rational desire relation gains the upper hand and pushes aside perceptive desire relation. If people notice only the image, not the event, perceptive relation will gain the upper hand and beauty feeling will still arise. The arising of beauty feeling is related to loving passion, which, in turn, is related to man's need of the utility of grapes and also to man's past consideration of the utility of grapes, therefore beauty feeling is ultimately related to utility.

The third argument of anti-utilitarian is as follows: though a beautiful object is useful, it is often unavailable to people who watch it. This is true when a prisoner faces fresh and free forests and wilderness or a vagrant sees other people's comfortable homes. From this anti-utilitarian obtain such conclusions: an object with utility yet not available to man can only make man feel disappointed and uneasy, it will not bring any pleasant feelings(including beauty feeling); thus beauty feeling is not the result of utility(Santayana had stated this, see ?2?,287).

But in my view, man's beauty feeling becomes stronger just because he cannot get the object. The more a person lacks something, the more he wants it and therefore the stronger he feels that it is beautiful. On such occasions, people will have bitterness of disappointment or uneasiness since there are two juxtaposed desire relations. For example, when a prisoner faces wide wilderness and yet cannot get freed, if he notices only the image, he will have beauty feeling; if he notices only the event, namely he cannot get freed, he will have bitterness of disappointment. Because of the presence of two juxtaposed desire relations, it is possible that beauty feeling and bitterness of disappointment appear on the same occasion. It is also possible that ugliness feeling and mental pleasure appear on the same occasion, as when a person killed a rat or poisonous snake or when people see a convict punished.

Some people might say that any pleasure feeling should come from certain satisfaction. They might ask why a prisoner have pleasant feeling(beauty feeling) when he has no satisfaction. But in reply, we may ask why pleasant feelings should come from satisfaction. For many years, it is just this point that mislead aesthetics. You will be able to understand the subtlety of beauty feeling if you are clear about this point.

4. How Does Art Reflect Reality?

People often talk about the unbalanced developments of art(including literature) and economy. Art may reach its peak when society is in economic difficulty and it may decline when economy prospers. Isn't art the reflection of reality or economic base? Why are there unbalanced developments? Some people, from the universal unbalanced developments, reach the conclusion that art does not reflect or does not directly reflect economic base. Some others affirm the reflection but negate the real existence of unbalanced developments of art and economy. Obviously the two views are not satisfying. The best conclusion to a materialist is to affirm that unbalanced developments really exist and also that art reflect reality or economic base. The conclusion seems to contradict itself. But what is shown in Figure 4 will easily solve the contradiction. Since objects of beauty usually are not what people have got or those that have satisfied people's need, instead, they are what people lack or urgently want. Therefore, art, which mainly(but not inclusively)reflects beauty, only shows the latter, not the former. Usually economic prosperity can amply satisfy people's various needs. So, beauty, as the feedback signal that promotes people's pursuits is not so important. Objects of beauty in society are not so rich and touching as to be reflected in art. Things will be just the opposite when society is in difficulty.

 When a man stretches out his arm to fetch a cigarette, he adjusts the movement of his hand according to the distance between his hand and the cigarette, not according to the present position of his hand or the distance his hand has moved. When we warm up a hot box, we adjust the input heat into the box according to the difference between present temperature and expected temperature, not according to present temperature. Similarly, art reflect or adjusts social developments according to the difference between ideal and reality, not according to reality only. I think only we understand the reflection of art in this way can we show that art, in turn, promotes social developments. With this view, it is not difficult to understand why ancient myths appeared when people hungered for magic power, why there were pastoral poets in years of upheaval, why the story "The Cowboy and the Spin Girl" appeared when peasants lived in misery, why there was the Renaissance after the dark middle ages, and why there was a popular interest in sex literature after a long period of asceticism in China, etc.

5. Conclusions

My views about the cause and result of beauty, simply put, is as follows: Beauty is the feedback signal that promotes loving passion. It motivates people to approach in space those objects that are helpful and scarce for life. It relies on loving passion and in turn promotes the development of loving passion. Both of beauty and loving passion rely on the demand relation between man and his environment. Whether the deductions, analyses, and explanations in this essay amply make above views reasonable will be determined by the wise judgment of the readers.

References

[1]Winer, N., Cybernetics, Science Press, Beijing, 1992, 99-129.

[2]On Beauty and Beauty Feeling by Western Aesthetes, Compiled by Department of Philosophy of Beijing University, Commercial Press, Shanghai,1980.

[3]Lu, C.-G., A trial to resolve the problems about fragrance, sweetness, and beauty left by Darwin--An extension of historical materialism to biology, Nature Information, 2(1987),25-27.

(This paper is originally carried in Journal of Changsha University, No.3, 1989)