Hello Qwerty,
I think I know what you are looking for. I have never found the perfect man. However it is also a personnel thing. Attractiveness (appearance and personality) is relative. What I like and what someone else likes can not be the same thing.
But the hunt keeps life interesting. As you change what you are want changes.
I may not get what I want just so long as I don't get what I deserve.
Cheers
PeakOil is You
The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by flametree » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 15:56:40
-
flametree - Peat
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon 15 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by mgibbons19 » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 16:00:17
Perfectly average is what you're aiming for.
Using computing to model the platonic woman. Interesting idea.
Using computing to model the platonic woman. Interesting idea.
- mgibbons19
- Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1105
- Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by keekles » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 16:39:37
del
Last edited by keekles on Thu 26 Oct 2006, 04:41:27, edited 1 time in total.
-
keekles - Peat
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Fri 09 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by qwerty » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 16:41:33
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('keekles', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('qwerty', 'I')mage never being disappointed or bored again. It is possible! Enchantment is where reality and illusion merge as one, perfection is the eternal presence of the magic of enchantment.
Qwerty, I really am trying to figure out where you're coming from. But you and I must have very different notions of what perfection equals. To me, perfection = boredom. To me, the magic and enchantment you talk of is not produced by a clear, sharp mathematical image, but rather a fuzzy, mysterious, blurred one. If I see this invented image of the perfect human female specimen, I may be blown away at first, and then I'd be bored. Case solved, nothing more to see here. Maybe I'm too much of a Buddhist, but what really interests me is the fleeting, the unraveling, the free-falling, the unclear, the unknowable -- the way life really is.
Who are you to say what is the way life really is?
I can sense you are a little Buddhist, like you say.
But does that mean you are necessarily correct?
You being nihilistic doesn't solve any problem, it doesn't create any solutions. Its no fun saying everything is 'nothing' and just sit back and love the 'mysteries of life'. Don't you ever have the curiousity and drive to delve into the very fabric of conciousness and existence itself and 'touch' it, to experience just what it is to be like that? Don't you want to know the truth? To get down to the CORE ESSENCE of what existence IS, to understand it, to BE 'IT'. A crystal clear High Definition Image of the perfect girl/woman is far superior than a blurred out 'mystery'. Mysteries are by their very nature speculative, they represent randomness, and uncertainty. They give room to a superposition of all possible combinations, being all of them yet none of them. Its a paradox that I hate, it doesn't get you anywhere and its not real.
Simple example: you want down the street and from far away glance at a attractive female (male if you are female) and you are awed by his/her form or physical beauty. So when you walk closer and you examine him/her better you realize you are repulsed by the very same image that you thought you were mesmerized by just a moment ago. What changed? Surely not the person herself!
By loving a mystery, you fall in love /lust /infatuation with an imaginary, ideal, perfect image in your mind that you know to exist. When you see that the 'real' person doesn't match up to this image you are dissappointed.
How about solving the perfect girl puzzle and staring at the REAL DEAL and never having to guess again? Less people would become neurotic and less woman would complain about being hit on.
Last edited by qwerty on Fri 15 Sep 2006, 16:51:52, edited 2 times in total.
-
qwerty - Peat
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sun 03 Sep 2006, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by keekles » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 16:48:35
del
Last edited by keekles on Thu 26 Oct 2006, 04:42:01, edited 1 time in total.
-
keekles - Peat
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Fri 09 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by markam » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 16:49:29
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he problem is I have never seen a woman that looks perfect. All are ugly.
Bet you get lots of dates with opening lines like that.
- markam
- Lignite
- Posts: 254
- Joined: Wed 20 Jul 2005, 03:00:00
- Location: PA
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by keekles » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 17:09:33
del
Last edited by keekles on Thu 26 Oct 2006, 04:42:47, edited 1 time in total.
-
keekles - Peat
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Fri 09 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by qwerty » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 18:36:40
Last edited by qwerty on Sat 16 Sep 2006, 15:12:07, edited 1 time in total.
-
qwerty - Peat
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sun 03 Sep 2006, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by WildRose » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 19:07:01
Qwerty, I am a heterosexual woman and I can appreciate beauty in other women. For example, if I watch a beauty pageant it is likely that I will think most, if not all, of the entrants are beautiful. If I see a poster in a women's clothing store with four beautiful young women, of four different ethnic backgrounds, I notice a lot of lovely features and combinations of features. How would I decide if one was more attractive than the other?
Let's say we're not even talking about the image of a perfect woman. Would it be any easier to find perfection in a tree, or an animal, or a sunset?
My point is simply that trying to complete the exercise you propose, creating perfection in the image of a woman, is only possible in the context of what is perfect to one person (subjective).
Let's say we're not even talking about the image of a perfect woman. Would it be any easier to find perfection in a tree, or an animal, or a sunset?
My point is simply that trying to complete the exercise you propose, creating perfection in the image of a woman, is only possible in the context of what is perfect to one person (subjective).
-
WildRose - Heavy Crude
- Posts: 1881
- Joined: Wed 21 Jun 2006, 03:00:00
Re: The Most Beautiful girl/woman in the multiverse?
by qwerty » Fri 15 Sep 2006, 19:58:44
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('WildRose', 'Q')werty, I am a heterosexual woman and I can appreciate beauty in other women. For example, if I watch a beauty pageant it is likely that I will think most, if not all, of the entrants are beautiful. If I see a poster in a women's clothing store with four beautiful young women, of four different ethnic backgrounds, I notice a lot of lovely features and combinations of features. How would I decide if one was more attractive than the other?
Let's say we're not even talking about the image of a perfect woman. Would it be any easier to find perfection in a tree, or an animal, or a sunset?
My point is simply that trying to complete the exercise you propose, creating perfection in the image of a woman, is only possible in the context of what is perfect to one person (subjective).
Let's say we're not even talking about the image of a perfect woman. Would it be any easier to find perfection in a tree, or an animal, or a sunset?
My point is simply that trying to complete the exercise you propose, creating perfection in the image of a woman, is only possible in the context of what is perfect to one person (subjective).
So based on this logic, why have beauty pageants at all then?
The image of the sunset? Your joking right? You can't make that kind of comparision. If everyone of us took a picture of the sun then there will be pretty ones, ugly sunsets, and perfect sunsets, but its going to pretty much stay within the same realm because its the ONE SUN. There is, in reality only one sun, and the sun is exceedingly simple object (can't get any simplier than a sphere..) so how un-photogenic can it get? There is much deviance, its the same sun over and over again.
However, this is vastly different than say taking the picture between a girl rated as 6 (on a scale from 0 to 10) compared to a girl rated as a 8. To be sure, if a whole bunch of photos are taken of each girl, there might be a chance that the worst photo of the higher rated girl is worse than the best photo of the lower rated girl, especially if they are both rated close to each other.
But overall no one would really prefer the 6 over the 8.
THE perfect girl/woman would always be rated 10 in each and every picture, no matter what angle or lightening was used. She would be prefectly photogenic.
I don't think it is subjective at all. Wanna know a quick way of figuring out if you are perfect or not? Take a whole bunch of pictures and if you can find one unflattering photo then you are imperfect. ITs that simple, dont make it complicated.
Look at the most beautiful woman you can find, where on the internet, in a magazine, or in real life. You can always find something 'wrong' with it. That's what I'm talking about. There are lots of pretty girls and beautiful woman with a lot of physical merits and excellent attributes, but all of them possess fatal flaws, and NONE of them have it all. Know what I mean?
-
qwerty - Peat
- Posts: 159
- Joined: Sun 03 Sep 2006, 03:00:00
