Intro
In this episode of “The Philosopher’s Zone,” the taboo topic of ugliness is explored. The hosts delve into the discomfort and narrow ideals of appearance that stem from our fear of discussing and describing ugliness. They also examine how ugliness can be pathologized and framed as a medical condition, particularly in the context of cosmetic surgery. The conflation of health and beauty is analyzed, along with the moral implications of deviating from aesthetic standards. The use of big data and AI in beauty apps is also discussed, raising ethical concerns.
Main Takeaways
Ugliness as a Social Taboo
- Ugliness is a taboo topic that is often avoided in conversation.
- The imperative not to be ugly informs many of our social practices.
- There is discomfort and narrow ideals of appearance because of our fear of discussing and describing ugliness.
Pathologizing Ugliness
- Ugliness can become pathologized and framed as a medical condition that requires intervention.
- Defining the boundaries of health and disease is a philosophical and problematic practice with gray areas.
- Pathologizing ugliness is an example of medicalization, where a non-medical condition is now considered a medical condition.
- The practice of pathologizing ugliness occurs in the cosmetic surgery industry, framing unattractive features as pathological and requiring treatment.
The Moral Conflation of Health and Beauty
- The conflation of health and beauty has led to the pathologizing of ugliness, where unattractive features are framed as pathological and requiring treatment.
- The moral conflation of health and beauty ascribes moral upstandingness to a healthy and beautiful state, and deviating from it is seen as a moral failure.
- Physical markers of health, such as weight loss due to illness or skin problems like acne, are often considered unattractive and get conflated with ugliness.
- The fitness industry upholds narrow ideals of appearance, contributing to the belief that unattractive features are pathological.
Aesthetic Pathology and Aesthetic Harm
- Cosmetic surgery is a practice that frames unattractive features as a pathology.
- The term “aesthetic pathology” is used instead of “ugliness.”
- Cosmetic procedures are reframed as therapeutic instead of enhancement.
- The supposed suffering of having an unattractive feature is overemphasized to justify pathologizing it.
- Aesthetic harms refer to the harm and disadvantage people with unattractive features face, such as decreased opportunities in education and employment.
- The concept of harm is being appropriated in the practice of pathologizing ugliness.
The Ideal Appearance and Aesthetic Deviation
- The halo effect is when attractive people have an advantage in life, while the horn effect is when unattractive people are at a disadvantage.
- Aesthetic harm arises from deviating from aesthetic standards.
- Aesthetic dysfunction is deviating from a function or feature that makes it perform less.
- Unattractive features can compromise reproductive and survival functions.
- Aesthetic dysfunction argument is reductive and reduces the way we interact with the world.
- Human beings have multiple dimensions, and it’s not just about one physical feature.
The Facial Canon and Beauty Apps
- Pathologizing ugliness legitimize the establishment of an ideal appearance where deviations from that norm become seen as gradations.
- Aesthetic deviation is the third set of claims in aesthetic pathology where numbers appear and deviations from the norm become seen as gradations.
- The golden ratio is a supposed guide for the ideal appearance, but there is no basis for the idea that there is an objective measurement of facial beauty.
- Medicine upholds specific averages when it comes to facial appearance, which contributes to the idea of an ideal appearance.
- Cosmetic surgeons have a strict and narrow average when it comes to proportion and measurements of the face, and deviations from these measurements are considered pathological.
- The facial canon is so detailed and specific, but where these aesthetic ideals come from is still unclear.
- Beauty apps are designed to analyze and evaluate facial appearance.
- These apps use big data and AI to provide their services.
- The facial canon is a detailed and specific set of aesthetic ideals.
- The origins of the facial canon are unclear.
- The use of big data and AI in beauty apps raises ethical concerns.
Summary
Pathologizing Ugliness and the Conflation of Health and Beauty
Ugliness, a taboo topic, is often avoided in conversation due to discomfort and narrow ideals of appearance. However, it can be pathologized and framed as a medical condition, particularly in the cosmetic surgery industry. This practice reflects the conflation of health and beauty, where unattractive features are seen as pathological and requiring treatment. The moral implications of deviating from aesthetic standards are also explored, as physical markers of health are often considered unattractive and get conflated with ugliness. The fitness industry upholds narrow ideals of appearance, reinforcing the belief that unattractive features are pathological.
Aesthetic Pathology, Aesthetic Harm, and Aesthetic Deviation
Pathologizing ugliness is referred to as “aesthetic pathology,” and cosmetic procedures are reframed as therapeutic instead of enhancement. The supposed suffering associated with unattractive features is exaggerated to justify their pathologization. This leads to aesthetic harms, such as decreased opportunities in education and employment for individuals with unattractive features. The concept of harm is being appropriated in the practice of pathologizing ugliness. Aesthetic deviation is another aspect of aesthetic pathology, where deviations from the norm are seen as gradations. However, the idea of an objective measurement of facial beauty, such as the golden ratio, lacks a basis. Medicine upholds specific averages for facial appearance, contributing to the notion of an ideal appearance. Cosmetic surgeons adhere to strict measurements, considering deviations as pathological.
The Facial Canon, Beauty Apps, and Ethical Concerns
The facial canon refers to a detailed set of aesthetic ideals, but its origins remain unclear. Beauty apps, utilizing big data and AI, analyze and evaluate facial appearance according to these ideals. However, the use of big data and AI in beauty apps raises ethical concerns. The establishment of an ideal appearance through pathologizing ugliness reinforces the belief that deviations from the norm are gradations. This reductionist approach fails to consider the multiple dimensions of human beings beyond physical features.
Conclusion
The discussion on the pathology of ugliness reveals the societal discomfort and narrow ideals surrounding appearance. Pathologizing ugliness in cosmetic surgery and the conflation of health and beauty have significant implications for individuals with unattractive features. Aesthetic harms and the concept of aesthetic deviation further highlight the problematic nature of defining and pathologizing ugliness. The establishment of an ideal appearance through the facial canon and the use of beauty apps raise ethical concerns. It is crucial to challenge societal norms and embrace the diverse dimensions of human beings beyond physical appearance.
