Richard Seymour: How beauty feels

www.ted.com A story, a work of art, a face, a designed object -- how do we tell that something is beautiful? And why does it matter so much to us? Designer Richard Seymour explores our response to beauty and the surprising power of objects that exhibit it.
TEDTalks is a daily video podcast of the best talks and performances from the TED Conference, where the world's leading thinkers and doers give the talk of their lives in 18 minutes. Featured speakers have included Al Gore on climate change, Philippe Starck on design, Jill Bolte Taylor on observing her own stroke, Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child, Jane Goodall on chimpanzees, Bill Gates on malaria and mosquitoes, Pattie Maes on the "Sixth Sense" wearable tech, and "Lost" producer JJ Abrams on the allure of mystery. TED stands for Technology, Entertainment, Design, and TEDTalks cover these topics as well as science, business, development and the arts. Closed captions and translated subtitles in a variety of languages are now available on TED.com, at www.ted.com/translate.

[@SIMKINETICS]

Like him, I'm an engineer. When I design something mechanically elegant, I get an emotional high. Other people's masterpieces do the same for me. And then, I want to make mine look great too. It's an aesthetic experience. Beauty feels like the inspiration of life!

[@PierreaSweedieCat]

One of the best TED talks ever!

[@MRL1985]

Beauty is knowing from first glance that you are feeling something that you would want to feel again, regardless of context. It's not just about sight, it's also a smell, a texture or even a thought. It's your own personal reward for life.

[@AmyTee12]

An absolutely captivating speech.

[@tommmmmm]

I watched over 100 TED videos. And this one I personally rank 4th. Congratulations. That piece of work was really awesome. AWESOME

[@Pianofy]

When he talks about beauty specifically it reminds me a lot of the way I appreciate Chopin's piano pieces. He is onto something

[@itscloudyinside]

; out of the many TED vids, i really enjoyed this one. also for the fact that he could put in words what i've always wanted to share with others. something attractive DOES have function. really good talk.

[@Theembodimentchannel]

first TED talk I've seen where the presenters engages with the body. Good to see/feel

[@nonalolagirl]

Now I know how to categorize my favorite movie types. Movies that make me feel what he's talking about. They open my eyes to a new world and they touch that part of my stomach and chest. Beautiful movies.

[@johncrab67]

This episode is much better than I thought it was going to be. Very good. :)

[@100akerwoods]

The story about the watch, something about that really made me think and see things differently,

[@totodepatas]

"God can see it."

[@tubinginnow]

Lovely presentation. Thoroughly enjoyed it.

[@unimaginablyawesome]

That talk felt beautiful :)

[@amjPeace]

I would like to see some of his work now, my curiosity is piqued!

[@joshs1uk]

stunning outlook on life

[@chessdude67]

Excellent talk. Thank you.

[@holdmybeer]

best talk all week!

[@Geoshi]

Awesome talk, moving even

[@jc333jc]

What an enjoyable talk. I thought that I was only going to be watching the first few minutes. but yet again.... Damn you TED!...:-)

[@pillar7of7fabulosity]

beauty cannot be defined by what we see alone. it is so much more than that.

[@Roy_Godiksen]

I realy like this one. Very good job Richard Seymour

[@ImDrizzt]

Enjoyed it thoroughly.

[@zeffii]

great talk.

[@03studios]

If I could stand p and applaud this I would... bravo sir, you have hit upon the small signals that tells us our life are bigger then what we can see.

[@freedomformind]

1) form follows function 2) form is function ~ both are apt in their own context. A beautiful product creates a gud impression askin u to try it out, hence following axiom (2) in principle. what happens later and whether u sustain ur love for it follows from axiom (1)

[@AveryMilieu]

Yes. I've seen it happen, I've had it happen. The flash before recognition, the decision made from the gut, not the mind. Sggest that the six seconds in theaters dates from when someone measured how long it takes an iris to adjust to changes from light to dark.

[@Melki]

feeling is reaction that came from the personality you've created. While thinking is the reaction from the personality you're creating.

[@zawawi1980]

amazing

[@HomieSoul]

The Watch story changed my life like it did his

[@cyrilrodriguez4519]

When he asked what the light going out slowly resembled I thought about a sunset. Obviously not 6 seconds but I imagine there’s an evolutionary connection similar to what he described

[@petrol11]

The point he made with the picture was valid.

[@NsaneNtheNbrane]

Just as form is function, feeling is thinking.

[@eatchiles]

@beriukay "When people tell me to feel, don't think, I immediately feel rage." You understand that you will not listen to other than your own thoughts about what you believe to be true. Others' opinions matter only that you are willing to accept them. You have the confidence that when you are asked to feel instead of think, you are more likely to agree with the fact that what you feel is in alignment with what the presenter is conveying.

[@eatcarpet]

Oh God, it's so beautiful, I think that I'm going to cry! Pretentious is more like it... If you focus too much on beauty and aesthetics, then you lose the practicality of the product. And that's why you have crap like the antennagate on the iPhone.

[@Radjehuty]

@undividedself1 actually it takes fractions of a second to dilate or contract your pupils. You can prove it when you look in the mirror and flash a light in one of your eyes. What takes longer is the sensations from neurons to adapt after being suddenly exposed to a lot of energy(light). Like being flicked in the ear quickly and dealing with pain that goes away vs pushing your ear and just feeling a pressure sensation that doesn't bother you.

[@geekgroupie42]

people who behold things have beautiful eyes.

[@nealhacker]

We live in a world in which exquisite beauty is to be found, beauty in the things of nature, beauty in the artifacts of man, beauty in human behavior and human relationships. But this beauty is uniformly imperfect, impermanent and, on its own level, inexplicable. It seems to only be understandable on seemingly paradoxical terms.

[@trapease]

I cried, and then he called out the woman that cried. Good to know I'm not alone.

[@nonalolagirl]

Also when he mentions the water bottle, it reminds me of this watch?v=JOl4vwhwkW8. I never thought a water bottle was beautiful until I saw that.

[@farvision]

@csqw I agree!! I've written to them and they are tone deaf. Why is it that big organizations are totally unable to fix things that are really bad in their designs?

[@peterbriers]

@argybarg He was not trying to score any points. He's just trying to make you aware of listening to what you were feeling, and how knowing things can affect the initial feeling about everything.

[@brettygood1]

My brain kept interrupting my ability to appreciate whatever it is he's getting at.

[@pedrohadek]

Amazing. If I saw the words "Emotional Functionality" in any other context I would call bullshit. Here, it is imbued with a very deep meaning. I guess that is how beauty feels.

[@jrpipik]

I hate the light that goes out slowly. When I close a car door, I want to know it's fully closed and not held slight open by a dragging seat belt or something. It used to be if the light went out, I knew it was shut. Now if I want to be sure, I have to wait around for the damn light to go off. And I know I've heard other people say the same.

[@gulllars]

7:40 intrinsic beautiful. I find people think fractals are intrinsically beautiful. This has to do with the human brain being naturally adept at pattern recognition, and find mathematical patterns and simple geometric shapes to be beautiful. Fractals are self-similar repeating patterns, and when drawn well can give a "mind blow" effect on top of it as the viewer tries to comprehend the infinite complexity formed from basic repeating and iterating shapes.

[@CharlesFerraro]

When he spoke of light to dark in 6 seconds, I thought he was going to parallel the lighting of a candle to full glow.

[@RobHoughton]

@beriukay well, you seem to have honored the request! How do you feel about that?

[@beriukay]

When people tell me to feel, don't think, I immediately feel rage.

[@LORDNARCISSUS]

when you close your eyelids you experience that same level of light going to darkness. I think it mimics the natural closure of the eyelids and not the theater. but who knows? I don't go to movie theaters.

[@undividedself1]

I suspect that light to dark in 6 seconds feels good because this is roughly how long it takes the pupil of the eye to dilate

[@RDJim]

When I want the light on, I want it on instantly. When I close the door I want that light out instantly.

[@Jukejointjeze0n]

As heard on NPR.

[@laojace]

can anybody tell me who is the designer of the water bottle at 12:54?

[@Zuriki09]

@inshepherdswetrust it probably worked a bit better at a distance. She didn't look pretty after the movement though, you are correct.

[@mcdweller99]

@chibiariel a car light turning on slowly is annoying, i want light straight away in order to see. He was attributing beauty to a car light going off slowly.

[@Nineteen1900Hundred]

@Niallphillips "yes I do" what?

[@csqw]

TED JUST TURN DOWN THE NOISE AT THE BEGINNING!!!

[@invinciblemode]

@eatcarpet other devices have the antennagate too

[@laojace]

@Stylo1321 THANK YOU :D

[@AlanKey86]

12:49 - to gaze upon the illustrious water bottle.

[@ShallowBeThyGames]

@Timrath Well that's, like, your opinion.

[@ilmarsabele]

5:57 Dont fucking tell me you didn't feel it!

[@blooflazh7]

i do

[@xenx1682]

the rainbow is universally Beautiful, no?

[@timmyguy13]

Does anyone know who he said designed that water bottle?

[@jvidez]

While I agree that greater appreciation for function leads to greater appreciation for form (as in the girl's drawing and the Agusta motorcycle), I still don't see how the opposite is true. So no, I don't think form is function.

[@ReX0r]

@9:30 Anais Nin and the Talmud tell us that we do not see things as they are. We see them as we are. Epictetus says: It's not what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters.

[@ashliebelle]

"We are slaves to the first few fractions of a second" so true.

[@CurtHowland]

In the stomach, intestines and etc, there is just as much "central nervous system" tissue as in the brain and spinal chord. You have two brains. A "gut feeling" is when your other brain is communicating.

[@wileym]

@tomahable It's a clicker to advance the display.

[@BrutusAlbion]

Went in with the thought that this was going to be a boring talk about art and what beauty was. But... Came out thinking beauty is more than meets the eye. P.S. God can't see me :D

[@YawnGod]

Fucking amazing.

[@StopFear]

It is as if Ted uploaded this to remind us of modern minimalist design of iPod and other apple products due to Jobs' passing. iPod comes to mind. Even if you hate it, you most likely wanted to touch it the first time.

[@MarkAbrahams_UK]

Interesting. Whatever you think - the answer to this question is not that you feel it. Feeling / emotion / attitude, whatever or however you think about the OMG woo woo stuff are all thoughts. I could say more - about the principles of how we, all 6.5 billion of us human beings, experience life. Understanding how the human mind operates means that designers (like me), writers / poets and all 'artists' would not imagine that their inside out reality can be any other way. Think & feel beauty.

[@daveroxyeah]

Wow, when he says 'for the next 14 minutes' its exactly 14 minutes missing .. Wow

[@Dixavd]

@MarkoKraguljac fIrst science can only show so much, relying totally on it is niave as it leaves us to the pitfalls of the flaws it is left with. And secondly, there is no reason that the thought of emotion or the scientific ideas are in fact completely secular. Simply because emotion is built within an orchestra of science does not make them any less powerful or universal. There is no harm in searching through thoughts and ideas as it is to search through reality and facts.

[@celticphrog]

I feel like a beer, pardon me while I go to the fridge.

[@jkjkjij22]

@WhatAxBrit what's at 0:15

[@ShallowBeThyGames]

@beriukay You feel rage? Do you do this without thinking? Then you have done what is asked.

[@markthe5hark8]

@CurtHowland That's just not true. There is a ridiculously higher density level of nerve cells in the spinal cord than in your intestines.

[@PhuongmegaFat]

i like him to be my lecturer :))

[@JosephOR]

Awsome comments, but common where's the: 0:15 thumb it.

[@MrNiceHk]

Straight off the bat and I have paused the video so perhaps he explains this already but i would say on symmetry the brain would be naturally filling in the blanks ie projecting a mirror image of the image being show to the subject and coming to the conclusion beautify or not beautiful the same way if they seen the entire image

[@CurtHowland]

@markthe5hark8 Sure, anything you say. After all, whatever someone says in a KZbin comment must be right.

[@sashakid]

interesting :]

[@carefulcarpenter]

@csqw Or you could plan ahead like I do.

[@bwill325]

What about those of us who aren't slaves to ads? I may walk down an isle and I make spot something based on my initial reaction, but it doesn't determine whether I buy it. It was an interesting talk, but not everything is first impressions.

[@prestaeus]

Evocative response? Intrinsic Art? Which field of study is he speaking about?

[@crosbying]

4:10 - 4:20. What is he talking about? Where does he think it arrives "first at"? Obviously he talks about arriving first in our consciousness, so he is placing thought away from consciousness. He assumes there is a place for it to arrive to, which would be the center for "consciousness in the brain. However many studies have been done on the subject, and there appears to be no center or seat of conciousness. So there this part of theory fell apart

[@dookiecheez]

6:11 Bottom left, Akuma?

[@MarkoKraguljac]

@LightWthoutTheStatic Behind my puny comment lays the idea of General semantics, founded and promoted by Alfred Korzybski quite long ago. It is science and (at least to me) very interesting and important field. If you are interested to throw a look, PM me and Ill send you "Science and Sanity" by Korzybski, PDF version. I see it as one of the most important books we should read at these troubled times (historical perspective).

[@HectorL360]

I am ugly, so have no idea what beauty feels like

[@yatah]

@jkjkjij22 The video starts right there if you don't wanna take the chance of waiting 2 min of intro to go by.

[@MrPikask]

"like" if you looked that t-shirt movie up :D

[@Timrath]

@ShallowBeThyGames No, he didn't. He wasn't asked to feel just anything. When someone solicits an emotional reaction, they usually expect something specific. This reminds me of the stupid argument of "if it made you feel something, then it's art", even if that feeling is disgust or outrage. No, it is not. Real works of art are measured by how good they are at producing exactly the emotional reaction that their creator intended. Even garbage can trigger emotions, but only art can shape them.

[@thingstodo645]

This is great. Something that I enjoyed every minute of. I'd have to disagree with @nealhacker because he's finding beauty in the thingsthat are necessarily natural. In a world (say Texas where I live) finding beauty in everyday objects and materialistic things is important because 99% percent of the the cities in Texas and the US have been man-made or altered by man. I hate the cities of Texas, nothing but concrete jungles.

[@anticliche321]

I would hate to be the lady that's pointed out when she starts crying. :p

[@totoado]

the translation is a shame !!

[@teetoew]

super saiyan bottom left corner 6:11

[@mookie9439]

You get a 3 and 1/2,

[@LightWthoutTheStatic]

@MarkoKraguljac So if we should start living by science then I'm assuming you're adjusting alot of your theoretical postulations and understanding of physics considering the discovery of a particle that moves faster than light, previously thought to the fasted thing, correct? I really don't believe science is the be all, end all.