From an evolutionary perspective, humans are naturally disgusted by things that might threaten survival. For example, we often find larvae “ugly,” which makes sense considering the food they inhabit may be spoiled. This feeling of disgust helps protect us from foodborne illness. Yet similar worms in the soil play a crucial role in maintaining ecological balance. Is understanding their importance enough to make us feel fond of them? More broadly – can simply knowing the role of a natural phenomenon change our sense of its beauty?
The question of what shapes aesthetic taste is not only philosophically intriguing – it also has practical significance for environmental protection.
“The way we perceive natural beauty influences our attitude toward nature,” explains Prof. Mateusz Salwa of the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Warsaw, whose research focuses on the aesthetics of landscapes and the natural environment.
“There is a strong connection between aesthetic experiences of nature and pro-environmental behavior. We are more likely to protect what we find attractive. It’s easier to persuade the public to protect spectacular landscapes like Morskie Oko” – a scenic lake in Poland’s Tatra Mountains – “than, for example, the marshes near Warsaw, even though the marshes are just as ecologically valuable,” he adds.
Understanding the roots of our attitudes toward nature could help guide more effective conservation efforts.
A picture-perfect landscape
One key idea about the development of aesthetic taste involves the influence of art. For example, ancient Greek and Roman ideals of bodily proportion continue to shape how we perceive physical attractiveness. We might say someone is “as beautiful as Apollo,” or feel flattered when told our body resembles a classical sculpture.
Landscape painting may have influenced our perception of nature in a similar way. After all, we often judge nature through the category of picturesque. Lakes at the base of mountains, seaside cliffs, or fields shrouded in morning mist are widely considered beautiful, while swamps rarely make it onto a canvas.
The concept of “arts-centered” approach to nature suggests that we experience nature as if it were a work of art and evaluate it accordingly. Critics, however, argue that nature is not a human creation. Imposing artistic categories on it can obscure the complexity and dynamics of ecosystems. “Arts-centered” approach also frames humans as external observers, whereas, in reality, we are part of nature itself.
“I like it because know”
A different approach in the aesthetics of nature is called “nature-centered”, which holds that everything in nature is beautiful. In this view, “ugliness” arises from disruptions of harmony or balance, often caused by human activity. Yet this approach has its critics, particularly for assuming that understanding nature is necessary to appreciate it.
“Common sense tells us this isn’t true,” Prof. Salwa notes. “We don’t need to understand what we’re looking at to enjoy it. Do we need to be geology experts to appreciate the satisfaction of gazing at Giewont?” – a prominent mountain in Poland’s Tatra range – “Or does knowing that the golden glow of a sunset is partly caused by atmospheric pollution make it any less stunning?”
According to Prof. Salwa, the aesthetic experience of nature cannot be separated from the pleasure it brings. Interesting shapes, appealing smells, or simply being in a place that feels good all contribute to aesthetic satisfaction. This sensory pleasure is important for well-being. We are more willing to care for what we enjoy. Indeed, the national park movement, which began in the 19th century in the United States, grew largely out of fascination with the beauty of nature, not purely practical considerations.
Better PR for nature
Prof. Salwa advocates for aesthetic eclecticism: recognizing that both arts-centered and nature-centered approaches are valid, though each has limitations. Viewing nature through an artistic lens can reveal features we might otherwise overlook, while knowledge about ecosystems can change how we perceive things once considered “ugly.”
Even if a larva initially repulses us, understanding its role in the ecosystem can help us distance ourselves from that first reaction, potentially leading to a shift in feelings and aesthetic judgment over time.
“The same happens with art that isn’t immediately easy to appreciate, like contemporary works. Learning to enjoy them is exactly what developing taste is all about,” the researcher explains.
How can these insights be applied? To encourage people to care not only for what society widely considers beautiful, we need to work on its image. By improving public perception of natural phenomena, we increase the likelihood of their protection.
“This is already happening,” Prof. Salwa observes. “People are paying more attention to areas traditionally seen as unattractive, trying to highlight their appeal. Examples include urban wastelands, unmowed lawns, or creating wildflower meadows in cities. In these discussions, beyond scientific arguments, it’s clear that residents – though not all – enjoy ‘wild’ nature or a ‘weedy’ lawn.”
Broadening our sense of what is worth protecting helps foster both appreciation and conservation, even for parts of the natural world that might not initially catch the eye.
The article was originally published in Polish on the Serwis Naukowy UW website on March 14, 2025.
