**2. Basic assumptions and core questions**

muscles, tissue, organs and chemical processes. Due to utilitarian moral theories, the human body is often in bioethics degraded to the status of a functional object. However, more and more a biomedical model, very specifically, an analytical approach to human embodiment with the danger of fragmentation and instrumentalisation, is being replaced by a more humane, spiritual and aesthetic approach. The shift is from an aggressive approach to a more qualitative and holistic approach [1]; i.e., to view the human body as an integral part of life and an ingredient of soulful embodiment (corporeal beautification): *I am my body, I don't merely 'have' a body*. This shift towards a more aesthetic approach to human life is even detectable in processes of high-tech digitalisation and information technology with its emphasis on 'big data'. Man is also the creator of beauty: man as *homo aestheticus*. For example, Steve Jobs, the digital entrepreneur of Apple, introduced aesthetics to the computer business. He combined his slogan 'Let's make a dent in the universe' [2] with the aesthetics and art of design. While his youth companion Steve Wozniak could see 'a sonnet in a circuit', Jobs, by contrast, could look at a beige box and see beauty [3]. 'He imagined a computer that was graceful and elegant as it was useful, an intersection of technology and art that resulted in something

Steve Jobs changed a possible bankrupt company, Apple, into a financial miracle. The secret? He stayed true to his original vision for Apple: He believed there was room for beauty and art

If one transfers the notion of beauty to human life, very specifically the naked human body, what would be the implication for theory formation in anthropology and the human quest for meaning and significance? Thus, the aesthetic question: For what purpose is the human

In a more moral approach anthropology, the fundamental question is often an ethical one: What is good and what is bad/evil? In many philosophies of life and religious circles, as influenced by Platonic dualism (the body is merely an inferior prison of the human soul), there is immediately the association that the human body, with its sensual needs, is from a lower order and should be suppressed in a Stoic way. Due to the Stoic principle of *apatheia*, emotions are rendered as obstacles to true knowledge. "So the passions (*pathē*) must be overcome in

Scepticism regarding the value of the sensual human body with its passions and sexual needs can be traced back to what one can call the *Platonic dualism in anthropology*. For example, Plato [6] provides us with the idea that a soul can be deprived of its body; that it does not come fully into its own until it has been separated from the body, and that it is immortal. The body is therefore merely clothing for the soul, a kind of prison from which it should escape and be liberated [7]. In general, the human body was in many religious circles and philosophies of life excluded from 'soulfulness' and reduced to the realm of 'flesh' (*sarx*). The genitals were not part of the beauty of the human soul and viewed as irrelevant for maintaining spiritual excellence. Beauty was therefore more an abstract spiritual category than an explicit corporeal and sen-

order that the ideal of 'dispassionateness' (*apatheia*) may be attained" [5].

truly special' [3].

42 Perception of Beauty

body designed?

sual category.

amid technology and commerce [4].

Instead of a dualistic approach in anthropology, what is meant by an integral approach to corporeal beauty? Is it also possible to see in the naked human body *more* than merely physical well being and biological chemistry? Are the human body and genitals merely objects for sexual exploitation, to be used for power abuse and rape, or is it possible to use the body for the beautification of life and the fostering of human dignity and meaningful hope—the human body as spiritual entity, soulful embodiment—embodied soulfulness?

<sup>1</sup> My contribution is based on research over a period of 20 years and seminated in the publication on icons [8]. 2 Online: http://www.italian-renaissance-art.com/Last-Judgement.html. Accessed: 23/05/2014. Public domain.

In the social media, film, many magazines and public advertisements, the naked human body is often projected as a commodity and portrayed as object for lust and sexual gratification (**Figure 2**).

Therefore, in many conservative Christian circles, nakedness and explicit sensual corporeality are bad and essentially 'sinful'. But: 'The sexual itself is not sinful. Real ignorance of the sexual, when nonetheless it is present, is reserved for the beast, which is enthralled in the blindness of instinct and acts blindly' [9]. On the contrary, I want to posit that human sexuality is an intrinsic component of soulful embodiment and embodied soulfulness. The naked human body is not designed for 'blind instinct' (the beast), but for 'compassionate intimacy' (the beauty)—the physical ordinary, becomes the representation of the spiritual extraordinary.

Beautifying the human body implies the following: the ordinary (human flesh) should be viewed as extraordinary, as a piece of art (expression of worth, value, dignity and identity). In 1992, Ellen Dissanyake wrote a book entitled *Homo Aestheticus: Where Art comes from and Why* [10]. Her basic assumption is that art can be regarded as a natural general proclivity that manifests itself in culturally learned specifics and bodily expressions such as dances, songs,

**Figure 2.** In order to change the paradigm of the human body image and meaning of the genitals, the proposed shift should be from a hedonistic male functionalism and the commercialised exploitation of the sexual organ (the penis as a tool), to the aesthetics and beauty of the genitals within the whole of male embodiment (the penis as an integral part of an ensouled body). The image suggests a 'more' that can seduce. The posture of the body is suggestive and open for a kind of commercialised exploitation, rather than merely an advertisement of male underwear. Public advertisement on pavement Copenhagen. Photo: D.J. Louw.

performances, visual display and poetic speech. Art makes life special, because making art involves taking something out of its everyday and ordinary use context and making it somehow special—the ordinary becomes extraordinary.

In the social media, film, many magazines and public advertisements, the naked human body is often projected as a commodity and portrayed as object for lust and sexual gratification

Therefore, in many conservative Christian circles, nakedness and explicit sensual corporeality are bad and essentially 'sinful'. But: 'The sexual itself is not sinful. Real ignorance of the sexual, when nonetheless it is present, is reserved for the beast, which is enthralled in the blindness of instinct and acts blindly' [9]. On the contrary, I want to posit that human sexuality is an intrinsic component of soulful embodiment and embodied soulfulness. The naked human body is not designed for 'blind instinct' (the beast), but for 'compassionate intimacy' (the beauty)—the physical ordinary, becomes the representation of the spiritual

Beautifying the human body implies the following: the ordinary (human flesh) should be viewed as extraordinary, as a piece of art (expression of worth, value, dignity and identity). In 1992, Ellen Dissanyake wrote a book entitled *Homo Aestheticus: Where Art comes from and Why* [10]. Her basic assumption is that art can be regarded as a natural general proclivity that manifests itself in culturally learned specifics and bodily expressions such as dances, songs,

**Figure 2.** In order to change the paradigm of the human body image and meaning of the genitals, the proposed shift should be from a hedonistic male functionalism and the commercialised exploitation of the sexual organ (the penis as a tool), to the aesthetics and beauty of the genitals within the whole of male embodiment (the penis as an integral part of an ensouled body). The image suggests a 'more' that can seduce. The posture of the body is suggestive and open for a kind of commercialised exploitation, rather than merely an advertisement of male underwear. Public advertisement on

(**Figure 2**).

44 Perception of Beauty

extraordinary.

pavement Copenhagen. Photo: D.J. Louw.

If the naked human body is indeed about the aesthetics of the extraordinary, the art of embodied corporeality, what is the implication for an anthropology of beauty in theory formation? Thus, the intriguing aesthetic and anthropological question: to what extent can the human body, nakedness and physicality, be viewed as vital elements and means of beauty in order to contribute to the beautification of life rather than the exploitation of life? How can nakedness make life extraordinary rather than a nightmare to be survived? How can physicality become a means to express humane encounters that contribute to peaceful coexistence rather than violent destruction and inhumane exploitation?
