Humans enrich themselves by creating works of art.

The arts are a universal phenomenon, permeating all cultures. Many experts acknowledge that aesthetics vary across cultures and ages. In Western culture, architectural structures often exhibit symmetry; they appear identical on both sides when divided at the center. In contrast, traditional Japanese gardens feature asymmetrical visual elements, with stones, trees, and sand placed seemingly without regularity or adherence to spatial rules. These examples demonstrate that our sense of aesthetics is, in part, shaped by our cultural context.

When in development do humans start to notice aesthetics?

Infants as young as 7 months old tend to look longer at their mothers and female strangers. Seeing their mother, a familiar figure, brings them comfort (Matsuda et al., 2012). In contrast, the sight of a female stranger introduces an element of novelty, resulting in excitement. Infants at this age can control their visual attention to entertain themselves and to seek satisfaction. However, it remains unclear as to whether their preference for visually comfortable stimuli is equivalent to the aesthetic preferences of human adults.

Is there any biological foundation for aesthetics?

Plants are incapable of movement on their own and rely on mobile animals for protection. When caterpillars eat the leaves of a plant, the plant releases a volatile chemical which signals the presence of caterpillars to wasps, which share a parasitic relationship with caterpillars that kills them. . These wasps learn to associate these chemicals with the presence of caterpillars, and so whenever a caterpillar eats the leaves of a plant, wasps are attracted to the plant and kill the caterpillar. Consequently, with the help of wasps, plants have their own protection mechanism that aids in their survival (Reference: Arimura Laboratory HP).

Plants also enlist the help of mobile animals for pollination, a process which led to the evolution of pollination syndromes, flower traits that are attractive to pollinators. When pollinators extract nectar from flowers, pollen attaches to their bodies. When the pollinators move to another flower, pollination is completed at that moment. This activity is mutually beneficial for both parties, with pollinators transferring pollen in return for the nectar provided by the plants.

Pollinators encompass a wide range of taxa, including bees, butterflies, moths, flies, hummingbirds, etc. Each species of pollinator has a different visual perception and preference. This means that the salient features of the flower, such as the coloration or shape of the petals, varies across species.

Pollinator syndrome, in which plants evolved their physical features to be salient for pollinators in response to coevolution of pollinator's preference for a particular plant, does not occur across all species of pollinators. However, it surely exists at least in some pollinators. Plants that depend on avian species tend to have red coloration, whereas plants that depend on bees tend to have blue-purple coloration.

In general, flowers that depend on pollinators have vibrant coloration and appear beautiful even to human eyes. This is not case for plants that have no pollinators. Cedars scatter their pollen with the help of wind. In the beginning of every Spring, people in Japan struggle with hay fever caused by Cedar pollen. Their flower is far away from "beautiful."

Some orchid species deceive pollinators, saving on the cost of producing nectar. They emit chemicals that smell similar to the pheromones of female bees. Male bees transfer pollen that they pick up while attempting to mate with an orchid they mistake for a female bee. This orchid species has a vivid coloration however it is a bit eerie rather than beautiful. Raphresias attract flies using a scent similar to rotten meat. Raphresias have a big flower, but it is less beautiful than flowers that provide nectar to pollinators. Those flowers must be visually pleasing to attract the attention of bees.

Steven Pinker argues that aesthetics is an evolutionary by-product (Pinker, 2003). His theory is that organisms have evolved a reward system activities essential to survival and this reward system is the origin of aesthetics. From this theory, one plausible evolutionary history emerges. When each species of plant began to diverge from a common ancestor, they evolved their own visual features to catch the visual attention of pollinators. In turn, pollinators have evolved their reward system to enhance a successful rate of foraging. Through mutual evolution, flowers evolved to be beautiful.

The mutualism between plants and pollinators evolved after pollinators diverged from ancestor species of humans. Thus, it is unreasonable to assume that any inclination towards aesthetics is shared by pollinators and humans. They probably evolved separately. However, going back to some point in evolutionary history, humans and bees shared the same ancestor. I cannot believe that pollinators are merely attracted to visually salient petals. I suspect that pollinators also sense some aspect of the aesthetics of flowers.