- #1
TheStatutoryApe
- 296
- 4
I have thought about this a few times but I have never really gotten other persons opinions.
It seems that it is generally looked down upon now a days to choose a partner with much regard for their physical apearance. It would seem, by some people's standards that physical apearance should only be an after thought. I've heard some people go so far as to say that it's disgusting to place any value on a persons physical apearance what so ever, though I know that this is really a rather small minority.
The idea generally seems to be that it is not fair to apraise people with much regard for looks. I put some thought into this and decided that it doesn't seem any less fair than apraising a person based on any other criterion. At one point I actually debated with myself whether or not it was really fair of me to find a female unattractive based on a lack of intelligence. It is supposedly unfair of me to be less attracted to someone based on their looks because a person hasn't much control over the natural aesthetic quality of their features. Really though, does a person have much control over their IQ?
Wouldn't it be just as bad for me to think a person is unattractive because they are "ugly as sin" as it is for me to think that someone is unattractive because they are "as dumb as a door nail"?
Wouldn't considering someone to be unattractive due to lack of intelligence be just another form of egotistical superiority? And how is it any different or any better than an egotistical superiority based on physical apearance?
You could say that the physical apearance is superficial and intelligence isn't. A person though can be very physically attractive and have many good qualities such as a sense of humour, honesty and loyalty but still be relatively unintelligent. Conversely a person can be very intelligent and be lacking in honesty, loyalty, and many other admirable traits. So is intelligence really any deeper a quality than physical beauty?
It seems that it is generally looked down upon now a days to choose a partner with much regard for their physical apearance. It would seem, by some people's standards that physical apearance should only be an after thought. I've heard some people go so far as to say that it's disgusting to place any value on a persons physical apearance what so ever, though I know that this is really a rather small minority.
The idea generally seems to be that it is not fair to apraise people with much regard for looks. I put some thought into this and decided that it doesn't seem any less fair than apraising a person based on any other criterion. At one point I actually debated with myself whether or not it was really fair of me to find a female unattractive based on a lack of intelligence. It is supposedly unfair of me to be less attracted to someone based on their looks because a person hasn't much control over the natural aesthetic quality of their features. Really though, does a person have much control over their IQ?
Wouldn't it be just as bad for me to think a person is unattractive because they are "ugly as sin" as it is for me to think that someone is unattractive because they are "as dumb as a door nail"?
Wouldn't considering someone to be unattractive due to lack of intelligence be just another form of egotistical superiority? And how is it any different or any better than an egotistical superiority based on physical apearance?
You could say that the physical apearance is superficial and intelligence isn't. A person though can be very physically attractive and have many good qualities such as a sense of humour, honesty and loyalty but still be relatively unintelligent. Conversely a person can be very intelligent and be lacking in honesty, loyalty, and many other admirable traits. So is intelligence really any deeper a quality than physical beauty?