Register to reply

Beauty vs. Brains

by TheStatutoryApe
Tags: beauty, brains
Share this thread:
TheStatutoryApe
#1
Jul18-05, 12:36 AM
TheStatutoryApe's Avatar
P: 1,550
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 differant 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?
Phys.Org News Partner Science news on Phys.org
Wildfires and other burns play bigger role in climate change, professor finds
SR Labs research to expose BadUSB next week in Vegas
New study advances 'DNA revolution,' tells butterflies' evolutionary history
Evo
#2
Jul18-05, 12:45 AM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 26,486
Well, for me humor is the most important thing. He needs to make me laugh. If he can do that, he's already half way there.

Intelligence is next, he must be smart.

and funny

And clever.

and funny

Wise.

and funny

Frugal.

and funny

Then looks.
Pengwuino
#3
Jul18-05, 01:05 AM
PF Gold
Pengwuino's Avatar
P: 7,120
I say your attracted to whatever your attracted to :) Some guys are attracted to a chicks good looken legs. As Jerry seinfeld says of course, "why would i want legs... i have legs"

TheStatutoryApe
#4
Jul18-05, 01:06 AM
TheStatutoryApe's Avatar
P: 1,550
Beauty vs. Brains

Quote Quote by Evo
Well, for me humor is the most important thing. He needs to make me laugh. If he can do that, he's already half way there.

Intelligence is next, he must be smart.

and funny

And clever.

and funny

Wise.

and funny

Frugal.

and funny

Then looks.
Lol.. yes I already know your preferance Evo. I think I even skimmed that thread about you needing a man that was up a while back.

What I want to know is if people think there is really a value differance between beauty and brains. Or maybe that's not really the best way to put it since everyone will value these qualities differantly. hmmmm...
Is it, or should it be, any more acceptable to value intelligence over beauty than it is to value beauty over intelligence?
----edit----
And if so why?
honestrosewater
#5
Jul18-05, 01:08 AM
PF Gold
honestrosewater's Avatar
P: 2,330
You choose a partner because you value their qualities, right? So the crux of your argument is if someone doesn't have control over x, then you shouldn't value x?
Do you think people have control over those other qualities (sense of humor, honesty, etc.)?
Pengwuino
#6
Jul18-05, 01:08 AM
PF Gold
Pengwuino's Avatar
P: 7,120
Should anything really be "acceptable" or "unacceptable"? Who really has the right to say what is acceptable to like in someone? Thats like saying its absolutely unacceptable to like a car for anything other then its gas mileage. You like who you like... they shouldnt have to run through a societal filter.
Pengwuino
#7
Jul18-05, 01:11 AM
PF Gold
Pengwuino's Avatar
P: 7,120
Quote Quote by honestrosewater
You choose a partner because you value their qualities, right? So the crux of your argument is if someone doesn't have control over x, then you shouldn't value x?
Do you think people have control over those other qualities (sense of humor, honesty, etc.)?
I think you should be able to. Everything should have a value and some people just arent meant for you... they just arent yoru type. I mean there are people who actually value someone who is dead serious aabout everything or people who lie a lot or is a "bad girl" or whatever. Shoudl we be forced into considering such people because they just dont possess quality x?
TheStatutoryApe
#8
Jul18-05, 01:18 AM
TheStatutoryApe's Avatar
P: 1,550
Quote Quote by honestrosewater
You choose a partner because you value their qualities, right? So the crux of your argument is if someone doesn't have control over x, then you shouldn't value x?
Do you think people have control over those other qualities (sense of humor, honesty, etc.)?
I'm not actually arguing that position really but demonstrating what seems to be the logic of that argument. Personally I think it is quite alright to value what ever quailties you like most over other qualities.
The crux here is my trying to figure out why it is that I can say I am not attracted to a girl because she lacks intelligence and this seems acceptable to society yet if I state that I am not attracted to a girl because she isn't pretty enough it isn't acceptable. I'm asking about the social phenomenon and not necessarily personal preferance.
---edit---
And the other qualities, I'm not really sure. Various determining circumstances are involved there. The same exists in regards to physical beauty as well and there are a variety of opinions on what determines beauty and what determines intelligence. I don't really wish to argue these things I simply picked the two traits because there is a particular polarity there in regards to this issue.
honestrosewater
#9
Jul18-05, 01:21 AM
PF Gold
honestrosewater's Avatar
P: 2,330
Edit: Didn't see your last post.

Right, qualities don't come with values; People need to assign values to them. That's what I'm asking: How are you assigning values to qualities? Based on whether having those qualities is within a person's control? Based on your instincts, religion, culture, logic, chance?
honestrosewater
#10
Jul18-05, 01:25 AM
PF Gold
honestrosewater's Avatar
P: 2,330
Quote Quote by TheStatutoryApe
I'm not actually arguing that position really but demonstrating what seems to be the logic of that argument. Personally I think it is quite alright to value what ever quailties you like most over other qualities.
The crux here is my trying to figure out why it is that I can say I am not attracted to a girl because she lacks intelligence and this seems acceptable to society yet if I state that I am not attracted to a girl because she isn't pretty enough it isn't acceptable. I'm asking about the social phenomenon and not necessarily personal preferance.
Maybe because "society" benefits more from smart people having babies than from beautiful people having babies.?

I just suggested that because I can't think of a logical or moral reason yet.
Lisa!
#11
Jul18-05, 01:30 AM
PF Gold
Lisa!'s Avatar
P: 973
Well,I think when we like someone alot we can't see his weaknesses and we usually like people who are attractive.S/he may say sth damn stupid, but we can't believe he's really stupid and think he says that because he's humorist! But for sure after we get used to someone's appearance whether s/he is beautiful or not, we get to know the person better and for sure we value the intelligence more.
And ugly people usually look stupid because they try so unsuccessfuly to be seen and then maybe to be loved.
Personaly I think you can know people by their appaearance most of time.Even I think people with the same appearance usually havethe same personality.

Anyway I really agree with Evo about sense of humour.It's most important thing for me as well, but I think you can't be humourist if you're not intelligent enough.
TheStatutoryApe
#12
Jul18-05, 01:32 AM
TheStatutoryApe's Avatar
P: 1,550
Quote Quote by honestrosewater
Maybe because "society" benefits more from smart people having babies than from beautiful people having babies.?

I just suggested that because I can't think of a 'logical' reason yet.
This is a possibility. The problem is though that apearantly, statistically, people who are more intelligent and educated tend to procreate far less than less intelligent people. This was a kink I was trying to figure out concerning the concept of evolution in regards to modern social society. If the trait is beneficial according to evolution it should be favored and become dominant and pervasive among the species. That doesn't seem to have happened with regard to intelligence.

I have to go but I will be back to pick this up tomorrow.
honestrosewater
#13
Jul18-05, 01:38 AM
PF Gold
honestrosewater's Avatar
P: 2,330
Quote Quote by TheStatutoryApe
This is a possibility. The problem is though that apearantly, statistically, people who are more intelligent and educated tend to procreate far less than less intelligent people. This was a kink I was trying to figure out concerning the concept of evolution in regards to modern social society. If the trait is beneficial according to evolution it should be favored and become dominant and pervasive among the species. That doesn't seem to have happened with regard to intelligence.
Heh, a trait is beneficial if it helps you procreate.
honestrosewater
#14
Jul18-05, 02:01 AM
PF Gold
honestrosewater's Avatar
P: 2,330
I swear I had another point, but I'll have to wait until tomorrow too.
Jelfish
#15
Jul18-05, 02:16 AM
P: 130
I tend to believe that people find other people attractive because of an instinctive desire to have babies with the best genes possible. Way back when intelligence and personality were less important traits, people would judge mostly on physical attractiveness. Many of the criteria for physical attractiveness are linked to genetic superiority. However, as time have changed, the definition of 'best genes' has changed as well. Now that most people seek monogamous relationships, people also seek traits that suggest a faithful and compatible lifetime mate. Also, since we don't hunt for food anymore, intelligence and good financial situation also become desirable traits.

So I think it comes down to the idea that now, since there are so many different facets that make that person the 'right one,' choosing based solely on looks makes a person seem not serious about looking for a real relationship.

That said, I personally think that so long as you don't choose solely on looks, it's perfectly ok to include physical appearance in the criteria. Sure, 'looks will fade,' but a good physical appearance can imply a lot of things, like personal hygiene and general health.
Bladibla
#16
Jul18-05, 03:15 AM
P: 366
Quote Quote by Evo
Well, for me humor is the most important thing. He needs to make me laugh. If he can do that, he's already half way there.

Intelligence is next, he must be smart.

and funny

And clever.

and funny

Wise.

and funny

Frugal.

and funny

Then looks.
So, what if it was a intelligent, clever, funny, wise, frugal, funny pig?
zoobyshoe
#17
Jul18-05, 04:12 AM
zoobyshoe's Avatar
P: 5,625
Quote Quote by TheStatutoryApe
The crux here is my trying to figure out why it is that I can say I am not attracted to a girl because she lacks intelligence and this seems acceptable to society...
Probably because the people who made it unacceptable to overtly seek someone out based on looks often give "intelligence" as the fine quality being overlooked in the ones who aren't sought out for appearance. Those people cannot, then, criticize you for being shallow if you cite "lack of intelligence" as the reason for disinterest.
lwymarie
#18
Jul18-05, 11:02 AM
P: 88
I need an intelligent partner to compensate my stupidity...


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Friend of mine is adamant that she is ugly General Discussion 2
On beauty General Discussion 14
Beauty General Discussion 4
Males predispositioned to find certain females Biology 17
Beauty in a T.O.E.? General Discussion 4