Smart or Attractive? Biology's Debate on Selection

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the biological and psychological implications of mate selection, specifically weighing intelligence against physical attractiveness. Participants express varied preferences, with many favoring intelligence over beauty, citing the importance of companionship and shared values. The conversation highlights the complexity of human attraction, suggesting that personality traits like kindness and humor often outweigh superficial qualities. Ultimately, the discussion reveals a consensus that while physical appearance is significant, intelligence and emotional connection are paramount in long-term relationships.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of evolutionary psychology principles
  • Familiarity with mate selection theories
  • Knowledge of social dynamics in relationships
  • Awareness of the role of personality traits in attraction
NEXT STEPS
  • Research evolutionary psychology and mate selection theories
  • Explore the impact of personality traits on relationship satisfaction
  • Study the relationship between physical attractiveness and perceived intelligence
  • Investigate social dynamics in romantic relationships
USEFUL FOR

Psychologists, relationship counselors, sociologists, and anyone interested in understanding the complexities of human attraction and mate selection.

If made to choose, what would be your choice?

  • your mate would be intelligent but homely

    Votes: 63 65.6%

  • your mate would be beautiful but dumb

    Votes: 33 34.4%
  • Total voters
    96
Evo
Staff Emeritus
Messages
24,032
Reaction score
3,276
We've been having a discussion over in biology about selection.

Be honest, if you had only two choices, your mate could either be very intelligent, but homely, or beautiful and dumb, which would you choose?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
I voted; and feel lucky I didn't have to choose in real life.
 
EnumaElish said:
I voted; and feel lucky I didn't have to choose in real life.

Because you couldn't choose homely and dumb?

Or because you couldn't choose smart and beautiful?

Or because, in real life, the answer would be none of the above because the chances are almost nil of finding a mate that will have anything to do with you.

Yes, this poll really needed more options. I really wanted to choose homely, dumb, and drunk.
 
Last edited:
My choice depends on what your definition of "mate" is. If it's not just sex, then I'll definitely vote for the intelligent one. I could never live with an idiot.
 
I vote both.
 
I dunno.. intelligence and beauty are nice, but love, compassion, and kindness are more important to me than both. I don't really care what mix of intelligence and beauty she has, as long as she has a good heart.

- Warren
 
If those are my only choices (and some days it sure does look that way :rolleyes:), I'm afraid my genetic contribution to future generations is done for.
 
radou said:
My choice depends on what your definition of "mate" is. If it's not just sex, then I'll definitely vote for the intelligent one. I could never live with an idiot.
It's nothing to think too deeply about. I seem to have remembered discussions where a lot of people placed looks over intelligence and I was curious to see if they had this difficult of a choice, if it would sway them in a particular direction.

I mean eventually we all get old and not that good looking.

The easy choice obviously would to have looks and intelligence.
 
Last edited:
which one says no most often?
 
  • #10
How dumb? and How homely? :biggrin:
 
  • #11
Astronuc said:
How dumb? and How homely? :biggrin:
Let's say 5 on a scale of ten for both, so average.

I just realized I'm somewhat shallow. :redface: I want at least a 6 on my scale of attractivess with DD being a 10.
 
  • #12
I voted for intelligent but homely. If my wife finds out that I voted at all, it will be the end of me. After all, she's no dummy. I doubt I could even go 5 rounds with someone stupid. Looks wouldn't help in that case. So put a bag over her head. And put another one over your own head too if it'll help.
 
  • #13
Astronuc said:
How dumb? and How homely? :biggrin:

Precisely!

I'm not sure I could stand being around either a box of rocks in terms of mentality, or someone so hideous I felt icky if they touched me. But, if it's more like someone who's very intelligent and just mediocre in looks vs someone drop-dead gorgeous and just mediocre in intelligence, I'd choose intelligence over looks. If we're talking about the complete extremes of Einstein vs Rainman, I think I'd have to go with looks (as long as he doesn't try talking while the actual mating was happening, that might be more doable).
 
  • #14
Evo said:
Let's say 5 on a scale of ten for both, so average.

I just realized I'm somewhat shallow. :redface: I want at least a 6 on my scale of attractivess with DD being a 10.

Okay, if we're talking average for the "lesser" trait, I'm going for intelligent and average looking.
 
  • #15
Moonbear said:
Precisely!

I'm not sure I could stand being around either a box of rocks in terms of mentality, or someone so hideous I felt icky if they touched me. But, if it's more like someone who's very intelligent and just mediocre in looks vs someone drop-dead gorgeous and just mediocre in intelligence, I'd choose intelligence over looks. If we're talking about the complete extremes of Einstein vs Rainman, I think I'd have to go with looks (as long as he doesn't try talking while the actual mating was happening, that might be more doable).
See post 11, sorry, I should have set parameters.

We will assume that both will be equally nice.
 
  • #16
Unless she's rich, in which case I would prefer stupid.
 
  • #17
Intelligence == beauty
 
  • #18
I don't care about looks. I couldn't live without an active, mutually benefiting exchange of ideas, thoughts, comments etc.
 
  • #19
From the Riders in the Sky (a wonderful musical group!) Stronger whiskey and weaker women is what I say!

I have dated some unattractive women that were a joy to talk to and hang out with, and some stunners that were brain-dead, and some that were otherwise interesting, but wanted "family" so strongly that it seemed like I was being evaluated as a wage-earner, not a mate. My steady date for a couple of years in HS was a Miss Maine runner-up. She was pretty, leggy, shapely, and musically talented, but it took me a couple of years before I realized that her agenda didn't fit with my more open-ended outlook. I ended up with a mate that had an upbringing more closely fitted to mine, and we have pulled together as a team. Sorry for the horse/oxen analogy, but we work very well together.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
I'd also take intelligence and average looks over beauty and average intelligence. Beauty fades with time anyway, and I've always found that women with mediocre, "cute" looks grow on me rapidly if I'm attracted to their personalities. After a few weeks of interaction I think they're positively gorgeous.

- Warren
 
  • #21
Dumb, that way I am able to date them.
 
  • #22
Astronuc said:
How homely? :biggrin:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
Contrapositive said:
Dumb, that way I am able to date them.

:smile: I guess that's another way to look at it.
 
  • #24
Assuming this is only for mating purposes (which is all that is specified in the OP), I chose looks. (noone tell my wife)
 
  • #25
I also feel I should add this

http://www.scribd.com/doc/34/Attractiveness-Scale
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #26
I'm sorry to say it, but I'd take beauty and average intelligence. I'm lucky, though, since my girlfriend is both beautiful and intelligent (albeit in completely different areas to me!)
 
  • #27
NeoDevin said:
Assuming this is only for mating purposes (which is all that is specified in the OP), I chose looks. (noone tell my wife)

I guess it depends on whether it works better for you to have your partner gagged or yourself blindfolded. :rolleyes: I might also be able to put up with a dumb partner if I went profoundly deaf.
 
  • #28
Evo said:
Let's say 5 on a scale of ten for both, so average.
I'd go with intelligence, and I assume by that there is some comparable level of sincerity, compassion and kindness along the lines of what chroot mentioned.

I just realized I'm somewhat shallow. :redface:
Bull - you are not!

I want at least a 6 on my scale of attractivess with DD being a 10.
I'm going to by you a new set of glasses. :biggrin:
 
  • #29
If I had to choose I'd probably choose neither.
 
  • #30
Moonbear said:
I guess it depends on whether it works better for you to have your partner gagged or yourself blindfolded. :rolleyes: I might also be able to put up with a dumb partner if I went profoundly deaf.
They say the ideal marriage is between a blind woman and a deaf man.
 

Similar threads

Synthetic Biology, What Might It Do?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Do biologists agree on a definition of "species"?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Virus mutation by artificially guided selection
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Examination project of EEG, Opinions and feedback
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Is There a Point to Theoretical Science in Biology?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
Is epigenetics an additional mechanism for natural selection?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Book Review: The Gene's-Eye View of Evolution
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Epothilone B study connected to 'Hard Problem of Consciousness' Model
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Biology research - do ppl have to argue for how relevant+interesting it is?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Question about evolution of animal species
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
14K