Perhaps the issue is what we find "attractive". Intelligence is attractive, and changes our perception of the physical person. Intelligence also correlates with health and grooming, as well as confidence and general presentation. Intelligence often changes your facial expressions and gestures, and many other little things about how you carry yourself. It doesn't necessarily mean the person we find more attractive is physically different. But they are still more "attractive".

There may be a genetic correlation, but I think it is more that intelligence "causes" you to be more attractive for the reasons I mentioned.

I guess your reasons add to the correlation. But that was actually not my point. I was completely ignoring the fact of how different intelligence results in different behaviour which might effect attractiveness, and only had in mind mostly the genetic-developmental component of attractiveness.

Way to hijack my own thread lol.

But wait, this is actually a pretty spot-on illustration to the thread. My whole brain activity pretty much consists of stuff like that

There is a positive correlation between attractiveness and intelligence between in so far as it shows that you can take care of yourself, etc. but I think there is a negative correlation once you restrict the population to 8's+.


Intelligence is only an ambiguous term because people have used it to describe any non-corporeal trait. Having a high EQ is a valuable skill and it is correlated with intelligence, but it wholly different from it.

I'm having difficulties connecting with both of you.

Vantek, you might be smart and all, but you're still going to be shown up at parties by the less smart guy packing the sick burns.

Vantek and garcia not connecting ITT

I like turtles.

I know what Vantek's talking about, I just enjoy landing sick burns and lolcats and memes more.

I have a huge crush on garcia btw and would like to 'connect' with him very much.

That's what she said?

The only positive correlation I see is post count in twoplustwo intelligence threads and ego.

I've only posted in this thread once, so that doesn't do a whole lot for your theory.

Take a number, that train's a mile long

mmhmm, and I've posted quite a bit so there are clearly some bugs.

the biggest fail not yet mentioned in this thread is that even if you thought there was a relationship between straight IQ and your ability to connect with someone, 90% of people will be wildly off the mark when asked to predict the IQ of their friends and acquaintances. you think your friends are smart because it makes you feel good about yourself, thus confirming your theory.

or if you're vantek, you think everybody must be dumber than you, explaining why you have no friends.

i work in a field where we administer IQ tests pretty regularly btw

What's the correlation between eating fruit and intelligence?

I teach 9th grade science. Everybody I talk to know who isn't a 9th grader seems like a genius.

ur gay

I don't go to parties.

Don't be scared! You too can learn how to be a hit at parties.

False, and certainly false until 50 years or so ago. Since your first fragment was wrong, I didn't delve deeper in to half-ass (malformed if that is too colloquial for you) diatribe.

Read this:






Then this:




To see why you are just so far off in your concept of evolutionary biology

Fortunately, both Frans De Waal and Jared Diamond are very good at connecting to people significantly less intelligent than themselves. You should be able to keep up.

The youthful ramblings of Hitler.

No, it is false SINCE 50 years or so ago, but that's not nearly enough to turn around millennia of evolution.

What is in your opinion roughly the optimum range that selection has been working towards up until 50 years or so ago? Average modern intellect? IQ 90-110?

EDIT: right off the bat I found two articles which contradict on this topic.

These guys kind of make the same argument as I did, though not exactly:
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...=rep1&type=pdf

These guys refute the previous one:
http://irserver.ucd.ie/dspace/bitstr...orkpap_056.pdf

But they said this:
"If a positive correlation between beauty and intelligence really is a logical implication of assumptions (1) to (4) then one would expect it to be found in all studies which is clearly not the case."
which really ticks me off.

From the discussion it turns out that the correlation is at best barely detectable. The "logical" argument seems serious enough to be presented in peer reviewed scientific articles, but it has also serious counterarguments.

I have difficulty connecting with people who have difficulty connecting with others based on their very likely flawed and unequivocally skewed assessment of the others' intelligence or physical appearance. Judgmental much? After reading the two excellent books above, please watch the Woody Allen film 'Whatever Works'.