[ExI] IQ and beauty

[William Flynn Wallace]

On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com> wrote:

> Also this entire conversation is increasingly moot as we become better at
> genetic manipulation and enhancement.  Tweak the genetic makeup of the kids
> for as much beauty and brains as well as health as you could wish.
>
> On Sat, Sep 26, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> While I haven't had that problem myself many of the more beautiful women
>> I have known, particularly if they had brains to go with the beauty, bewail
>> that a lot of men simply assume they are not in their league or fail to
>> just act naturally and open.   Worse, many more powerful men look at them
>> as a trophy of their success.  Many a beautiful woman with high
>> intelligence has to work much much harder to see the products of her
>> intelligence be the foremost criteria in how others evaluate and treat her.
>>
>>
>> If you follow the notion, which is btw highly mistaken, that beautiful
>> women end up with more wealthy and powerful men, then you still don't get
>> to those men being more intelligent.
>> ​Where is the data supporting that statement?  There are many studies
>> showing that women tend to marry up in social rank and thus in IQ.
>> Sometimes money doesn't matter - professors are middle rank economically
>> but high socially.​
>> There is a considerably strong argument that regardless of one's gender
>> more than a certain level of intelligence is not conducive to more wealth
>> and success in the world.    There are certainly a lot of wealthy men in
>> the world that aren't all that terribly intelligent.
>> ​  Aside from the occasional low IQ men who have just inherited money, my
>> guess is that the self-made men are at least above average - say 110 to
>> 115​ - certainly not high IQ.
>>
>>
>> Lastly it doesn't follow at all even with the half-baked assumptions
>> taken for granted that the children of the union will be beautiful.   It is
>> almost a truism that successful rich men are not known for their common
>> handsomeness.  So only half the genes would sort for beauty at most.
>> ​What some studies find is that symmetry is necessary for good looks,
>> though not sufficient.  I'd guess that rich men will reject women who lack
>> symmetry​ - not necessarily beautiful, but at least handsome.  And if a
>> woman truly is beautiful, I'd doubt that she would marry a man who wasn't
>> symmetrical at least.  She has so many options.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 4:54 PM, William Flynn Wallace <
>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Who has more social mobility than pretty/beautiful women?  So it makes
>>> sense that the men that get them are more wealthy, powerful, hence more
>>> intelligent.
>>>
>>> And so their children tend, at least. towards being better looking and
>>> more intelligent.
>>>
>>> bill w
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> extropy-chat mailing list
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20150928/0e8f05bc/attachment.html>