5 ms·

Here’s a hot take on that front: “ The well-known association between height and earnings is often thought to reflect factors such as self esteem, social domina

Here’s a hot take on that front: “ The well-known association between height and earnings is often thought to reflect factors such as self esteem, social dominance, and discrimination. We offer a simpler explanation: height is positively associated with cognitive ability, which is rewarded in the labor market.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2709415/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2709415/

centimeter 6y ago
I think it's definitely true that attractiveness indicators correlate with characteristics like intelligence. If you think about it, this shouldn't actually be that surprising; it would be silly if the factors that went into sexual selection had no correlation with survival-boosting traits.
- wutbrodo 6y ago
  Hm, perhaps I'm reasoning about this correctly, but wouldn't you think the opposite? Being attractive provides evolutionary slack that requires less optimization on other characteristics (like intelligence), and vice versa.
  - dsr_ 6y ago
    Being judged attractive is a cultural thing that varies with time and place. Being judged intelligent is also a cultural thing that varies with time and place. Unless your culture is static for 20+ generations, don't expect much influence of it on evolution.
    - centimeter 6y ago
      There are attractiveness signifiers that are not culturally mediated (e.g. clear healthy skin is valued everywhere, extreme obesity or thinness is very rarely valued, being very short is very rarely valued, etc.) Intelligence also seems to have plenty of culture-independent aspects.
    - wutbrodo 6y ago
      > Being judged attractive is a cultural thing that varies with time and place. This is partially true, but there are many significant markers of attractiveness that are not particularly context-dependent. > Being judged intelligent is also a cultural thing that varies with time and place. This I disagree with much more strongly. "Being judged intelligent" isn't explicitly isn't the only thing that feeds into the evolutionary drive, and the second-order consequences are much more significant: being quick-witted/funny, increasing likelihood of success/resources, etc. The concept of general intelligence is not nearly as narrowly-defined as you're implying. To take an example, subsistence farming isn't exactly _easy_. General intelligence is an important factor in success at subsistence farming just as it is in success at post-industrial white-collar work.
  - centimeter 6y ago
    No, I don't think this reasoning holds. What is intuitively considered attractive is itself an evolved trait, so as a meta-evolutionary strategy it almost certainly selects for otherwise desirable traits.
    - wutbrodo 6y ago
      In this thread, "attractive" is being used as shorthand for "physically attractive": it was first introduced in response to a comment talking about height. Also, while intelligence is per se attractive to some degree, it's also mediated through downstream effects like a higher likelihood of financial/resource success.
- ZephyrBlu 6y ago
  What's the correlation coefficient though? Attractiveness may only be weakly correlated with intelligence, in which case it isn't very meaningful.
dragonwriter 6y ago
That's almost certainly at least part of the explanation, if for no other reason than that height and cognitive development are both adversely impacted by some of the same environmental conditions from conception through childhood.
scarmig 6y ago
The issue with that theory is that height is significantly more correlated with labor market outcomes for men than for women. Naive models of what you're suggesting (where e.g. negative gestational or early environmental influences are correlated with disrupted height growth and cognitive abilities) would result in men and women both showing the correlation. A secondary point is that a correlation between height and cognitive ability existing in a world where children suffer poverty/malnutrition/exposure to lead does not imply that a correlation between height and cognitive ability exists in a world without that suffering, so studies using data from the 50s and 70s might have limited relevance for the present day.
- atleta 6y ago
  > The issue with that theory is that height is significantly more correlated with labor market outcomes for men than for women. How about cognitive abilities? You'd need to state that there is no (or less) difference in those between the two genders in order for this to be a valid counter argument. > correlation between height and cognitive ability existing in a world where children suffer poverty/malnutrition/exposure to lead does not imply The paper uses UK and US data.
bjourne 6y ago
Now let's make the same argument but with race or gender. :/

centimeter 6y ago

I think it's definitely true that attractiveness indicators correlate with characteristics like intelligence. If you think about it, this shouldn't actually be that surprising; it would be silly if the factors that went into sexual selection had no correlation with survival-boosting traits.

wutbrodo 6y ago
Hm, perhaps I'm reasoning about this correctly, but wouldn't you think the opposite? Being attractive provides evolutionary slack that requires less optimization on other characteristics (like intelligence), and vice versa.
- dsr_ 6y ago
  Being judged attractive is a cultural thing that varies with time and place. Being judged intelligent is also a cultural thing that varies with time and place. Unless your culture is static for 20+ generations, don't expect much influence of it on evolution.
  - centimeter 6y ago
    There are attractiveness signifiers that are not culturally mediated (e.g. clear healthy skin is valued everywhere, extreme obesity or thinness is very rarely valued, being very short is very rarely valued, etc.) Intelligence also seems to have plenty of culture-independent aspects.
  - wutbrodo 6y ago
    > Being judged attractive is a cultural thing that varies with time and place. This is partially true, but there are many significant markers of attractiveness that are not particularly context-dependent. > Being judged intelligent is also a cultural thing that varies with time and place. This I disagree with much more strongly. "Being judged intelligent" isn't explicitly isn't the only thing that feeds into the evolutionary drive, and the second-order consequences are much more significant: being quick-witted/funny, increasing likelihood of success/resources, etc. The concept of general intelligence is not nearly as narrowly-defined as you're implying. To take an example, subsistence farming isn't exactly _easy_. General intelligence is an important factor in success at subsistence farming just as it is in success at post-industrial white-collar work.
- centimeter 6y ago
  No, I don't think this reasoning holds. What is intuitively considered attractive is itself an evolved trait, so as a meta-evolutionary strategy it almost certainly selects for otherwise desirable traits.
  - wutbrodo 6y ago
    In this thread, "attractive" is being used as shorthand for "physically attractive": it was first introduced in response to a comment talking about height. Also, while intelligence is per se attractive to some degree, it's also mediated through downstream effects like a higher likelihood of financial/resource success.
ZephyrBlu 6y ago
What's the correlation coefficient though? Attractiveness may only be weakly correlated with intelligence, in which case it isn't very meaningful.

dragonwriter 6y ago

That's almost certainly at least part of the explanation, if for no other reason than that height and cognitive development are both adversely impacted by some of the same environmental conditions from conception through childhood.

scarmig 6y ago

The issue with that theory is that height is significantly more correlated with labor market outcomes for men than for women. Naive models of what you're suggesting (where e.g. negative gestational or early environmental influences are correlated with disrupted height growth and cognitive abilities) would result in men and women both showing the correlation. A secondary point is that a correlation between height and cognitive ability existing in a world where children suffer poverty/malnutrition/exposure to lead does not imply that a correlation between height and cognitive ability exists in a world without that suffering, so studies using data from the 50s and 70s might have limited relevance for the present day.

atleta 6y ago
> The issue with that theory is that height is significantly more correlated with labor market outcomes for men than for women. How about cognitive abilities? You'd need to state that there is no (or less) difference in those between the two genders in order for this to be a valid counter argument. > correlation between height and cognitive ability existing in a world where children suffer poverty/malnutrition/exposure to lead does not imply The paper uses UK and US data.

bjourne 6y ago

Now let's make the same argument but with race or gender. :/