3 ms·

This has been observed by countless fiction writers all these "smart deep eyes", "large foreheads" etc. Heck, even in everyday interactions we all make split se

This has been observed by countless fiction writers all these "smart deep eyes", "large foreheads" etc. Heck, even in everyday interactions we all make split second judgements about intelligence based on appearance; and we often are right. These kind of observations go against the politics of identitarian academia, so you probably won't find much of confirmation there.

klyrs 3y ago
> These kind of observations go against the politics of identitarian academia, so you probably won't find much of confirmation there. You mean to say that you prefer the older identitarian politics wherein people who look different from you are less than human? Indeed, science has moved on from that, and prefer to deal with data and not unexamined biases with sources such as fiction writers.
- SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
  No, I do not mean anything different from what I said: there is a correlation between appearance and intelligence, not perfect correspondence. The _data_ in social sciences in _unreliable_, because it is often _heavily_ _politicized_, no one wants to end up being a pariah as the authors of "The Bell Curve" had become. Fiction authors across all cultures, ideologies and epochs, reliably underscore same facial features as the sign of intelligence; if this was entirely uncorrelated with the reality, this notion would not survive many thousands years.
- SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
  here: https://www.psypost.org/2014/03/people-can-predict-the-iq-of-men-but-not-women-by-looking-at-their-face-study-finds-24024 https://www.psypost.org/2014/03/people-can-predict-the-iq-of... "The researchers also found that the participants rated men with a high IQ as more intelligent based solely on their facial photograph. For women, however, the researchers found no statistically significant link between perceived intelligence and their actual IQ."
  - klyrs 3y ago
    Nice quote, but when you drill down a little further, they observe that the correlation didn't actually follow the facial features. > But these facial characteristics were only associated with perceived intelligence. The researchers found no link between these facial traits and actual IQ scores. > “This means that our raters accurately assessed intelligence from faces of men based on visual cues that simply are not explicable from shape variability in men’s faces,” the researchers wrote. Try again. Or better yet, recognize that this just-so argument is a lost cause, and abandon it. To rehash a top-level comment, I'd love to see your study replicated with these ten couples sprinkled in: https://www.boredpanda.com/couples-nacho-rojo/ https://www.boredpanda.com/couples-nacho-rojo/
    - SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
      If you drill even further, you'd read this: "We also showed that IQ has no statistically significant association in facial morphology in both men and women (at least as it was delimited by the landmark configuration used within this study). This means that our raters accurately assessed intelligence from faces of men based on visual cues that simply are not explicable from shape variability in men's faces. It is important to recall that our subjects were prompted to assume a neutral expression while their photo was taken and only photos of subjects with a neutral expression were included in the study. We can speculate about attributions of intelligence based on particular configurations of eyes or gaze, colour of eyes, hair and skin, or skin texture. These hypotheses should be tested in future studies." Which means that the authors literally meant "face shape" in a narrow literal sense (such as round on elongated) , and hypothesize that other facial features which they deem as unrelated to shape (although configuration of eyes IMO are clearly part of what usually is called facial features) are at play; they clearly are puzzled about the ability of respondents to reliably predict male intelligence from the pictures of their faces (even filtered to remove visual clues related not the faces per se, but facial expressions). Stop pushing your agenda and engaginng in creative reading, please.
    - kelipso 3y ago
      Those facial characteristics being "narrower face with a thinner chin and a larger prolonged nose". Lol. There are many many facial characteristics other than narrowness of the face and nose size.

klyrs 3y ago

> These kind of observations go against the politics of identitarian academia, so you probably won't find much of confirmation there. You mean to say that you prefer the older identitarian politics wherein people who look different from you are less than human? Indeed, science has moved on from that, and prefer to deal with data and not unexamined biases with sources such as fiction writers.

SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
No, I do not mean anything different from what I said: there is a correlation between appearance and intelligence, not perfect correspondence. The _data_ in social sciences in _unreliable_, because it is often _heavily_ _politicized_, no one wants to end up being a pariah as the authors of "The Bell Curve" had become. Fiction authors across all cultures, ideologies and epochs, reliably underscore same facial features as the sign of intelligence; if this was entirely uncorrelated with the reality, this notion would not survive many thousands years.
SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
here: https://www.psypost.org/2014/03/people-can-predict-the-iq-of-men-but-not-women-by-looking-at-their-face-study-finds-24024 https://www.psypost.org/2014/03/people-can-predict-the-iq-of... "The researchers also found that the participants rated men with a high IQ as more intelligent based solely on their facial photograph. For women, however, the researchers found no statistically significant link between perceived intelligence and their actual IQ."
- klyrs 3y ago
  Nice quote, but when you drill down a little further, they observe that the correlation didn't actually follow the facial features. > But these facial characteristics were only associated with perceived intelligence. The researchers found no link between these facial traits and actual IQ scores. > “This means that our raters accurately assessed intelligence from faces of men based on visual cues that simply are not explicable from shape variability in men’s faces,” the researchers wrote. Try again. Or better yet, recognize that this just-so argument is a lost cause, and abandon it. To rehash a top-level comment, I'd love to see your study replicated with these ten couples sprinkled in: https://www.boredpanda.com/couples-nacho-rojo/ https://www.boredpanda.com/couples-nacho-rojo/
  - SomeoneFromCA 3y ago
    If you drill even further, you'd read this: "We also showed that IQ has no statistically significant association in facial morphology in both men and women (at least as it was delimited by the landmark configuration used within this study). This means that our raters accurately assessed intelligence from faces of men based on visual cues that simply are not explicable from shape variability in men's faces. It is important to recall that our subjects were prompted to assume a neutral expression while their photo was taken and only photos of subjects with a neutral expression were included in the study. We can speculate about attributions of intelligence based on particular configurations of eyes or gaze, colour of eyes, hair and skin, or skin texture. These hypotheses should be tested in future studies." Which means that the authors literally meant "face shape" in a narrow literal sense (such as round on elongated) , and hypothesize that other facial features which they deem as unrelated to shape (although configuration of eyes IMO are clearly part of what usually is called facial features) are at play; they clearly are puzzled about the ability of respondents to reliably predict male intelligence from the pictures of their faces (even filtered to remove visual clues related not the faces per se, but facial expressions). Stop pushing your agenda and engaginng in creative reading, please.
  - kelipso 3y ago
    Those facial characteristics being "narrower face with a thinner chin and a larger prolonged nose". Lol. There are many many facial characteristics other than narrowness of the face and nose size.