On a related subject, I can usually tell if someone has been in the military by looking at them.
I know it’s a derogatory term. A also knew those two men could probably be found by googling ‘hillbilly’ and that, as an unrelated fact, they were an example of a ‘stupid’ look. I’m afraid my thought process didn’t go much further than that.
I have. I’ve known several people who run around with their mouths hanging open, but who are quite intelligent. The two most obvious examples are a family member of a college friend, who has his PhD and works on x-ray crystallography. The other one is a professor in the Neuroscience department at UPenn.
They are both a bit socially awkward, but I don’t know if that’s because people treat them differently because they’re both slack-jawed, or because being out of tune socially contributes to the way they hold their faces.
I can’t open my eyes wide enough to show my whole iris. Their normal “open” state is narrower. ( Makes contacts near impossible for me. ) My father had to have his eyes widened surgically after he hit 70 years.
My IQ is in the 170 range. (for what that matters…iq is useless, but I’m damned smart and a very deep thinker.)
Update:
I managed to find some information on a study that demonstrated that intelligence can be fairly accurately assessed (r = 0.53) by a person’s physical appearance. Cognitive Daily has a good summary:
http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/2009/12/how_many_slices_does_it_take_t.php
And here’s a little something for those who are still skeptical of physiognomy in general:
http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/35/12/1661
The authors found that observers could accurately judge several personality traits including extraversion, emotional stability, openness, self-esteem, and religiosity just by looking at the subjects’ photographs.
It’s been a while since I read the research, but I believe it is true that people tend to assign favorable attributes, such as intelligence, to more attractive people while tending to minimze the abilities and personality characteristics of less comely individuals.
Those are perceptions that often do not reflect reality.
My heart flutters when I look upon Carrie Prejean, but most of my illusions about her vanish when she begins to speak.
I went to a computer camp when I was about 13, and as all the kids were arriving with their families, I saw a guy who, from his appearance, I assumed was someone’s retarded older brother tagging along for the trip. The next day I find out he was one of the instructors, on summer break from MIT.
Did you try to Google Bill Gates? 
I’m more familiar with the “face = criminal” side of this debate. It’s an interesting thought that’s been around for years but the exceptions always turn out to be quite exceptional.
A better title for this thread would be “why are stupid people stupid-looking?” There may be no causal relationship between the way stupid people look and the way stupid people stupid, but if there is one, I can’t imagine that this would be a case of dense appearances causing denseness.
I think that the obvious answer is that certain facial appearances are correlated with certain mental traits, just as certain styles of dress are correlated with certain mental traits. Whether this is strictly predetermined or whether there is something about being dumb that makes faces look stupid, there is going to be some validity in predicting mental traits by facial appearances.
It seems clear, however, that expressions and behaviors affect facial appearance, in the broadest sense. Hair style, personal hygiene, and facial expression are all within a person’s control. If we were all shaved bald and told to hold the blankest expression we could, I think the predictive value of facial appearances would be reduced (but not eliminated).
No, they are not mountain men, they are Dresie and Casie from West Transvaal in South Africa. The original photo was part of a series done in rural South Africa by Roger Ballan. Link
surprised no one mentioned grooming. Can often tell by: monobrow/awkward looking moustache. Think this makes a big difference, as well as teeth and hair.
Basically just like the suggestion that lower intelligence people don’t look at themselves critically in a mirror, they also don’t groom themselves based on what they see / go to dentist to sort out crooked teeth.
And yea necro, and what 
This is a more important factor IMHO. Grooming, dental care, dress and mannerisms can all make someone look either more or less stupid or educated.
Plus I just don’t buy it that you can wear a look into your face over time. People’s faces are constantly in motion, regardless of their mood. I don’t believe you can develop your “smile” or “frown” muscles through repetition. A more critical factor is stuff like sun exposure, smoking, drinking, getting your nose broken (not a sign of intelligence), being tired (from studying all night), or stress.
Mannerisms play a key role as well. You can tell if someone appears to be studying something intently or at least thinking about it, rather than just sort of glazing over.
Like this half wit.
I never heard of Rex Reed before this thread and I never heard of Rick Perry before today but I think they must be in the same boat, The Ferry from Uranus.
In April this year, therewas a study that looked for a correlation between perceived intelligence from a photo, and how the person did on an IQ test. There was a small but statistically significant correlation for men, but no correlation seen for women. They then tried to look for what facial cues might have been looked at, and it seemed that a narrower face tended to be perceived as more intelligent, though they also found that these physical characteristics did not correlate with intelligence.
So basically, the answer is largely no, people cannot reliably assess intelligence based on physical characteristics, at least from a photograph. Obviously if you meet in person, you have mannerisms and such that you can look at. I don’t know of any studies done that way.
I also really hate science journalism, because most of the articles about this are trumpeting how you can accurately deduce intelligence from faces (at least for men). Which isn’t at all what the science showed. The science showed that there’s a correlation that’s statistically significantly better than chance. The correlation is still small. There are lots of people who look stupid who are smart, and vice-versa. The title of that Forbes articles is not just misleading, it’s wrong.
zombie or no
it’s called studar.
Statistics and chance are bullshit.
Over say, 100 million rolls of 3 die, I can tell you within 1% how many times three 7’s will be hit.
Goldang, I was almost stoopid enough to post to this zombie thread.
I embrace the “hillbilly” identity. Advanced degree and high IQ be damned. I moved up to New York and found me a nice Jewish girl, and we begat a couple of kids who have excelled in the schools of this rich county we live in (albeit the poor part of the rich county). Dunno if I have the face of an imbecile, but the wife seems to like it.