Monday, 9 August 2010

Charming, attractive and intelligent?

Following Paul Waugh's 'Nerd, Dweeb, Geek or Dork?' blogposted Venn diagram mapping the overlaps of intelligence, social ineptitude and obsession, I've been stymied by a slightly more meaningful challenge to the English vocabulary; how would you term these overlaps? Are there words?


10 comments:

lilith said...

Shagability?

Chris said...

Int + Attr = "Hot swot"
Wit/Ch + Attr = "Charmer"
Int + Wit/Ch = "Character"
Nexus of all three = "smug b*st*rd"

Even these fumbling definitions took a little while. It's quite depressing how much easier it is easier to accentuate the negative with character.

Woodsy42 said...

Wit & charm + attractiveness would provide charisma.
Intelligence + wit & charm should make someone considerate, but could allow them to be manipulative.
Intelligence + Attractiveness with no charm would probably be arrogant.
Sadly I cannot place myself on the diagram, despite my positive virtues there is no area for irritable and short tempered.

Nick Drew said...

Int ∩ W&C = sparkling

W&C ∩ Attr = perky

Attr ∩ Int = gorgeous

Attr ∩ Int ∩ W&C = Mrs D

(I know which side my bread is buttered ...)

Span Ows said...

What Lilith and Chris said! Except maybe "lucky bastard" for the combination of all 3.

Tufty said...

Are there words? No. The diagram should have no overlapping areas. Such people don't exist. Except me perhaps...

Scrobs... said...

Fiona Bruce, in the Library, with the bone-handled fish knife!

Anonymous said...

clockwise from 12; Judgment, charisma, chemistry, middle - genius.

Anonymous said...

For me, none of your three circles are mutually exclusive, and all your "?" categories suggest "cold and manipulative." Predators are predators.

Unless, of course, you were to define 'wit and' charm as somehow rooted in empathy for fellow humans; or 'attractiveness' as something other than chemical. But I'd like to know what you mean, in either case...

English Pensioner said...

I always believed that, for females, "Beauty" plus "Brains" was constant, although a friend insists that they have to be multiplied to produce a constant.
I've been tying to verify this theory lately by watching various women being interviewed or talking on TV (at the Hague trial for instance). Is the fact that two well known Labour females don't comply with the rues (low score on both counts) the exception which proves the rule?