Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="phindar" data-source="post: 3402562" data-attributes="member: 37198">Again, I agree with you, but that's my argument for CHA not relating to beauty.&nbsp; I think that in practice we end up pretty close on this issue, but we follow a different line of reasoning to get there.&nbsp; Obviously, we're never going to agree 100% because in this instance we're like the Odd Couple, where I am Oscar and you are whoever Jack Lemmon's character was.To me, your above example is of a physically unattractive person who uses their personal magnetism to attract people.&nbsp; It doesn't make them pretty, but it does let them overcome their physical repulsiveness.This topic spun off from a discussion about a illustration of a hot chick with an 8 CHA, which some posters objected to, and some defended.&nbsp; It seems like the above example would be a picture of a acne-scarred, snaggletoothed swamp thing, but who if you met them would be able to charm you farily quickly.And,How is this not contradictory?&nbsp; Are you saying that physically unattractive people with high CHAs can attract people physically?&nbsp; (Are characters simultaneously attractive and unattractive, or am I thinking of a certain cat?)Because it seems to me you are saying that Jimmy Durante's high CHA allows him to attract people despite the fact he looks like a subspecies of the common potato.&nbsp; CHA doesn't make him beautiful, it makes people be able to see past appearance.&nbsp; This to me is a much better reading of CHA than &quot;CHA determines physical attractiveness&quot;, it gets right to the heart of the matter of CHA as a mental stat completely separate from one's superficial appearance.&nbsp; Beauty is only skin deep.&nbsp; Who is more physically attractive, Jimmy Durante or Paris Hilton?&nbsp; Who has a higher CHA?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="phindar, post: 3402562, member: 37198"] Again, I agree with you, but that's my argument for CHA not relating to beauty. I think that in practice we end up pretty close on this issue, but we follow a different line of reasoning to get there. Obviously, we're never going to agree 100% because in this instance we're like the Odd Couple, where I am Oscar and you are whoever Jack Lemmon's character was. To me, your above example is of a [i]physically unattractive[/i] person who uses their [i]personal magnetism[/i] to attract people. It doesn't make them pretty, but it does let them overcome their physical repulsiveness. This topic spun off from a discussion about a illustration of a hot chick with an 8 CHA, which some posters objected to, and some defended. It seems like the above example would be a picture of a acne-scarred, snaggletoothed swamp thing, but who if you met them would be able to charm you farily quickly. And, How is this not contradictory? Are you saying that physically unattractive people with high CHAs can attract people physically? (Are characters simultaneously attractive and unattractive, or am I thinking of a certain cat?) Because it seems to me you are saying that Jimmy Durante's high CHA allows him to attract people despite the fact he looks like a subspecies of the common potato. CHA doesn't make him beautiful, it makes people be able to see past appearance. This to me is a much better reading of CHA than "CHA determines physical attractiveness", it gets right to the heart of the matter of CHA as a mental stat completely separate from one's superficial appearance. Beauty is only skin deep. Who is more physically attractive, Jimmy Durante or Paris Hilton? Who has a higher CHA? [/QUOTE]

Verification