Staying on the topic of attractiveness being quantifiable, but it's quantification doesn't make it attractive, merely measures it;

There are some very interesting sub-threads above.
I find it hard to believe the 1.618-1 ratio in attractive faces is a survival trait hard wired...

If we find this ratio attractive, for whatever reason, than does the replication of the ratio PROVE it was understood? Or merely that the ratio is how we measure what a majority of humans FIND attractive.

This is a pretty core concept of where my logic is dragging me.

Anyone/everyone thoughts?

Jammer