COUNTER ARGUMENTS ARE WELCOME.
While the Golden Ratio has been a cornerstone of aesthetic theory for decades, recent scientific research presents a more nuanced picture.
A 2024 study published in Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, concludes that “there is no convincing evidence that the golden ratio is linked to idealized human proportions or facial beauty.” These are the key points of the study:
1.Historical inaccuracy: Even though Eucilid mentions that kind of ratio in his books, he never ties it to beauty, rather regards it as a mathematic ratio. "However, in each of these descriptions, Euclid merely regards it as a rather general mathematical ratio. There are many propositions in each of the Books in The Elements, but no special mention is made of this particular proposition, and no relationship to beauty or any other aspect of the natural world is suggested. Contrary to generations of mystics and pseudoscientists who followed, Euclid soberly treats the ratio for what it is, without attaching to it any miraculous or preternatural properties. The so-called golden number itself is not mentioned"
2. Correlation with golden ratio and attractive faces: Most scientific investigations have found no connection between attractive faces and the golden ratio. "However, most scientific investigations have found no plausible relationship between improved facial appearance and the golden ratio, whether in orthodontic or orthognathic patients [19, 20], or the faces of professional models from different ethnic backgrounds [21, 22]. There are many publications on the golden ratio in the literature, but these few appear to have unbiased methodology. The idea that the golden ratio should be used as an aim in dentofacial treatment, whether orthodontic or surgical or as an aim to improve attractiveness, appears to have dubious validity."
Ratios and proportions do matter in the terms of facial asthetics, but the claim that the universal ratio is 1.618 has no unbiased evidence.
Link for the study: Link
While the Golden Ratio has been a cornerstone of aesthetic theory for decades, recent scientific research presents a more nuanced picture.
A 2024 study published in Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, concludes that “there is no convincing evidence that the golden ratio is linked to idealized human proportions or facial beauty.” These are the key points of the study:
1.Historical inaccuracy: Even though Eucilid mentions that kind of ratio in his books, he never ties it to beauty, rather regards it as a mathematic ratio. "However, in each of these descriptions, Euclid merely regards it as a rather general mathematical ratio. There are many propositions in each of the Books in The Elements, but no special mention is made of this particular proposition, and no relationship to beauty or any other aspect of the natural world is suggested. Contrary to generations of mystics and pseudoscientists who followed, Euclid soberly treats the ratio for what it is, without attaching to it any miraculous or preternatural properties. The so-called golden number itself is not mentioned"
2. Correlation with golden ratio and attractive faces: Most scientific investigations have found no connection between attractive faces and the golden ratio. "However, most scientific investigations have found no plausible relationship between improved facial appearance and the golden ratio, whether in orthodontic or orthognathic patients [19, 20], or the faces of professional models from different ethnic backgrounds [21, 22]. There are many publications on the golden ratio in the literature, but these few appear to have unbiased methodology. The idea that the golden ratio should be used as an aim in dentofacial treatment, whether orthodontic or surgical or as an aim to improve attractiveness, appears to have dubious validity."
Ratios and proportions do matter in the terms of facial asthetics, but the claim that the universal ratio is 1.618 has no unbiased evidence.
Link for the study: Link
Last edited:
