And Why Sexy Is Not the Same as Beautiful

Sita and Sarita (1893–94) by Cecilia Beaux.
Sita and Sarita (1893–94) by Cecilia Beaux. Every animal contains a part of God, but only the cat knows it.

By Dr Neel Burton — Psychiatrist, philosopher, and wine writer; Fellow of Green Templeton College, University of Oxford; author of over twenty books.

We find every cat, or almost, to be beautiful. But when it comes to other human beings, beauty is more the exception than the rule. We might walk past hundreds of faces without seeing one that makes us look again.

Yet people try a lot harder than cats, expending considerable time, money, and ingenuity on beautifying themselves. We exercise, diet, dress, moisturise, dye, paint, inject, and even, sometimes, submit to the surgeon’s scalpel. Cats, meanwhile, do little more than lick themselves.

Are we just an uglier species, like bats or warthogs, or might there be more to it than that?

Of Mice and Men

It may be that our aesthetics are a product of our mind. Bats may not be ugly to other bats, and cats probably don’t think of us as ugly—but do seem to think of us as smelly.

Indeed, bats and cats may be entirely without aesthetic judgement, and respond merely to mating signals.

But even if we are the only truly aesthetic animal—as argued by the philosopher Immanuel Kant—that does not explain why we find the average cat to be a lot more beautiful than the average member of our own species.

One possibility is that we are more sensitised to human faces. To the untrained eye, all sheep look alike, whereas their shepherd may be able to recognise each one. A large area of our cerebral cortex is devoted to visual processing, with specialised mechanisms for recognising and reading other human faces.

But should that not mean that we find human faces more, rather than less, beautiful?

Beauty and the Beast

Perhaps the more important difference is not in what we see, but in what we are looking for. When we admire a cat, we admire its proportions, colouring, movements, and general appearance. But when we look at another human being, our judgement is complicated by sexual desire, or the absence of it. We are asking not merely whether a face or body is beautiful on its own terms, but whether we find it sexually attractive.

Of course, we can sometimes find a middle-aged body or wizened face beautiful, but this often requires the kind of perceptual shift that we undergo in a museum, when contemplating a work of art.

In a museum, as Kant would tell us, we suspend our ordinary practical judgements and attend to an object for its own sake. We can admire the appearance of Socrates in a David painting, without asking whether his snub nose and pot belly would feed our appetites. Yet we seldom extend the same generosity to people we encounter in everyday life. In a sense, then, the museum turns us back from animal to human.

Beauty and sexiness are not the same thing. We can find someone beautiful without being attracted to them, and vice versa—which is fortunate for ugly people.

On Youth and Old Age

And for young people too. Smooth skin, lustrous hair, and a certain fullness of the face and body are among the qualities we associate with sexual attractiveness. Not every young person is attractive, of course, but youth confers advantages that are difficult to appreciate until they have disappeared.

Indeed, one of the ironies of ageing is that we look back at photographs of our younger selves and wonder how we could ever have been dissatisfied with our looks—or made so little use of them for the few summers that they lasted.

Yet beauty, as opposed to buxomness, need not diminish with age. It is possible to become even more beautiful. An older face may acquire a beauty that depends less on its proportions than on its character and expression. To be beautiful, an older face may also need to be interesting. To be beautiful, an older face may also need to be… good.

Human beauty is not so rare as we suppose. We are simply too distracted by desire, comparison, and convention to appreciate it.

Perhaps we should learn to look at people as we do at paintings, or cats.

Cats are not just beautiful, but irresistibly cute. Part of why we find them so beautiful is simply that we love them.

Our feline friends have no conception of beauty, and certainly no ambition to be beautiful—though they purr when we call them so. They neither admire their reflection nor regret their younger selves. They, like us, simply go on being beautiful, whether we notice or not.

Continue Exploring

To explore Kant’s ideas in their historical context—and discover how they influenced Hegel, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche—see my book, The German Greeks.

You may also enjoy

The Answer May Be to Become a Monk

Harvest at the Abbaye de Lérins, on an island opposite Cannes, c. 1900.
Harvest at the Abbaye de Lérins, on an island opposite Cannes, c. 1900.

By Dr Neel Burton — Psychiatrist, philosopher, and wine writer; Fellow of Green Templeton College, University of Oxford; author of over twenty books.

Recently, I decided to get in touch with a childhood friend. We hadn’t spoken in twenty-five years.

He wasn’t just any childhood friend. We were born on the same day, in the same town, one hour apart. We used to joke that we were twins from different mothers.

In the intervening years, he had become a Trappist monk: a strict kind of monk who practises deep silence and speaks only when necessary. I write him long, flowing letters; he replies laconically, but touchingly.

His life is austere. Every morning, he wakes up at 3:30 to pray. And yet I find myself envying something in it: its simplicity, its mindfulness, and its constant, if mostly silent, companionship.

My twin brother got me thinking about the monastic life. As I researched, I found something most astonishing: If you are poor and uneducated, you may be able to enjoy the same health outcomes and life expectancy as the richest and most educated… simply by becoming a monk or nun.

This remarkable fact ought to be better known, and probably would be if it did not sit so uneasily with our cut-throat consumerist society.

The Price of Inequality

A major American study found that, at age 40, the richest 1 per cent of men could expect to live 14.8 years longer than the poorest 1 per cent. For women, the gap was 10.6 years.

The inequality is not just in how long people live, but how well. In England, people born in the most deprived areas in 2018-20 could expect nearly twenty fewer years in good health than those born in the least deprived areas: 19.3 fewer years for women, and 18.6 for men.

In a monastery, these inequalities simply vanish. A 2025 study followed 2,421 German Catholic monks born between 1840 and 1959. The researchers used the order’s titles “brother” and “padre” as indicators of socioeconomic status, with brothers often engaged in manual labour and the better-educated padres holding senior administrative posts. Across the different birth cohorts, they found no statistically significant survival difference between the two groups.

The contrast is all the more striking because monks appear not only to escape the inequality between rich and poor, but also to live unusually long lives. A study of Bavarian religious communities found that young adult monks could expect to live up to four years longer than other men. A Korean study analysing newspaper death notices across occupational groups between 1963 and 2010 found that clergy, including Buddhist monks, had the highest reported average age at death, at about 80.

Cloistered life reduces inequality not just between rich and poor, but also between men and women. A girl born in America in 2024 could expect to live 4.9 years longer than her male counterpart. By contrast, a study of Bavarian religious communities found that nuns’ life expectancy exceeded monks’ by only about one year.

A Different Way to Live

What might explain this all-round levelling effect? In a monastery, many of the things that make life better and safer are shared. Monks eat together, live under the same roof, follow a common routine, and receive the same care.

The monastery also offers something harder to measure: a place within a community, useful work, and a strong sense of purpose. Its members have a role and a status, but little of the competition that governs life outside. They have peace and quiet without being alone. Even death belongs to a shared—and continuing—story.

The implication that you can “win at life” simply by stepping out of the rat race is, of course, deeply disturbing. Our society assumes that income and education represent genuine advantages. But the monastery suggests that they matter partly because the world outside is insecure, competitive, and unequal. Once people share the same housing, food, healthcare, community, and purpose, much of the advantage of wealth and education simply disappears.

I think of my friend waking up at 3:30 to pray and chant. His life is austere, but far from empty. Perhaps that is what I envy: not the silence alone, but the sense that a life can be rich—in fact, far richer—without being organised around acquisition, comparison, and the fear of falling behind.

Continue Exploring

If this essay spoke to you, you might also look into The Art of Failure: The Anti Self-Help Guide.

You may also enjoy

Explore all Success & Failure essays

Why Intelligence and Critical Thinking Are Not Enough

Géricault, La Monomane de l'envie
Théodore Géricault, La Monomane de l’envie—or what three hours of scrolling can do to you.

By Dr Neel Burton — Psychiatrist, philosopher, and wine writer; Fellow of Green Templeton College, University of Oxford; author of over twenty books.

We have more access to information than ever before, but the information that we see is that which is most likely to grab and hold our attention. We might wonder whether this is knowledge at all—or, in fact, the opposite of knowledge.

Fake news is not new. A year after the Battle of Actium in 31 BCE, Cleopatra sent word to Mark Antony that she had killed herself. Believing the report, Antony stabbed himself—only to discover that Cleopatra was still alive. What’s new is the speed and precision with which a falsehood can be targeted at millions.

How Manipulation Works

Manipulation seldom consists in an outright lie. Rather, it consists in controlling the picture. Each statement may be true, while the picture created by those selected statements is profoundly false.

Imagine two reporters covering the same protest. One focuses on the peaceful marchers; the other, the broken windows. One interviews the protesters; the other, the shopkeepers. Both reports may be factually accurate, and yet leave us with a misleading picture of what happened. That’s why fact-checking, though important, can only take us so far. Facts need context, proportion, and balance.

Manipulation works because we are biased. We tend to notice the information that confirms our existing beliefs while ignoring what challenges them. The first person to manipulate me is not a politician or an algorithm, but myself.

That is why intelligence and critical thinking are not sufficient defences. Often, we reach the conclusion that suits us and then reason backwards towards it. Indeed, intelligence can simply make us better at this kind of backward reasoning.

Engagement algorithms are designed in ways that exploit this. They show us not what is most true or important, but what is most likely to captivate and agitate us. Artificial intelligence then gives those selected fragments fluency and persuasive force, so that they hit harder and I am more likely to share them—thereby amplifying the message and lending it whatever credibility I may have.

How to Defend Ourselves

Whenever words give us a strong feeling before they give us a good reason, we should pause to create some mental distance. In that breathing space, we should ask: Who is speaking? What do they want from me? And what have they left out?

But most importantly, we should ask: Why do I want this to be true?

Truth requires more than intelligence. It requires qualities such as self-knowledge, humility, and justice.

Manipulation feeds us misleading fragments; truth asks us to recover the whole.

Continue Exploring

If this essay spoke to you, you might look into Hide and Seek: The Psychology of Self-Deception and How to Think Like Plato and Speak Like Cicero.

You may also enjoy

We Know More and More—but Understand Less and Less

Caspar David Friedrich’s Wanderer above the Sea of Fog
Caspar David Friedrich’s Wanderer above the Sea of Fog (c. 1818). Greater perspective is the beginning of wisdom.

By Dr Neel Burton — Psychiatrist, philosopher, and wine writer; Fellow of Green Templeton College, University of Oxford; author of over twenty books.

Wisdom begins with the willingness to hear difficult truths, especially about ourselves. Our problem is not merely that we are no wiser than our ancestors; in many ways, we are less wise.

One reason for this is that we have abandoned wisdom as an ideal. The word ‘wisdom’ appears 222 times in the Old Testament, and ‘philosophy’ in the original Greek literally means ‘the love of wisdom’. But today, anyone who speaks seriously about wisdom risks sounding grandiose or ridiculous—like me right now.

We admire intelligence, productivity, and innovation because they can be measured and monetised. Wisdom, however, is quieter, and often goes against the grain.

What Wisdom Is

Having replaced wisdom with expertise, we confuse knowing more with being wiser. But if wisdom simply amounted to knowledge, learning the name of every river and mountain in the world would make us wise, and every modern school-leaver would be wiser than a Socrates or a Seneca. Socrates was declared the wisest of men not because he knew everything, but because he understood what he did not know.

Aristotle took a different view. He said that wisdom is the understanding of causes: the wise person knows not merely that something is, but why it is. Wisdom consists in seeing the relations between things, for example, the immediate action and its distant consequences, the present moment and the shape of an entire life. It’s not so much a kind of knowledge as a way of seeing, or ways of seeing.

Why We Lack Wisdom

If wisdom is perspective, our lack of wisdom becomes easier to explain. Today, knowledge is increasingly specialised and compartmentalised. Nobody is responsible for assembling the fragments or asking what they are for. There is no job description for someone like me, who falls between the cracks—and, unfortunately, no salary either.

In addition, we suffer from an overload of information. We’re always checking our phones, flitting from fragment to fragment, living in abstract bubbles. Our ancestors may have known far less, but they were exposed to the rain and the wind: to nature, mortality, connection… to the things that can give us perspective.

Although, to be fair, our ancestors too struggled with wisdom. Wisdom derives from the Indo-European root, weid-, ‘to see’. In Norse mythology, Odin sacrifices one eye at Mimir’s well in exchange for a higher kind of vision. Later, he hangs for nine nights from the world tree, pierced by his own spear, to win the runes. That’s what wisdom demands: the courage to see what we would rather not see.

Continue Exploring

If this essay spoke to you, you might look into Hypersanity and How to Think Like Plato and Speak Like Cicero.

You may also enjoy

Explore all Cognition essays

Why the Best Friends Tell us What We Least Want to Hear

Plato and Aristotle, details from Raphael's School of Athens
‘Plato is dear, but dearer still is truth’—a saying that captures Aristotle’s willingness to disagree with his teacher in the pursuit of truth, and his conviction that genuine friendship need never fear honest disagreement.

By Dr Neel Burton — Psychiatrist, philosopher, and wine writer; Fellow of Green Templeton College, University of Oxford; author of over twenty books.

What makes a true friend? Aristotle distinguishes friendships of utility, pleasure, and virtue—and explains why the finest friends are so rare.

Today, everyone is obsessed with romantic love. Aristotle, however, conceived of the highest human relationship in terms of friendship—the bond through which we learn to value another person for their own sake.

For the Greeks, true friendship was a rare and precious thing. In Plato’s Lysis, Socrates says, “I would rather have a real friend than all the gold of Darius [the Persian emperor], or even Darius himself.” But today, on social media, we call hundreds of people our friends.

By putting romantic love on a pedestal, we have devalued friendship. Our romantic partner is also expected to be our best friend, confidant, counsellor… As a result, other friendships may be neglected or even treated as threats.

Aristotle’s Three Kinds of Friendship

Friendship is so important to Aristotle’s account of the good life that he devotes two of the ten books of the Nicomachean Ethics to it.

Aristotle famously distinguishes between three kinds of friendship: friendships of utility, friendships of pleasure, and friendships of virtue. In a friendship of utility, we value them for what they can bring us. In a friendship of pleasure, we value them for the enjoyment they provide. These relationships are not necessarily base: colleagues, neighbours, and tennis partners may genuinely like and help one another.

But the limitation of these first two kinds of friendship lies in their reason for being: when the advantage or pleasure fades, the friendship fades with it.

Why Perfect Friends Are Rare

Lasting friendships, on the other hand, are based on character or virtue: each friend values the other, not for what he brings, but for who he is. The friend’s wellbeing and flourishing become part of our own.

Because we are invested in the wellbeing and flourishing of our friend, we owe them the hard truth—and expect the same thing in return. A real friend does not simply accept us as we are, but recognises our potential and helps us become what we could be.

That’s why “perfect friendship”, as Aristotle calls it, is not for everyone. Most people would sooner ghost us than listen to the truth about themselves—particularly now, when there are so many less demanding distractions around. Whereas social media affirms our public image, true friends challenge the person underneath.

Continue Exploring

If this essay spoke to you, you might look into The Gang of Three: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle.

You may also enjoy

Explore all Aristotle essays