The Foundations of Personality | Page 4

nose has no relation to character, except as its owner is vain
because of it.
One might go on indefinitely discussing the various features of the face
and discovering that only a vague relationship to character existed. The
thick, moist lower lip is the sensual lip, say the physiognomists, but
there are saints with sensual lips and chaste thoughts. Squinty eyes may
indicate a shifty character, but more often they indicate conjunctivitis
or some defect of the optical apparatus. A square jaw indicates
determination and courage, but a study of the faces of men who won

medals in war for heroism does not reveal a preponderance of square
jaws. In fact, man is a mosaic of characters, and a fine nature in one
direction may be injured by a defect in another; even if one part of the
face really did mean something definite, no one could figure out its
character value because of the influence of other
features--contradictory, inconsistent, supplementary. Just as the wisest
man of his day took bribes as Lord Chancellor, so the finest face may
be invalidated by some disharmony, and a fatal weakness may
disintegrate a splendid character. Moreover, no one really studies faces
disinterestedly, impartially, without prejudice. We like or dislike too
readily, we are blinded by the race, sex and age of the one studied, and,
most fatal of all, we judge by standards of beauty that are totally
misleading. The sweetest face may hide the most arrant egoist, for
facial beauty has very little to do with the nature behind the face. In fact,
facial make-up is more influenced by diet, disease and racial tendency
than by character.
It would be idle to take up in any detail the claims of phrenologist and
palmist. The former had a very respectable start in the work of Broca
and Gall[1] in that the localization of function in the various parts of
the brain made at least partly logical the belief that the conformation of
the head also indicated functions of character. But there are two fatal
flaws in the system of phrenological claims. First, even if there were an
exact cerebral localization of powers, which there is not, it would by no
means follow that the shape of the head outlined the brain. In fact, it
does not, for the long-headed are not long-brained, nor are the
short-headed short-brained. Second, the size and disposal of the sinuses,
the state of nutrition in childhood have far more to do with the "bumps"
of the head than brain or character. The bump of philoprogenitiveness
has in my experience more often been the result of rickets than a sign
of parental love.
[1] It is to be remembered that phrenology had a good standing at one
time, though it has since lapsed into quackdom. This is the history of
many a "short cut" into knowledge. Thus the wisest men of past
centuries believed in astrology. Paracelsus, who gave to the world the
use of Hg in therapeutics, relied in large part for his diagnosis and cures
upon alchemy and astrology.
Without meaning to pun, we may dismiss the claims of palmistry

offhand. Normally the lines of the hand do not change from birth to
death, but character does change. The hand, its shape and its texture are
markedly influenced by illness,[1] toil and care. And gait, carriage,
clothes and the dozen and one details by which we judge our fellows
indicate health, strength, training and culture, all of which are
components of character, or rather are characters of importance but
give no clue to the deeper-lying traits.
[1] Notably is the shape of the hand changed by chronic heart and lung
disease and by arthritis. But the influence of the endocrinal secretions is
very great.
As a matter of fact, judgment of character will never be attained
through the study of face, form or hand. As language is a means not
only of expressing truth but of disguising it, so these surface
phenomena are as often masks as guides. Any sober-minded student of
life, intent on knowing himself or his fellows, will seek no royal road to
this knowledge, but will endeavor to understand the fundamental forces
of character, will strive to trace the threads of conduct back to their
origins in motive, intelligence, instinct and emotion.
We have emphasized the practical value of some sort of character
analysis in dealing with others. But to know himself has a hugely
practical value to every man, since upon that knowledge depends
self-correction. For "man is the only animal that deliberately undertakes
while reshaping his outer world to reshape himself also."[1] Moreover,
man is the only seeker of perfection; he is a deep, intense critic of
himself. To reach nobility of character is not a practical aim, but is held
to