
[Middle English phisonomie, from Old French phisionomie, from Late Latin physiognōmia, from Greek phusiognōmiā, variant of phusiognōmoniā : phusio-, physio- + gnōmōn, gnōmon-, interpreter.]
physiognomic phys'i·og·nom'ic (-ŏg-nŏm'ĭk, -ə-nŏm'ĭk) or phys'i·og·nom'i·cal (-ĭ-kəl) adj.| physician, doctor, surgeon, phreaking, phishing, phrasal verbs | |
| pianist, piano, piazza |
The study of expression, primarily of the emotions, and principally via the face, has a long and complex history. From Aristotle onwards, physiognomy has been the means of reading and judging character based on the expressions of the face. In sum, physiognomists recognized the face as an index of emotion and (moral) character; and physiognomy offered a way of conceptualizing these particular observations in terms of general categories or theories. The purpose of physiognomy was to identify and to describe the common forms that organized the diversity of appearances, and, as such, it functioned in a profoundly normative manner — as the determinant of what was common to all people and all things in the physical world. At best, physiognomy provided an explanation of human nature in terms of a uniform order of types or kinds, which worked by translating particular observations into general theories of character and emotion. At worst, it was disparaged as a mystical and highly deterministic practice, more akin to fortune-telling than to science, and cast as a poor resemblance of its family relation, phrenology.
A number of thinkers have attempted to describe and explain how the desire to see the workings of the mind, and ultimately the soul, through the face answers these questions about man, mind, and nature. Aristotle, Charles Le Brun, Johann Caspar Lavater, and Charles Darwin are the most notable. The challenge they faced was how to establish the grounds upon which their teachings could be viewed as true or rejected as false. One of the earliest philosophical treatises on physiognomy, and the first attempt to present physiognomy as a hermeneutic, and possibly scientific, method, was a work thought to be written by Aristotle, Physiognomica, which identified three categories of physiognomic judgement — the zoological, the ethnological, and the pathognomical. Yet what emerges after Aristotle is a complex relationship between the classical mode of reading and judging character — physiognomy — and the rise and triumph of inner, scientific understandings of expression based on physiology. Such a relationship originates with the work of Charles Le Brun, who believed an understanding of expression was the key to discerning the passions or the activities of the mind (soul). Based on Descartes' theory of the passions, Le Brun's Conférence sur l'expression générale et particulière (1668) sought to present a rational and coherent theory of expression. Le Brun wanted to demonstrate the necessary and natural correspondence between the movements of the passions and the movements of the facial muscles, and, from this, to deduce the laws of expression. A knowledge of the principles, psychological and physiological, which directed these activities and their external appearance would, he claimed, release the artist from simply copying nature and allow him to create his own images, which would be directed by, and maybe even improve on, the processes of nature.
This notion of ‘improvement’ was of crucial importance to Johann Caspar Lavater in his Essays on Physiognomy (1789-93). In his hands, each and every attempt to read and judge character was a means of ascribing an essence to human nature that imagined there was something hidden from external appearances, which, once discovered, made them more purposeful and more substantial. One could arrive at a definition of man by imputing a certain kind of ‘spirit’ from the ‘surface’ appearance of an individual. But the point was that Lavaterian physiognomy enabled the impressions of sense to be translated into common sense — an essential and ideological form, which comprehended order and unity from the appearances of things. The appeal of essentialism for Lavater lay in its capacity to validate a ‘science’ of man based on a theory of natural kinds. But the problem of essentialism for physiognomy was that it imagined its ‘science’ as the result of an intuitive understanding of the intrinsic properties and purposes of things. So, whilst essentialism underwrote Lavater's ‘science’ of man, it was also, and not incidentally, the cause of its many inconsistencies.
There is no doubt that Charles Darwin was sceptical about the claims of physiognomy with regard to expression and emotion. Nonetheless, it is interesting that his study of expression makes a number of contradictory claims about the possibility and plausibility of conducting a scientific analysis of expression. Darwin's oft-neglected work, The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872), was self-consciously presented as the cornerstone of his evolutionary theory — the means of demonstrating once and for all that man was not a separate and divinely created species but continuous with other species. An evolutionary account of expression was not concerned with teleological explanations of physical attributes; rather, it was directed towards finding a means of understanding the process through which expressions are acquired. The result was a study of expression that tried to identify specific mental and emotional states as well as their corresponding expressions (by concentrating on their motor activity), and then map their common descent through groups of related organisms. If this could be done, then human feelings like love, anger, fear, and grief could be treated as habits and shown to have clearly recognizable parallels, perhaps even origins, in the animal world.
The rise and triumph of these inner, scientific rationales for the expression of the emotions placed the study of expression on new ground. Indeed, the evolutionary explanation of expression given by Darwin (and taken to its logical, albeit odious, conclusion by Francis Galton, father of eugenics) is both the long-term outcome of physiognomical teachings and the reason for their dissolution. As we reflect on the impact of physiognomy, there is much to suggest that its demise is no bad thing.
— Lucy Hartley
Bibliography
See also facial expression; phrenology; smiling.
Physiognomy, also known today as personology, is an ancient form of divination based upon reference of the physical appearance of the individual. It was a widespread practice in the ancient Mediterranean Basin and in China, and also appears in India and the ancient Arab world. During the Renaissance, Gerolamo Cardano and Giovanni Battista della Porta emerged as popular exponents. As did other forms of divination, it came under heavy attack by the eighteenth-century Enlightenment and following the work of J. C. Lavater largely died. Its post-Enlightenment revival was delayed by the emergence of phrenology, which could be seen as a form of physiognomy that concentrated attention on the shape and appearance of the head.
In China, a form of physiognomy, called Siang Mien, developed that concentrated on face readings tied to the acupuncture points. Each of the 100 points on the face are numbered and named, assigned to a year in one's life, and carry a range of meanings. The Chinese measure life from conception, hence one must add a year to one's age to find the applicable point. At age 41, for example, one can make reference to point 42, the Delicate Cottage. It represents a place of seclusion and may be interpreted as an appropriate time to shift concentration from outer to inner concerns. A variety of face readers may be found throughout Chinese ethnic communities in the West.
In the mid-twentieth century new attention to physiognomy was proposed by Edward Vincent Jones, a judge with the U.S. Superior Court who did his primary research on defendants brought before him over a number of years. His modern development of physiognomy was called personology. During World War II (1939-45) he founded the Personology Foundation of California, which graduated its first class in 1942. Jones' work is being carried on by Paul Eisner, who founded the Personology Foundation of the Pacific. Its Learning Center is located at P.O. Box 3301, Honokaa, HI 96727. It has a website at http://www.users.totalise.co.uk/~tmd/person.htm.
The measurable growth of interest in physiognomy associated with the New Age Movement can be traced both to Personology and to the influx of Chinese into North America since 1965. Pushing the practice of physiognomy ahead is Rose Rosetree, a former Transcendental Meditation instructor who now teaches both aura readings and face readings and trains teachers in suburban Washington, D.C. Based on her initial study of both European and Chinese texts, she developed her own new system of physiognomy. She is the author of one of the most popular contemporary texts in the field, The Power of FaceReading. She may be contacted through her webpage at http://www.rose-rosetree.com/.
Sources:
Lin, Henry B. What Your Face Reveals. St. Paul, Minn.: Llewellyn Publications, 1999.
Personology Foundation of the Pacific.http://www.users.totalise.co.uk/tmd/person.htm. April 23, 2000.
Rose Rosetree.http://www.rose-rosetree.com/. April 23, 2000.
Rosetree, Rose. The Power of Face Reading for Sales, Self-Esteem, and Better Relationships. Women's Intuition Worldwide, 1998.
Yong, Wu. Face Reading. Longmead, Dorset, UK: Element Books, 1998.
— Richard L. Gregory
n.
The art of determining the character of another by the resemblances and differences between his face and our own, which is the standard of excellence.
"There is no art," says Shakespeare, foolish man,
"To read the mind's construction in the face."
The physiognomists his portrait scan,
And say: "How little wisdom here we trace!
He knew his face disclosed his mind and heart,
So, in his own defence, denied our art."
Lavatar Shunk
A strange and somewhat impassive physiognomy is often, perhaps, an advantage to an orator, or leader of any sort, because it helps to fix the eye and fascinate the mind.
— Charles Horton Cooley
LearnThatWord.com is a free vocabulary and spelling program where you only pay for results!

|
|
This article may contain original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding references. Statements consisting only of original research may be removed. More details may be available on the talk page. (October 2008) |
Physiognomy (from the Gk. physis meaning 'nature' and gnomon meaning 'judge' or 'interpreter') is the assessment of a person's character or personality from his outer appearance, especially the face. The term physiognomy can also refer to the general appearance of a person, object or terrain, without reference to its implied characteristics.
Credence of such study has varied from time to time. The practice was well-accepted by the ancient Greek philosophers, but fell into disrepute in the Middle Ages when practised by vagabonds and mountebanks. It was then revived and popularised by Johann Kaspar Lavater before falling from favour again in the late 19th century.[1] Physiognomy as understood in the past is clearly a pseudoscience.[2]
While the term physiognomy is no longer used, the concept is being revived to some extent.[1] There is no clear evidence that physiognomy works.[1]
Physiognomy is also sometimes referred to as anthroposcopy, though the expression was more common in the 19th century when the word originated.[3]
|
Contents
|
Notions of the relationship between an individual's outward appearance and inner character are historically ancient, and occasionally appear in early Greek poetry. The first indications of a developed physiognomic theory appear in 5th century BC Athens, with the works of Zopyrus (who was featured in a dialogue by Phaedo of Elis), who was said to be expert in the art. By the 4th century BC, the philosopher Aristotle makes frequent reference to theory and literature concerning the relationship of appearance to character. Aristotle was apparently receptive to such an idea, as evidenced by a passage in his Prior Analytics:
It is possible to infer character from features, if it is granted that the body and the soul are changed together by the natural affections: I say 'natural', for though perhaps by learning music a man has made some change in his soul, this is not one of those affections natural to us; rather I refer to passions and desires when I speak of natural emotions. If then this were granted and also that for each change there is a corresponding sign, and we could state the affection and sign proper to each kind of animal, we shall be able to infer character from features.—Prior Analytics 2.27 (Trans. A. J. Jenkinson)
The first systematic physiognomic treatise to survive to the present day is a slim volume, Physiognomonica (English: Physiognomonics), ascribed to Aristotle (but probably of his "school" rather than created by the philosopher himself). The volume is divided into two parts, conjectured to have been originally two separate works. The first section discusses arguments drawn from nature or other races, and concentrates on the concept of human behavior. The second section focuses on animal behavior, dividing the animal kingdom into male and female types. From these are deduced correspondences between human form and character.
After Aristotle, the major extant works in physiognomy are:
Ancient Greek mathematician, astronomer and scientist Pythagoras, believed by some to be the originator of physiognomics, once rejected a prospective follower named Cylon simply because of his appearance, which Pythagoras deemed indicative of bad character[4]
The term was common in Middle English, often written as fisnamy or visnomy (as in the Tale of Beryn, a 15th-century sequel to the Canterbury Tales: "I knowe wele by thy fisnamy, thy kynd it were to stele").
Physiognomy's validity was once widely accepted, and it was taught in universities until the time of Henry VIII of England, who outlawed it (along with "Palmestrye") in 1531.[5] Around this time, scholastic leaders settled on the more erudite Greek form 'physiognomy' and began to discourage the whole concept of 'fisnamy'.
The great inventor, scientist and artist, Leonardo da Vinci, was a critic of physiognomy in the early 16th century he said 'I do not concern myself with false physiognomy...there is no truth in them and this can be proven because these chimeras have no scientific foundation'[6] He did however believe that lines caused by facial expressions could indicate personality traits i.e. 'those who have deep and noticeable lines between the eyebrows are irascible'[6]
The principal promoter of physiognomy in modern times was the Swiss pastor Johann Kaspar Lavater (1741–1801) who was briefly a friend of Goethe. Lavater's essays on physiognomy were first published in German in 1772 and gained great popularity. These influential essays were translated into French and English. The two principal sources from which Lavater found 'confirmation' of his ideas were the writings of the Italian Giambattista Della Porta (1535–1615) and the English physician-philosopher Sir Thomas Browne (1605–1682), whose Religio Medici discusses the possibility of the discernment of inner qualities from the outer appearance of the face, thus:
there is surely a Physiognomy, which those experienced and Master Mendicants observe… For there are mystically in our faces certain Characters that carry in them the motto of our Souls, wherein he that cannot read A.B.C. may read our natures.— R.M. part 2:2
Late in his life Browne affirmed his physiognomical beliefs, writing in his Christian Morals (circa 1675):
Since the Brow speaks often true, since Eyes and Noses have Tongues, and the countenance proclaims the heart and inclinations; let observation so far instruct thee in Physiognomical lines....we often observe that Men do most act those Creatures, whose constitution, parts, and complexion do most predominate in their mixtures. This is a corner-stone in Physiognomy… there are therefore Provincial Faces, National Lips and Noses, which testify not only the Natures of those Countries, but of those which have them elsewhere.— C.M. Part 2 section 9
Sir Thomas Browne is also credited with the first usage of the word caricature in the English language, whence much of physiognomy movement's pseudo-learning attempted to entrench itself by illustrative means.
Browne possessed several of the writings of the Italian Giambattista Della Porta including his Of Celestial Physiognomy, which argued that it was not the stars but a person's temperament that influences facial appearance and character. In his book De humana physiognomia (1586), Porta used woodcuts of animals to illustrate human characteristics. His works are well represented in the Library of Sir Thomas Browne; both men sustained a belief in the doctrine of signatures — that is, the belief that the physical structures of nature such as a plant's roots, stem and flower, were indicative keys (or signatures) to their medicinal potentials.
Lavater received mixed reactions from scientists, some accepting his research with other criticizing it.[2] For example, the harshest critic was scientist Georg Christoph Lichtenberg said that Pathognomy, discovering the character by observing the behaviour, was more effective. Writer Hannah More complained to Horace Walpole that "In vain do we boast (...) that philosophy had broken down all the strongholds of prejudice, ignorance, and superstition; and yet, at this very time (...) Lavater's physiognomy books sell at fifteen guineas a set."[2][7]
The popularity of physiognomy grew throughout the 18th century and into the 19th century, and it was discussed seriously by academics, who saw a lot of potential in it.[2] Many European novelists used physiognomy in the descriptions of their characters.[2] notably Balzac, Chaucer[8] and portrait artists, such as Joseph Ducreux; meanwhile, the 'Norwich connection' to physiognomy developed in the writings of Amelia Opie and travelling linguist George Borrow. A host of other 19th century English authors were influenced by the idea, notably evident in the detailed physiognomic descriptions of characters in the novels of Charles Dickens, Thomas Hardy and Charlotte Brontë.
Physiognomy is a central, implicit assumption underlying the plot of Oscar Wilde's The Picture of Dorian Gray. In 19th century American literature, physiognomy figures prominently in the short stories of Edgar Allan Poe[9]
Phrenology was also considered a form of physiognomy. It was created around 1800 by German physician Franz Joseph Gall and Johann Spurzheim, and was widely popular in the 19th century in Europe and the United States. In the U.S., physician James W. Redfield published his Comparative Physiognomy in 1852, illustrating with 330 engravings the "Resemblances between Men and Animals." He finds these in appearance and (often metaphorically) character, e.g. Germans to Lions, Negroes to Elephants and Fishes, Chinamen to Hogs, Yankees to Bears, Jews to Goats.[10]
During the late 19th century, English psychometrician Sir Francis Galton attempted to define physiognomic characteristics of health, disease, beauty, and criminality, via a method of composite photography.[11] [12] Galton's process involved the photographic superimposition of two or more faces by multiple exposures. After averaging together photographs of violent criminals, he found that the composite appeared "more respectable" than any of the faces comprising it; this was likely due to the irregularities of the skin across the constituent images being averaged out in the final blend. With the advent of computer technology during the early 1990s, Galton's composite technique has been adopted and greatly improved using computer graphics software [13].
In the late 19th century it became associated with phrenology and consequently discredited and rejected.[1] Modern scientists now consider physiognomy a form of pseudoscience.[2]
A February 2009 article in the New Scientist reported that physiognomy is living a small revival, with research papers trying to find links between personality traits and facial traits.[1] There is still no conclusive evidence on any clear link.[1]
Some alternative theories have been proposed.[1] For example, our brain tends to extrapolate emotions from facial expressions, and physiognomy would only be an overgeneralization of this skill.[1] Also, if one classifies a person as untrustworthy due to their face, and treats them as such, that person will eventually behave in an untrustworthy way.[1]
Practitioners of the personality type theory socionics use physiognomy as a personality identification technique.[citation needed]
A physiognomist named Yoshito Mizuno was employed from 1936 to 1945 by the Imperial Japanese Naval Aeronautics Department, examining candidates for the Naval Air Corps, after - to their surprise - Admiral Yamamoto's staff discovered that he could predict with over 80% accuracy the qualifications of candidates to become successful pilots.[14]
In 2011, the South Korean news agency Yonhap, published a physiognomical analysis of the heir of North Korea, future leader Kim Jong-Un.[15]
| Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Physiognomy |
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
Dansk (Danish)
n. - fysiognomi
Nederlands (Dutch)
gelaatsuitdrukking, fysiognomiek, (morele) eigenschap, kenmerken van landschap
Français (French)
n. - physionomie
Deutsch (German)
n. - Physiognomie, Physiognomik
Ελληνική (Greek)
n. - φυσιογνωμική
Italiano (Italian)
fisionomia, fisiognomica
Português (Portuguese)
n. - fisionomia (f)
Русский (Russian)
физиономия, облик
Español (Spanish)
n. - fisonomía
Svenska (Swedish)
n. - fysionomi, ansikte, yttre drag, fysionomik, karaktärstolkning
中文(简体)(Chinese (Simplified))
人相学, 脸, 人相
中文(繁體)(Chinese (Traditional))
n. - 人相學, 臉, 人相
한국어 (Korean)
n. - 인상학, 관상술, 인상, 지형
日本語 (Japanese)
n. - 人相, 人相学, 地勢
العربيه (Arabic)
(الاسم) سحني, ملامحي, سيماء, خلقه, مظهر, ملامح الوجه
עברית (Hebrew)
n. - תווי-פנים, פרצוף, חכמת הפרצוף, פני-השטח, מאפיין, בייחוד מוסרי
If you are unable to view some languages clearly, click here.