HOW TO READ HUMAN NATURE/PART 3
CHAPTER III
THE OUTER PHASE: PERSONALITY
Just
as character is the inner phase of Human Nature, so is personality its
outer phase. To many the two terms are synonymous, but analysis will show the
shades of difference between them. A man's character is his
inner self, while his personality is the outward indication of
his self. The word, in this sense, is defined as: "That which constitutes
the personal traits of a person, as his manner, conduct, habits, appearance,
and other observable personal peculiarities."
The
word is derived from the Latin word, persona, meaning, "a mask
used by play-actors," which in turn was derived from the two words per,
meaning "through," and sono, meaning, "to
sound," or combined, "to sound through." And the derivation of
the term really gives us an idea of its inner meaning, for the personality is
really the mask worn by the character, and through which it sounds,
speaks, or manifests itself, Jeremy Taylor once said: "No man can
long put on person and act a part but his evil manners
will peep through the corners of his white robe." Archbishop Trench once
said that the real meaning of the phrase, "God is no respecter of persons"
is that the Almighty cared nothing for what part in life a
person plays, but how he plays it. The old-time play-actor was
wont to assume a mask of the features of the part he played, just as the modern
actor "makes up" for the part and walks, speaks and acts in
accordance therewith. Whether or not the individual be aware of the fact,
Nature furnishes to each his mask of personality—his persona—by
which those who understand may recognize the part he plays, or his character.
In both the inner character, and the outer personality,
each individual struts the stage of life and plays his part.
The
mask or "make up," of personality, by which men may read each other's
character, is evolved and developed from the instinctive physical expression
accompanying thought, feeling and emotion. Just as the frown accompanying the
feeling of annoyance or anger will, if repeated sufficiently often, become
fixed upon the countenance of the man, so will all of his general thoughts,
feelings and emotions register themselves in his manner, gait, tone of voice,
carriage and facial expression. Moreover, his inherited tendencies will show
themselves in the same way.
Professor
Wm. James says, regarding the genesis of emotional reactions: "How come
the various objects which excite emotion to produce such special and different
bodily effects? This question was not asked till quite recently, but already
some interesting suggestions toward answering it have been made. Some movements
of expression can be accounted for as weakened repetitions of movements which
formerly (when they were stronger) were of utility to the subject. Others are
similarly weakened repetitions of movements which under other conditions were
physiologically necessary concomitants of the useful movements. Of the latter
reactions, the respiratory disturbances in anger and fear might be taken as
examples—organic reminiscences, as it were, reverberations in imagination of
the blowings of the man making a series of combative efforts, or the
pantings of one in precipitate flight. Such at least is a suggestion made by
Mr. Spencer which has found approval."
Herbert
Spencer says, on this subject: "To have in a slight degree such psychical
states as accompany the reception of wounds, and are experienced during flight,
is to be in a state of what we call fear. And to have in a slight degree such
psychical states as the processes of catching, killing, and eating imply, is to
have the desires to catch, kill and eat. That the propensities to the acts are
nothing else than nascent excitations of the psychical state involved in the
acts, is proved by the natural language of the propensities. Fear, when strong,
expresses itself in cries, in efforts to escape in palpitations, in tremblings;
and these are just the manifestations that go along with an actual suffering of
the evil feared. The destructive passion is shown in a general tension of the
muscular system, in gnashing of teeth and protrusion of the claws, in dilated
eyes and nostrils in growls; and these are weaker forms of the actions that
accompany the killing of prey. To such objective evidences every one can
add subjective evidences. Everyone can testify that the psychical state called
fear consists of mental representations of certain painful results; and that
the one called anger consists of mental representations of the actions and
impressions which would occur while inflicting some kind of pain."
Professor
Wm. James adds the following to the discussion: "So slight a symptom as
the snarl or sneer, the one-sided uncovering of the upper teeth, is accounted
for by Darwin as a survival from the time when our ancestors had large canines,
and unfleshed him (as dogs do now) for attack. Similarly the raising of the
eyebrows in outward attention, the opening of the mouth in astonishment, come,
according to the same author, from the utility of these movements in extreme
cases. The raising of the eyebrows goes with the opening of the eye for better
vision, the opening of the mouth with the intensest listening, and with the
rapid catching of the breath which precedes muscular effort. The distension of
the nostrils in anger is interpreted by Spencer as an echo of the way in
which our ancestors had to breathe when, during combat, their 'mouth was filled
up by a part of an antagonist's body that had been seized.' The trembling of
fear is supposed by Mantegazza to be for the sake of warming the blood. The
reddening of the face and neck is called by Wundt a compensatory arrangement
for relieving the brain of the blood-pressure which the simultaneous excitement
of the heart brings with it. The effusion of tears is explained both by this
author and by Darwin to be a blood-withdrawing agency of a similar sort. The
contraction of the muscles around the eyes, of which the primitive use is to
protect those organs from being too much gorged with blood during the screaming
fits of infancy, survives in adult life in the shape of the frown, which
instantly comes over the brow when anything difficult or displeasing presents
itself either to thought or action."
Thus,
it will be seen, the fact that all inward states manifest themselves to some
degree in outward physical expression, brings with it the logical inference
that particular mental states when habitually manifested tend to fix in
the physical organism the expression associated with them. As "thoughts
take form in action," so habitual mental states tend to register traces of
those actions. A piece of paper folded in a certain way several times shows
plainly the marks on the folding. In the same manner the creases in our
clothing, shoes and gloves, show the marks of our personal physical form. A
habitual mental state of cheerfulness is accompanied by a frequent exercise of
the muscles expressing the physical signs of that feeling, and finally the
smile wrinkles are formed that all may read them. In the same way the gloomy,
pessimistic mental attitude produces the marks and wrinkles showing the habit
of frequent down-turning of the corners of our mouths. A habitual mental
attitude of suspicion will tend to impart the appearance of the
"suspicious peering" to our eyes. The mental attitude of
combativeness will likewise give us the traditional set jaw and tightly
compressed lips. The mental attitude of lack of self-respect will show itself
in our walk, and so, in the opposite manner with the mental attitude of
self-respect. People grow to walk, talk, carry themselves, and "look
like" their habitual mental attitude.
Dr.
A. T. Schofield, says: "'He is a dull scholar,' it is said, 'who cannot
read a man's character even from a back view.' Round a statue of the prince
Consort in Edinburgh stand representative groups paying homage to him. If you
get a back view of any of these you can see unconscious mind impressed on
matter, and can tell at once the sailor or soldier, peasant or scholar or
workman. Look at the body and face of a man when the mind is gone. Look at the
body of a man who has lost his self-respect. Look at the body of a thief, of a
sot, of a miser. Compare the faces and expressions of a philanthropist, of a
beggar, of a policeman, of a scholar, of a sailor, of a lawyer, of a doctor, of
a shop-walker, of a sandwich man, of a farmer, of a successful manufacturer, of
a nurse, of a refined girl, of a servant, of a barmaid, of a nun, of a ballet
dancer, of an art student, and answer to yourself these two questions: First,
are these different expressions of body and face due essentially to physical or psychical causes?
And, secondly, do these psychical causes act on the facial and other
muscles in consciousness or out of consciousness. The only possible answers to
these two questions leave us with this fact, were no other proof possible, that
we each have within us an unconscious psychical power (here
called the unconscious mind) which has sufficient force to act upon the body
and display psychical conceptions through physical media."
It
is impossible for us (at least by any of the five senses) to peer into the
mental chamber of other men and there read the record of their character,
or to interpret the combination of Human Nature therein moulded and formed. But
nevertheless we are not balked in our desire, for by learning to interpret the
outward signs of personality we may arrive with a wonderful degree of success
at an understanding of the character, mind, or Human Nature in others. From the
seen Outer we may deduce the unseen Inner. We may discern the shape of that
which is concealed, by observing the form of the covering which hides it from sight.
The body, like the fabled veil of the goddess, "conceals but to
reveal."
Comments
Post a Comment