A special announcment

I hereby pause the academic proceedings to advertise an event: a Halloween Tea Party. If you are a Cornish student or employee, (which you probably are if you are reading this,) please come if you can! As you can see, there will be a Ouija board séance, I will record the events that take place afterwards, on this blog.
Facebook Event for this... event.

Ouija board, Ouija board...

I purchased a glow in the dark Ouija board yesterday, (actually my mom picked it up from Toys 'R' Us because I couldn't find any locally.) I gave it a try last night, hoping I might feel a little scared or nervous, like I did when I was a kid.
I goofed around trying to get it to say something sensible, but really had to reach to find anything. I'm going to be conducting a public séance on Friday, and I hope I get better results.
I tried to Google some tips, hoping I might find some entertaining questions I could ask the board, but found mostly "I heard this scary story..." "Ouija boards are dangerous" and "You might contact a demon!" I can't believe that this is the sort of thing that people still believe to this day.
I certainly didn't have anything scary happen to me yet, I actually would rather that than getting a bunch of boring gibberish.
Worse yet, I couldn't muster even a feeling of slight apprehension, without even thinking about it. I really want to feel scared, or that there is anything supernatural in the world, but it seems I cannot change my feelings no matter how hard I might try.

Physiognomy and Phrenology wrap up

Overall with Pseudo-sciences, I've been discovering that they obviously do not hold up to experimentation. I think that the reason people might have believed in this sort of thing is the argument from authority, of smart looking scholars telling them that it is true. Also, one can skim one of these books and say, "Oh, I'm smart, and it says that this aspect of my head/face means I'm smart, how canny!" Yet, most people do not delve in and really examine what the shape of their nostrils means. With much scrutiny at all, these 'sciences' fall apart. I was nearly wanting to believe them, because it 's fun to imagine you can determine people's personalities based on this sort of thing, but it just isn't possible. I'm a bit disappointed, and I fear that I am going to be doubly disappointed on my next experiment, contacting the dead with a Ouija board. I tried it out a bit last night, I will write a quick summary in my next entry.

Physiognomy Experiment

Sorry for the delay, things always take longer than you'd think. Tonight I will be posting a self physiognomy experiment, in which I analyze my own face.
Actually, I had someone else analyze it for me, because I figured they would be a more impartial judge than I would be. I will list some of the 'observations' that were made based on information from the book Amazing Face Reading - an Illustrated Encyclopedia For Reading Faces.

"slightly impatient
barely jealous and untrustworthy
very strong sex drive
very intelligent/high IQ
logical, abstract thinker
slightly unforgiving, mean, and miserly
slightly good moneymaking potential
very adaptable to changing circumstances
slightly pessimistic, immature, unpredictable
good at rote learning/memorization, general knowledge, literary quotes
somewhat zealous/firm resolve
somewhat cunning/sly
good stamina/will to succeed
chronic indecision/ defeatism
lacks energy
inclined to use authority with fairness
good common sense
somewhat friendly, easy going and approachable
cranky and idiosyncratic
haste for satisfaction
expect reciprocity in relationships, and a bit touchy
chilly, standoffish and remote
serious thinker at early age
strong feelings
intolerant - conservative
slightly discontent
people think you are trustworthy or innocent. "

Now, I read over this list, and decided with my friend how true each was on a scale of 1-3, and I calculated the percentage of correctness. I won't say which ones are true, because it's too embarrassing! (My blog, afterall.)

I got an average of 2.13 correctness, so only slightly more than half of the time were these ideas true. Overall, that seems as good a chance as just randomly guessing. 9 points were very true, and 4 were very untrue. The vast majority being "sort of true." I was rather underwhelmed again.

Phrenology - Experiment

It took a little longer to decipher these books than I thought, so today will be the phrenology experiment, to be followed by physiognomy experiments tomorrow.
I set to measuring my head, which proved difficult without calipers. I followed the instructions in the book Descriptive Mentality... Head Face and Hand by Holmes W. Merton (1899)
The instructions were very vague and poorly written. The names of the certain measurements were obfuscated, either on purpose or not. Once it would be referred to as "top head measurement" and later as "forehead measurement." After about an hour I was able to take all of my head measurements and determine what they were supposed to be. For science's sake, I will provide my measurements and notes here.

"measurement 1 22 inches (high medium or large)"

This was the circumference of my head, surprisingly not that big. I suppose this was probably designed with men as a base line. I have a very large head in reality. This measurement has little to do with anything, other than creating a proportion for the other measurements to go off of.

"temperament 1 14, 1/2 large"

This measurement was from the center of my ear to the top of my forehead and around to the other ear.

"2 15 1/2 (real big)
3 15 1/2 (pretty big)
(mental temperament)
(middle and second range of faculties strong)"

Here I have determined that based on these measurements which are basically the top of my head from the ear up from various angles, I have the "mental temperament," based on information from the book.

"measurement 2 6 inches?? exceedingly tiny
DEFINITELY not vital temperament
height from ear holes to top 5 1/4
side head slightly less than 12 inches, VERY small"

My strange head shining through. I can wear children's sunglasses, and yet I can't wear a lot of normal sized hats. This apparently means I am very un-vital, for what that's worth.

"estimative temperament
high motive and mental, low vital"

So I have determined my temperament, based on my having high 'motive' and 'mental' and low 'vital', which means I am intelligent and hard-working, but not very lively or healthy. That is in some ways accurate, but I am actually reasonably healthy. I was a bit disappointed that this is all that I was able to find out after all that measuring. This was the experiment I could most easily do with phrenology, because the rest of it requires one knowing what an 'average' head feels like, and the only people I know who would probably let me touch their heads are not very 'average'.
I guess these measurements are difficult and vague, because it is actually a lot easier to measure one's head than to do the more specific reading, so more people might do it. The more people who can do it, the more vague one must be for it to seem 'true.' Of course most people are going to consider themselves intelligent, or lively, or hard-working, so any combination of the three is going to ring true to most people.
I must admit I did try doing a more thorough reading on my head, and was only able to determine that I am apparently lousy at math, mechanical objects, and don't believe much in personal liberties. Not sure how true any of those are, more than an average person.
Something I am finding about these pseudo-sciences, is that prior to my experiments, I am more readily able to believe them than the occult subjects. I suppose this is how people believed them in the past, a scholarly person makes claims that seem reasonable, people are likely to believe it until they actually test it. Such is the definition of a pseudo-science, it seems.

Physiognomy

I began reading through Physiognomy Illustrated by Joseph Simms (1889) on Google Books. I was very disappointed that despite the entertaining illustrations, this book seems very morally bankrupt and silly. Compared to Fowler's book, this book is extremely racist, sexist and Euro-centric. All other races are 'proven' to be worse than Europeans, the lower classes considered criminals by nature, and women only worthwhile humans if they are docile and friendly. In addition, there is a lot of silly information, such as people with large noses being good at smelling things, and people who are gluttonous to have double chins. He also tries to prove points by giving animal examples, sometimes ones that seem very strange, such as crows having 'high suspiciousness' and owls having very small. (Aren't owls as suspicious as any bird?)
As I continued on in the book, I came across increasingly ridiculous parts, such as 'dog headed' people of the world, and that people in Zanzibar have noses that zig zag shaped. I can't imagine that people were still thinking ridiculous things like this in 1889, so I'm not sure what to think about this book.

Phrenology and Physiognomy

Sorry for the lack of updates lately, I've been reading way too many books on these subjects, and gotten a bit behind. I thought I would make some quick thoughts before I post about an experiment or two I will undertake this weekend.
One thing that struck me interesting, was that phrenology is much more general than I thought. I had always heard it was about 'looking for lumps' on a person's head, but it's actually more about the general shape, size and appearance of the head. Physiognomy of the skull, in a manner of speaking.
I was also surprised as I read a book by the Fowler brothers, (one of the brothers) that they seemed rather progressive for the time. The book I'm reading was written in 1899, but it is not nearly as racist as some books on physiognomy I've read from forty or fifty years later. There is quite a bit of Euro-centrism, (the European face seemingly the 'average' face,) but women are included in the book without derogatory remarks, and some differences in the races commented on, but nothing very dismissive or offensive. (Any more offensive than saying that people with small foreheads are 'idiots.') Overall, surprising for this time period.
I checked out more modern books, but they seem to mostly just be rehashing information from these older books, and taking out some parts that seem bizarre or offensive to modern people. I love reading these old books, I scanned the oldest, and will post images from it, (if not the whole book,) on Monday. In all of them, people have underlined passages, and made notes. One book in particular has nearly every page covered in tiny illegible penciled words. I love old books, and the more it shows that people have actually read them over the years, the more I like them.