Year: 1875

Saturday Review.


| The vulgar tendency to simulate 8
knowledge about things where the requi


site conditions of accurate information
are clearly wanting, has ever been {
theme for philosophic satire. 1t is the
recognition of this tendency which has LEO
the thinking few TO despise the opinion o.
the many as a spurious and counterfeit
kind of recognition. From Plato, who
distinctly excluded mere opinion from tho
category of certain knowledge, to the mod
ern idealist, who pays no heed to the
strongest assurances of common sense
! philosophers have made light of prevail
| ing convictions, on the ground that they
are formed in haste, and with no due ap-
probation of the conditions of rational
| certainty. Not only so, but science itself
which might be supposed to maintain q
more amicable attitude toward prevailing
belief has long since learnt to initiate
philosophy in its contempt for vulgar
| ideas, and a scientific lecture would now
be deemed wanting in spirit and point il
it failed to illustrate, by some startling
example, the wide opposition between the
NOilIllbl lllill'lN anu
the verified conclusions of the savant.


Nowhere, perhaps, does popular belief
exhibit its hastiness and inadequacy more
conspicuously than in the readiness OF
most persons to pronounce an opinion re-
specting the characters and motives of
Others. The confidence with which many
a man and woman will talk about the de-
sires and habits of comparatively new
acquaintance, must strike a reflective
mind as signal illustration of the eager
ness of mankind to seem wise. There are
many whose modesty and good sense
would prevent their giving an opinion on
any point of scientific knowledge or
aesthetic appreciation, who, nevertheless,
feel no hesitation in passing judgment
respecting matters of conduct, of which
their knowledge is infinitesimal. Mum
bers of people, who do not in the least
seem to be ashamed of ignorance respect
ing most matters of discussion, are quite
sensitive as to their reputation for knowl-
edge, with respect to the intricacies of
human character. When, for example,
there is an addition to the society of a
small town, through the arrival of a new
family, there is the greatest impatience
to have a definite and fixed opinion re-
specting the idiosyncrasies of the new
comers There will certainly be more
than one knowing person whose supposed
qnickncss of perception will at once ena-
bic them, satisfactorily to themselves, to
define and characterize the man or
woman about whom curiosity is natur-
ally aroused. 1t is curious, too to no
tice the readiness of Others to accord to
these persons the special facultyfor intui-
tion which they claim for themselves. 1t
has often been remarked, that the first
condition of winning the confidence OF
others, is to display fair amount of self
confidence, and this truth is fully illus
trated in the case of the people whom we
are now considering When lady gives
out among her acquaintance that she is
an expert in matters ofcharacter and dis
position, she speedily gains an enviable
reputation for this kind of prescience. If
there is any new character to be deci-
phercd, about which there hangs GER
tain mystery, she is the authority to
whom all repair, in order to acquire def
mite information. If a scandal is Just
terminating, and everybody is on tiptoe
respecting its real nature and results, il
is this connoisseur who is resorted to for
a final solution of the problem. In this
way people are sustained in the pleasing
belief that they possess some easy avenue
to the minds and hearts of their fellows,
thanks to which they are enabled to dis
pense with the tardy methods of observa-
,,,1 .,,l 4,
a new character rs confidently as an un.
| folded letter


Yet il does not call for any rcmarka-
BILE power of reflection to see that this
intuitive kind of knowledge of other,
must be very delusiye. For, first of all
! human character is an exceedingly com.
plex and variable thing, and can not be
| known except after patient attention
| The facial perusal of character, of which
we now speak, always involves two infer
ences, either of which may be mistaken
one. In the first place, the selfstyled
observer argues, that certain things which
have held good of other people will hold
good of the new character, and since it i,
exceedingly easy to mistake quality o'
a certain order of minds for universal
attribute of mankind, there is always q
chance of wrong induction. In the next
place, the observer is compelled 70 Judge
the whole of a character from a very few
data; and here again there is ample room
or error in reasoning that, because one
felt or acted - and 50 to-day, this must
be his Characteristic mode of feeling OF
acting. In other words, human nature i,
TOO variable, both As whole and within
the limits of single individual, to allow
of the rapid kind Of provision of which
we are speaking.


There is a second obstacle to this in.
Simultaneous reading of character, which
calls for special notice, Not only is
| character a phenomenon of great COM.
plexity, but Il is also one in high degree
Inaccessible. For, in the first place, all
the thoughts and purposes Of another
have 10 be inferred from external signs;
and this process, however carefully car
ricd on,uHiust always be liable to error.
The ~ 6niiormitics of connection be.
twcsh lnling ard expression, for exam
M ca9 0nly be kneNn apl1oxia1alely
4 n ~ Wi4e elasl l,al c. - ~ a.
IN 3641S4 i ~ DtS11n