Physiognomy[a] (from Greek φύσις (physis) 'nature' and γνώμων (gnomon) 'judge, interpreter') orface reading is the practice of assessing a person's character or personality from their outer appearance—especially theface. The term can also refer to the general appearance of a person, object, or terrain without reference to its implied characteristics—as in the physiognomy of an individual plant (seeplant life-form) or of a plantcommunity (seevegetation).
Physiognomy as a practice meets the contemporary definition ofpseudoscience[3][4][5] and is regarded as such by academics because of its unsupported claims; popular belief in the practice of physiognomy is nonetheless still widespread and modern advances in artificial intelligence have sparked renewed interest in the field of study. The practice was well-accepted byancient Greek philosophers, but fell into disrepute in the 16th century while practised by vagabonds andmountebanks. It revived and was popularised byJohann Kaspar Lavater, before falling from favour in the late 19th century.[6] Physiognomy in the 19th century is particularly noted as a basis forscientific racism.[7] Physiognomy as it is understood today is a subject of renewed scientific interest, especially as it relates to machine learning and facial recognition technology.[8][9][10] The main interest for scientists today are the risks, including privacy concerns, of physiognomy in the context of facial recognition algorithms.
Physiognomy is sometimes referred to asanthroposcopy, a term originating in the 19th century.[11]
Notions of the relationship between an individual's outward appearance and inner character date back to antiquity, and occasionally appear in earlyGreek poetry.Siddhars from ancient India definedSamudrika Shastra as identifying personal characteristics with body features. Chinese physiognomy orChinese face reading (mianxiang) dates back to at least theSpring and Autumn period.[12]
Early indications of a developed physiognomic theory appear in 5th century BCAthens, with the works of Zopyrus (featured in dialogue byPhaedo of Elis), an expert in the art. By the 4th century BC, the philosopherAristotle frequently referred to theory and literature concerning the relationship of appearance to character. Aristotle was receptive to such an idea, evidenced by a passage in hisPrior Analytics:
It is possible to infer character from features, if it is granted the body and the soul are changed together by the natural affections: I say "natural", for although perhaps by learning music, a man 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 for each change, there is a corresponding sign, and we could state the affection and sign proper to each kind ofanimal, we shall be able to infer character from features.
— Prior Analytics 2.27 (Trans. A. J. Jenkinson)
The first systematic physiognomic treatise is a slim volume,Physiognomonica (Physiognomonics), ascribed to Aristotle, but probably of his "school", rather than created by Aristotle himself. The volume is divided into two parts, conjectured as originally two separate works. The first section discusses arguments drawn from nature and describes other races (non-Greek) 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.[13]
After Aristotle, the major extant works in physiognomy are:
Ancient Greek mathematician, astronomer, and scientistPythagoras—who some believe originated physiognomics—once rejected a prospective follower named Cylon because, to Pythagoras, his appearance indicated bad character.[14]
After inspecting Socrates, a physiognomist announced he was given to intemperance, sensuality, and violent bursts of passion—which was so contrary to Socrates's image, his students accused the physiognomist of lying. Socrates put the issue to rest by saying, originally, he was given to all these vices, but had particularly strong self-discipline.[15]
The term 'physiognomy' was common inMiddle English, often written as'fisnamy' or'visnomy', as in theTale of Beryn, a spurious addition toThe Canterbury Tales:"I knowe wele by thy fisnamy, thy kynd it were to stele".
Physiognomy's validity was once widely accepted.Michael Scot, a court scholar forFrederick II, Holy Roman Emperor, wroteLiber physiognomiae in the early 13th century concerning the subject. English universities taught physiognomy untilHenry VIII of England outlawed "beggars and vagabonds playing 'subtile, crafty and unlawful games such as physnomye or 'palmestrye'" in 1530 or 1531.[16][17] Around this time, scholastic leaders settled on the more erudite Greek form 'physiognomy' and began to discourage the entire concept of 'fisnamy'.
Leonardo da Vinci dismissed physiognomy in the early 16th century as "false", achimera with "no scientific foundation".[18] Nevertheless, da Vinci believed that facial lines caused by facial expressions could indicate personality traits. For example, he wrote that "those who have deep and noticeable lines between the eyebrows are irascible".[18]
The principal promoter of physiognomy in modern times was the Swiss pastorJohann Kaspar Lavater (1741–1801) who was briefly a friend ofGoethe. Lavater's essays on physiognomy were first published inGerman in 1772 and gained great popularity. These influential essays were translated intoFrench andEnglish, and influenced early criminological theory.[19]
_(14595802808).jpg)
Lavater received mixed reactions from scientists, with some accepting his research and others criticizing it.[3] His harshest critic was scientistGeorg Christoph Lichtenberg, who saidpathognomy, or discovering the character of a person by observing their behavior, was more effective. English religious writerHannah More (1745–1833) complained to her contemporary writerHorace Walpole, "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."[3][20]
Lavater found confirmation of his ideas from the English physician-philosopherSir Thomas Browne (1605–1682), and theItalianGiambattista Della Porta (1535–1615). Browne in hisReligio Medici (1643) discusses the possibility of the discernment of inner qualities from the outer appearance of the face, and wrote:
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.
— Religio Medici, part 2:2
Browne reaffirmed his physiognomic beliefs inChristian 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.
— Part 2 section 9
Browne also introduced the wordcaricature into the English language,[21] whence much of physiognomical belief attempted to entrench itself by illustrative means, in particular through visual political satire.
Italian scholar Giambattista della Porta's works are well represented in theLibrary of Sir Thomas Browne includingOf Celestial Physiognomy, in which della Porta argued that it was not the stars but a person's temperament that influences their facial appearance and character. InDe humana physiognomia(1586), della Porta used woodcuts of animals to illustrate human characteristics. Both della Porta and Browne adhered to 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.
The popularity of physiognomy grew throughout the first quarter of the 18th century and into the 19th century. It was discussed seriously by academics, who believed in its potential.[22]
Many European novelists used physiognomy in the descriptions of their characters,[22] notablyBalzac,Chaucer[23] and portrait artists, such asJoseph Ducreux. A host of 19th-century English authors were influenced by the idea, notably evident in the detailed physiognomic descriptions of characters in the novels ofCharles Dickens,Thomas Hardy, andCharlotte Brontë.
In addition to Thomas Browne, other literary authors associated withNorwich who made physiognomical observations in their writings include theromantic novelistAmelia Opie, and thetravelogue authorGeorge Borrow.
Physiognomy is a central, implicit assumption underlying the plot ofOscar Wilde'sThe Picture of Dorian Gray. In 19th-century American literature, physiognomy figures prominently in the short stories ofEdgar Allan Poe.[24]
Phrenology, a form of physiognomy that measures the bumps on the skull in order to determine mental and personality characteristics, was created around 1800 by German physicianFranz Joseph Gall andJohann Spurzheim, and was widely popular in the 19th century inEurope and theUnited States. In the U.S., physician James W. Redfield published hisComparative 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.[25]
In the late 19th century, phrenology became associated with physiognomy and consequently was discredited and rejected.[6] Nevertheless, the German physiognomist Carl Huter (1861–1912) became popular in Germany with his concept of physiognomy, called "psycho-physiognomy".[26]
During the late 19th century, English psychometricianSir Francis Galton attempted to define physiognomic characteristics of health, disease, beauty, and criminality, via a method ofcomposite photography.[27][28] 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 image 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.[29]
Physiognomy also became of use in the field ofCriminology through efforts made by Italian army doctor and scientist,Cesare Lombroso. Lombroso, during the mid-19th century, championed the notion that "criminality was inherited and that criminals could be identified by physical attributes such as hawk-like noses and bloodshot eyes".[30] Lombroso took inspiration from Charles Darwin's recently released theories of evolution and carried many of the misunderstandings that he had regarding evolution into the propagation of the use of physiognomy in criminology.[31] His logic stemmed from the idea that "criminals were 'throwbacks' in the phylogenetic tree to early phases of evolution".[31] It is reasonable to conclude that "according to Lombroso, a regressive characteristic united the genius, the madman and the delinquent; they differed in the intensity of this characteristic and, naturally in the degree of development of the positive qualities".[31] He believed that one could determine whether one was of savage nature just by their physical characteristics. Based on his findings, "Lombroso proposed that the "born criminal" could be distinguished by physical atavisticstigmata, such as:
This interest in the relationship between criminology and physiognomy began upon Lombroso's first interaction with "a notorious Calabrian thief and arsonist" named Giuseppe Villella.[30] Lombroso was particularly taken by many striking personality characteristics that Villella possessed; agility and cynicism being some of them. Villella's alleged crimes are disputed and Lombroso's research is seen by many as northern Italian racism toward southern Italians.[33] Upon Villella's death, Lombroso "conducted a post-mortem and discovered that his subject had an indentation at the back of his skull, which resembled that found in apes".[30] He later referred to this anomaly as the "median occipital depression".[34] Lombroso used the term "atavism" to describe these primitive, ape-like behaviors that he found in many of those whom he deemed prone to criminality. As he continued analyzing the data he gathered from Villella's autopsy and compared and contrasted those results with previous cases, he inferred that certain physical characteristics allowed for some individuals to have a greater "propensity to offend and were also savage throwbacks to early man".[30]
These sorts of examinations yielded far-reaching consequences for various scientific and medical communities at the time, and he wrote, "thenatural genesis of crime implied that the criminal personality should be regarded as a particular form of psychiatric disease".,[31] which is an idea still seen today in psychiatry's diagnostic manual, the DSM-5, in its description of antisocial personality disorder.[35] Furthermore, these ideas promoted the concept that when a crime is committed, it is no longer seen as "free will" but instead a result of one's genetic pre-disposition to savagery.[31] Lombroso had numerous case studies to corroborate many of his findings due to the fact that he was the head of an insane asylum at Pesaro. He was easily able to study people from various walks of life and was thus able to further define criminal types. Because his theories primarily focused on anatomy and anthropological information, the idea of degeneracy being a source of atavism was not explored till later on in his criminological theory endeavors.[36] These "new and improved" theories led to the notion "that the born criminal had pathological symptoms in common with the moral imbecile and the epileptic, and this led him to expand his typology to include the insane criminal and the epileptic criminal". In addition, "the insane criminal type [was said to] include the alcoholic, the mattoid, and the hysterical criminal".[36]
Lombroso's ideologies are now recognized as flawed and regarded as pseudo-science. Many have remarked on the overt sexist and racist overtones of his research, and denounce it for those reasons alone.[34] In spite of many of his theories being discredited, he is still hailed as the father of "scientific criminology".[37]
In France, the concept was further developed in the 20th century under the namemorphopsychology, developed by Louis Corman (1901–1995), aFrenchpsychiatrist who argued that the workings ofvital forces within the human body resulted in different facial shapes and forms.[38] The term "morphopsychology" is a translation of theFrench wordmorphopsychologie, which Louis Corman coined in 1937 when he wrote his first book on the subject,Quinze leçons de morphopsychologie (Fifteen Lessons of Morphopsychology).
Since around 2023–2024, a resurgent discourse around physiognomy has been noted onsocial media among both male and female users, particularly with regards tomemes,face filters, and anti-feminist andincel communities. Such content has raised concern about the normalization of pseudoscience and the idea that physical characteristics are inherently associated with one's actions and social status. Examples include the perception of leftists as being unattractive and women's femininity as dependent on their skull shape. An article inDazed argued that these pseudosciences "[play] into the appetite to categorise ourselves".[39][40][41]
Artificial intelligence (AI) has been reported to heavily employ physiognomy, such as the ability to predict homosexuality, criminality, and political affiliation from images of faces or other records of outwards appearance. Critics have said that this is a result of the biased databases that AI systems are trained on, and have noted its use and potential weaponization by governments and corporations.[42]
 | This sectionmay presentfringe theories, without givingappropriate weight to the mainstream view and explaining the responses to the fringe theories. Pleasehelp improve it or discuss the issue on thetalk page.(August 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Due to its legacy of racism andjunk science masquerading as criminology, scientific study or discussion of the relationship between facial features and character has become taboo. It had previously posited many links. For example, there is evidence that character can influence facial appearance.[43] Also, facial characteristics influence first impressions of others, which influences our expectations and behavior, which in turn influences character.[44] Lastly, there are several biological factors that influence both facial appearance and character traits, such pre- and post-natal hormone levels[45] and gene expression.[46]
Recent progress in AI and computer vision has been largely driven by the widespread adoption ofdeep neural networks (DNNs). DNNs are effective at recognizing patterns in large unstructured data such as digital images, sound, or text, and analyzing such patterns to make predictions.[8] DNNs offer an opportunity to identify links between characteristics and facial features that might be missed or misinterpreted by the human brain.[8]
The relationship between facial features and character traits such as political or sexual orientation is complex, but involves the fact that facial features can shape social behavior, partially as a result of the self-fulfilling prophecy effect.[47] The self-fulfilling prophesy effect asserts that people perceived to have a certain attribute will be treated accordingly, and over time may engage in behaviors consistent with others' expectations of them.[48] Conversely, social behavior such as addictions to drugs or alcohol, can shape facial features.
Research in the 1990s indicated that three elements of personality in particular – power, warmth and honesty – can be reliably inferred by looking at facial features.[49]
Some evidence indicated that the pattern of whorls in the scalp had some correlation to male homosexuality,[50] though subsequent research has largely refuted the findings on hair whorl patterns.[51]
A February 2009 article inNew Scientist magazine reported that physiognomy is undergoing a small revival, with research papers trying to find links between personality traits and facial traits.[6] A study of 90 ice hockey players found a statistically significant correlation between a wider face—a greater than average cheekbone-to-cheekbone distance relative to the distance between brow and upper lip—and the number of penalty minutes a player received for violent acts like slashing, elbowing, checking from behind, and fighting.[52]
This revival has continued in the 2010s with the rise of machine learning forfacial recognition. For instance, researchers have claimed that it is possible to predict upper body strength and some personality traits (propensity to aggression) only by looking at the width of the face.[53] Political orientation can also be reliably predicted.[10] In a study that used facial recognition technology by analyzing the faces of over one million individuals, political orientation was predicted correctly 74% of the time; considerably better than chance (50%), human ability (55%) or even personality questionnaires (68%).[10] Other studies have used AI and machine learning techniques to identify facial characteristics that predict honesty,[54] personality,[55] and intelligence.[56]
In 2017, a controversial study claimed that an AI algorithm could detect sexual orientation 'more accurately than humans' (in 81% of the tested cases for men and 71% for women).[8] TheHuman Rights Campaign (HRC) accused the study of being "junk science" to theBBC.[57] The researchers,Michal Kosinski and Yilun Wang, responded that their critics were engaged in "premature judgement". In early 2018, researchers, among them two specialists of AI working at Google (one of the two on face recognition), issued a reportedly contradicting study based on a survey of 8,000 Americans usingAmazon's Mechanical Turk crowd-sourcing platform. The survey yielded many traits that were used to discriminate between gay and straight respondents with a series of yes/no questions. These traits had actually less to do with morphology than with grooming, presentation, and lifestyle (makeup, facial hair, glasses, angle of pictures taken of self, etc.).[58] For more information of this sexual orientation issue in general, seegaydar.
In 2020, a study on the use of consumer facial images for marketing research purposes concluded that deep learning on facial images can extract a variety of personal information relevant to marketers and so users' facial images could become a basis forad targeting onTinder andFacebook.[59] According to the study, while most of facial images' predictive power is attributable to basic demographics (age, gender, race) extracted from the face,image artifacts, observable facial characteristics, and other image features extracted bydeep learning all contribute to prediction quality beyond demographics.[59][60]
Although we bracket physiognomy withMesmerism as discredited or laughable belief, many eighteenth-century writers referred to it as a useful science with a long history ... Although many modern historians belittle physiognomy as a pseudoscience, at the end of the eighteenth century, it was not merely a popular fad, but also the subject of intense academic debate about the promises it held for progress.
Although we may now bracket physiognomy withMesmerism as discredited or even laughable belief, many eighteenth-century writers referred to it in all seriousness as a useful science with a long history ... Although many modern historians belittle physiognomy as a pseudoscience, at the end of the eighteenth century it was not merely a popular fad but also the subject of intense academic debate about the promises it held for future progress.
