The ruthless ones wade over the paper; the considerate ones torment themselves with conscientious printing. The writer knows that what he has written can be used for purposes he never intended or even foresaw. Therefore the prudent man with ulterior motives writes cautiously, and the self-conscious criminal may choose ornate, imposing script. Men who prowl craftily through life seldom caper across paper. One's Path to Glory. We all desire to attain status among our fellows.
The 7 causes Of Dysgraphia - talks - dysTalk
Where these wishes include a desire to commit rape-murders, the symbolism can be very sinister indeed. Writing is a piece of work, to some a highly disagreeable chore and to all an effort requiring concentration and output of energy. Is the writer ebullient with energy? Or does marathi he wearily drag one foot after the other? Is he tireless or easily fatigued? Is he liberal with his energies, or does he try to economize on every movement? The impact of his pen on the paper will certainly vary with these traits. As a means of communication, writing is a slow technique. It is adequate only for the slow thinker; to the man whose mind is leaping ahead of his hand it becomes an irritating impediment. But agile minds reporting may react variously to this drag: some devise ingenious shortcuts, others butcher the script beyond recognition.
Others there are who conform rigidly to the set standards, some willingly, some desperately, some furtively, and some because they have no particular personal preferences to express. The Shock of Early battles. Writing may bear scars. Learning to write is one of the first great struggles with society which many of us undergo, faced suddenly with a frightfully difficult task which we must perform or remain illiterate. The job can be torture, or a game; that depends on many things. But the attitudes toward writing then established (cramped, worried, overanxious; or relaxed, confident, free-flowing?) are often reflected throughout life. Writing is an act of self-expression, sometimes of feelings hidden from the conscious mind. A pen driven by boiling emotions will move very differently than one in the hand of a calculating or apathetic "cold fish." The writer who is tormented by ungratified (perhaps ungratifiable!) sex apple wishes will unwittingly interject some sex-wish symbols into his calligraphy.
It is an act of communication, seeking to reach and influence one or more readers, whether with generous or sinister motives. How the writer moves across the paper toward the reader must, as a matter of common sense, reflect somewhat his attitude. A self-confident, outgoing, cheerful, trusting writer who loves people is bound to cross the page in a very different way than the writer who hates, fears, and distrusts others, and perhaps himself as well. As a matter of common observation such opposite types act differently, use different gestures, have different smiles, etc.; it is hardly surprising that their gestures on first paper would differ. The act of writing is an act of conformity: if certain standards are not met, the communication can be read only with difficulty or not at all. Here the people who like to make things difficult for others can have a field day by distorting their handwriting, leaving it just readable enough to make the reading a torture. Those who rebel in principle against conformity will also maim their writing, and so will some gentlemen who fear they may be called to account for what they have written.
With some practice legible signatures can be produced in this fashion, which on comparison will be found to resemble closely (with due allowance for mechanical factors!) the work produced by the hand. Even if you cannot control your neck or leg muscles sufficiently to produce legible scrawls, you will be able to see that you are trying to direct the instrument held in teeth or toes to produce the image you have in mind. (I would warn the reader who attempts this experiment either to make sure of privacy or to let any possible intruder know beforehand what he is trying. It can be very embarrassing to be caught barefoot in simian concentration on managing a pencil with your toes.). There are a number of cogent reasons why psychological rather than mechanical factors dictate the main calligraphic peculiarities of a person who does not have a neurological condition of some sort. Let's look briefly at the influence of a dozen common psychological motivations. A writer usually feels that his handwriting's appearance represents him to the reader and to the community at large. He accordingly makes a certain amount of effort, depending on the degree to which he feels appearances are important, to make his calligraphy look "good." Therefore his writing will in some degree reflect his personal taste in what looks good, and how much importance. Except in the case of memoranda written for notekeeping, the act of writing has strong social implications.
Poor handwriting problems and its negative impact
As the reader will see from essays the bibliography attached at the end of this article, much has been written on the "how" of graphology. The bibliography could be much longer without exhausting the list of serious works. The student who reads these books will find that, while there is considerable divergence among them in the area of fundamental theory, there is striking unanimity on the more concrete technical level. This situation no doubt reflects the general dilemma of assessment: it is a lot easier to devise tests that reveal a hidden habit, such as "taking ways than to uncover the underlying psychological reasons for the habit. We shall therefore try as far as possible to avoid the more abstruse aspects of the subject in discussing next the general validity of the thesis that reliable clues to the character and to some of the capabilities of a person may be derived from. Essentially, two points have to be established, first that the individuality of every person's handwriting is caused primarily by psychological, as distinct from mechanical, characteristics peculiar to the writer, and second, that there is reflected in a given handwriting, in symbol form, a hidden "story".
If this individuality in writing were the result of mechanical influences only, then the enormous deviations from letter forms taught in school which some calligraphies exhibit would be due to extreme mechanical idiosyncrasies, not to say difficulties, peculiar to the writer. The fact is, however, that writers thesis with exceedingly peculiar handwritings perform all other tasks with about the same mechanical competence as the next man, and conversely, persons who are markedly unadroit often have more regular handwritings than those of considerable mechanical skill. Mechanical skill, in fact, is one of the abilities which can not be deduced from handwriting. Handwriting is in reality brain-writing, as the following experiment will prove to any reader who cares to try it: Sign your name on a piece of paper. Now take the writing instrument between your molars and sign; then put the instrument between your big and second toes and write your name that way.
Our second problem, semantics, can cause a great deal of difficulty either in the exercise of the graphological art or in the study of it; it is a pitfall into which many have tumbled. What is an "honest" man? What is a "brave" man? Definition of such words is a practical impossibility, since the third unknown, an ethical standard, is involved. If we could establish agreed ethical standards, we could, no doubt, compose definitions which would be adequate, but there does not now appear to be such a set of standards. In fact, at this point in human history there seems to be more confusion than ever over whether the end justifies the means or is inseparable from them.
We are accordingly, as far as I can see, limited in using characterological terms to those denoting specific acts such as talking, stealing, lying, etc., and must eschew words with ethical overtones. Many writers and students on the subject have fallen into the ethics trap, so let both student and practitioner beware. It is necessary to add yet another caution: The analysis of handwriting is an art, not a science, and the quality of the result is dependent upon the caliber and capacity of the artist. Consequently, the statistical evaluation of graphology according to the accuracy of the results obtained by a cross-section of its practitioners is meaningless. The question whether graphology can be used reliably in assessment work seems to me to depend on whether even one person can do it consistently, not whether a majority of those who claim to be competent can get results. The evaluator should be aware that a great many so-called graphologists are either dilettantes or charlatans, using an art of which they have a smattering to swindle or astound the gullible. It is, in fact, this swarm of fortunetellers and mystics, with a small but noisy retinue of supporters making extravagant claims, who have done that recurring damage to the reputation of graphology which has served to deprive many a harassed executive of its assistance. Basis for the Art.
8 easy tips to improve your handwriting - matador Network
From the purely practical point of write view, then, assessment starts with the job description, and that job description should be supplemented by a list of desirable, undesirable, and fatal traits. In the absence of such a guide, assessment becomes perforce an undertaking to describe all the traits of a given subject, an exceedingly unrealistic exercise in the present state of psychological knowledge and one which, if conscientiously carried out, results in massive and complicated reports. I should accordingly, without prejudice to the usability of graphology in the field of deeper research, answer the first question as follows: we resumes should consider a reasonably acceptable result from this technique to be a report containing a reliable guide to those character-traits of the. For example: we specify that we want to fill a bank-teller's job. For this (with apologies to bank tellers) we want a stable and mediocre person who is conscientious, able to stand dull routine, accurate, and honest, one who is not quarrelsome, thieving, aggressive, or imaginative. We assume that in other respects he will be run-of-the-mill. The assessment turns up one candidate who meets the specifications of general mediocrity and willingness to handle other people's money without appropriating it but who is also exceedingly vain, in fact a peacock. Such a potentially dangerous factor ought to be reported to us, even if we have not required.
I am not a professional graphologist, but I have explored the subject enough to be convinced that this black art has a practical application in report the assessment of persons to whom access for other character tests is limited. Since character assessment (as distinct from capabilities-testing) is as complex as human nature itself, and the art of handwriting analysis is exceedingly difficult in its detail, the most that can be achieved in any short paper is to give an outline of the theory involved. Plotting the terms of Reference, anyone undertaking serious study or investigation of graphology-or of any assessment system, for that matter-must settle three formidable related questions before he can safely submerge himself in the "how" of the technique at all, to wit: 1) How far. 2) How do we handle the semantic problems which plague character descriptions? 3) What do we do about standards for judging the ethical aspects of character? It seems to me, on the first question, that we have to specify in some detail precisely what we want to know about a subject's character before we can proceed in any assessment operation, and then keep within these sharply delineated limits to avoid. Most executives appear willing to settle for any assessment system which will consistently and reliably tip them off to those peculiarities of a given individual which will be helpful and those which will be harmful in the job they are trying to fill. They seldom appear to be interested in ultimates about anyone's character, in complete "character-pictures" pages long, or in abstract conceptions that have to be interpreted.
technique of potential value in intelligence. Handwriting analysis as an assessment aid. Keith laycock, the assertion that reliable clues to a person's character 1 and some of his capabilities may be derived from analysis of his handwriting usually evokes a vigorous pro or can reaction which seems to originate somewhere in the subconscious mind and not. The reaction is at times so strong as to give a psychologist the impression that those who shrink from the idea do so because they fear exposure and those who eagerly embrace it are the kind who like to snoop and pry. Whatever the psychological reasons, one thing is certain: the proposition is a good one for starting a controversy. The art of handwriting analysis-graphology, as it is more commonly called, especially in Europe-has two branches: an established and "respectable" one devoted to the identification of individuals by their handwriting, and a black-sheep branch dealing with the assessment of personality. The latter is the subject of this paper.
In medieval times, highly stylized writing focused on the "minims or vertical lines in a letter, and the smudgy nature of ink confused people trying to read. For example, "in "ni "m "iii "ui and "iu" might all look exactly the same because the horizontal lines written into each letter were so thin, they tended to smudge or just fade away. For example, this: Harvard. This says "animal like you fancy yourself in the sack, or "annnal which is a rather annoying way to ask for it, or "aiiuiiai which is the sound you're going to make when you head for your partner's fire door without permission and get punched. The solution to all this buggery was to just stop using "u" for some words, like "some "love essay and "come and wow, we just cannot get out of the gutter here. This is the reason why you see an "o" for a "u" sound when it's next to an "n" or an "m like in "monkey" and "ton and also why you see a "c" before a "k" when the letter appears next to more minims. The "c" was a good way to separate the "k" from letters it could be easily confused with, which led to spellings such as "lick" and "flick" and. We're going to open a new tab here and take care of some things before this next entry.
Ugly handwriting and what it says about you - graphology world
M, the Crazy rule: Writing has become second nature to us, so it's easy to forget how schizophrenic the letter "o". You get the word "con where its sound is basically "aw but then in "son" it's encroaching on "u" territory, and that's a good way to get your face cut u" don't take no shit). Then you have "comb" and "tomb which are shredder totally different "o" sounds despite having no right. Then there are phrases like "some honey tongue" and. Whoa, this article is already way dirtier than we expected it. Hemera technologies/m, we know what that sentence has all of you thinking about: that "mouth" is spelled pretty weirdly, too. Continue reading Below, the Stupid reason: It all comes down to sloppy handwriting.