- This topic has 21 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
What are your view’s? does anyone know anything about it?
My view is that plurals don’t have apostrophes.
I see it the same way I see horoscopes based on birth dates.
I can tell a tremendous amount from handwriting. It’s a learned ‘science’ that you can pick up with tons of exposure. Very much like a councelor learns how to read body language or faces.
Syag, what can you see about me?
On the Insert tab, the galleries include items that are designed to coordinate with the overall look of your document. You can use these galleries to insert tables, headers, footers, lists, cover pages, and other document building blocks. When you create pictures, charts, or diagrams, they also coordinate with your current document look. You can easily change the formatting of selected text in the document text by choosing a look for the selected text from the Quick Styles gallery on the Home tab. You can also format text directly by using the other controls on the Home tab.You can’t really tell anything from handwriting. Self-fulfilling prophecy works on anyone who believes at all.
HaLeiVi – You seem to be a highly structured, maticulously organized (tho mildly boring) individual who leaves no room for error.
I think it’s quite clear that handwriting shows the writers frame of mind while writing the given sample. To track a tendency you’d need several samples over a period of time.
Gamanit – I don’t really ‘read’ that kind of stuff in handwriting. I usually learn about more physically/neurologically related stuff. And once you have some of that stuff, you can build a small picture about some specific, related info. There are certain patterns that show up over and over again and are almost always on the mark.
I have no doubt, though, that if someone spends years ‘reading’ handwriting, they would be able to do so up to a point. In the limited way that you can read faces. As with the story about Moshe Rabbeinu you can learn what a person was born with, but possibly not what they have shaped themselves into.
Excerpts from “How Graphology Fools People” by Barry L. Beyerstein, Ph.D.
“My task in summarizing the extensive scientific research on graphology has been made quite easy by the superb efforts of Geoffrey Dean [8] [8].”
“Dean [8] unearthed more than 200 studies that had unambiguous criteria of this sort and were acceptable with respect to sample sizes, experimental controls, statistical analyses, etc. After subjecting these studies to a meta-analysis, Dean showed that graphologists have failed unequivocally to demonstrate the validity or reliability of their art for predicting work performance, aptitudes, or personality. Graphology thus fails according to the standards a genuine psychological test must pass before it can ethically be released for use on an unsuspecting public.”
Syag, what can you tell from PAA’s handwriting?
Even if Dean is right, that doesn’t disprove graphology, it just proves that many/most graphologists are hoaxes, but not that all are.
It doesn’t prove graphology. What it does is demonstrate that there is not much scientific research/data that supports it. To use the inverse of your favorite line on you, “something can be wrong even if I can’t prove it”. The point is that if something doesn’t have sufficient evidence supporting it then we should be skeptical (all the more so if it has evidence against it). I can claim that I can tell about you from looking at techeiles. There is no evidence supporting my claim but you haven’t disproven it. And even if you would demonstrate that all my predictions are wrong, I could just say that it just proves that I am a charlatan but not that you can’t tell about a person from looking at techeiles.
There’s more of a sevara to believe in graphology than techeilesology.
So if you told me you were a techeilesologist, I would think you were a hoax or a meshuggener.
If someone tells me they can tell a lot about a person from their handwriting, I would take it more seriously, especially if I knew the person not to be a charlatan or meshuggener.
“Syag, what can you tell from PAA’s handwriting?”
http://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/your-coffee-room-report-card-comments
“There’s more of a sevara to believe in graphology than techeilesology.”
I beg to differ.
“especially if I knew the person not to be a charlatan or meshuggener.”
So you know Syag to not be a charlatan or meshuggener but you have your doubts about me. But I suspect that the (one of many) reason(s) why you would suspect me of being a charlatan or a meshuggener is precisely because of techeiles(ology).
Do illiterate people not have personalities?
So you know Syag to not be a charlatan or meshuggener but you have your doubts about me. But I suspect that the (one of many) reason(s) why you would suspect me of being a charlatan or a meshuggener is precisely because of techeiles(ology).
Wrong on both counts. If Syag (or for that matter you) would say she can tell a lot about me based on my techeiles, I would think she (or you) was badly mistaken, maybe even a fraud. (Or I would do mental gymnastics to figure out how I misunderstood the claim.)
Until that point, I think she (and you) are not.
I do not think graphology falls into the category of automatic fraud/meshuggener.
And Syag has enough credibility (and sanity) that even if most people who claim proficiency in graphology are lying, I would believe her. (I would probably believe you as well, but I’ve “known” Syag for longer, so I feel more confident, in her case, to apply my skill in coffeeroompostology). For the most part, though, I’m not making a distinction between you and her, I’m making the distinction between the types of claim.
I’m trying to be dan you l’kaf z’chus, but on the off chance that you are implying any sort of dishonesty on Syag’s part, I hereby strongly protest.
Graphology makes more sense than the House-Person-Tree test, or at least as much sense. The problem is that it is erroneously associated with palm ream and star gazing. However, it is not mystical. It is simply an analysis of a reflection of your character. Everything you do is colored by your personality. Why would handwriting be any less?
In stead of bunching any self professed expert together in order to pass an unfavorable judgement, choose one celebrated expert and follow his results — as we see from the Sugya in Shabbos.
HaLeiVi – exactly right. it is not mystical at all. I can tell a lot thru handwriting because it is composed of many neurological components. And many neurological features share commonalities with certain personality features. Not conclusively, but if I see something that is almost always seen in an ‘x’ type of person, I will not assume ‘x’, but I will certainly consider looking for it.
watching them write is really the best way to get the info. Even better is when I have a sample of a paragraph they wrote by themselves vs. another paragraph they copied off of something.
By the way, I wasn’t responding to Syag, I was responding to the original question.
Syag, what would expect to find different in, or how would you read differently, an original paragraph vs. a copied one?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.