These are but a few examples of the truths upon which the science of character analysis by the observational method is based. Many others may occur to you. Many others have been observed, traced and verified in our work upon this science.
Briefly recapitulating, we see that for every physical difference between men there is a corresponding mental difference, because both the physical differences and the mental differences are the result of the same heredity and environment. We see, further, that these physical and mental differences are not only results of the same environment affecting the individual through his remote ancestry, but that they are tied together by cause and effect in the individual as he stands to-day.
We have told you that the science of character analysis is classified knowledge. It is clear to you by this time that the knowledge which lies at the basis of this science is knowledge concerning physical and mental differences and their correspondences. In this science, therefore, since we are to observe physical differences and from them to determine differences in intellect, in disposition, in natural talents, in character in general, our first classification must deal with these physical differences.
Men differ from one another in nine fundamental ways These ways are: color, form, size, structure, texture, consistency, proportion, expression, and condition. Let us consider each of them briefly.
Color is, perhaps, the most striking variable. You instantly observe whether a person is white or black, brown or yellow. Indeed, so striking are these variations that they were formerly the basis upon which humanity was divided into races.
We have already briefly touched upon the cause for pigmentation and the indications of differences in color. For many years anthropologists were at a loss to understand exactly why some men were black and others white. About twenty years ago, however, Von Schmaedel propounded the theory that pigmentation in the hair, eyes and skin was Nature’s way of protecting the tissues from injury by the actinic or ultra-violet rays of the sun, which destroy protoplasm. Following the enunciation of Von Schmaedel’s theory, prolonged experimentation was made by many anthropologists, chief among whom was our own late Major Charles E. Woodruff, of the U.S. Army. In Major Woodruff’s book, “The Effects of Tropical Light Upon White Men,” are to be found, set forth in a most fascinating way, evidences amounting almost to proof of the correctness of Von Schmaedel’s theory.