CHARACTER
585
CHARACTER
thoughts which they awaken, the particular feelings
with which they are associated in his mind, and the
special volitions to which they give rise are, in spite
of the common nature in which he participates with
other men, in a certain measure peculiar to himself.
Taken collectively they are said to constitute or, more
accurately perhaps, to reveal his character. At any
epoch in mature life a man's character is the resultant
of two distinct classes of fact ors : t lie original or inher-
ited elements of his being, and those which he has
himself acquired. On the one hand, every human
being starts with a certain nature or disposition — a
native endowment of capacities for knowledge, and
feelings, and tendencies towards volitions and action
— which varies with each individual. This dispo-
sition is dependent in part on the structure of the
bodily organism and especially of the nervous system
which he has inherited; in part, perhaps, also on his
soul which has been created. It forms his individ-
uality at the beginning of life; and it includes suscep-
tibilitiea for responding to external influences, and
potentialities for developing in various ways which
differ with each human being. A fundamental erroi
in English psychology from Locke to John Stuart
Mill was the ignoring or under-estimating of this
diversity of native aptitude in different individuals.
Much of the Associationist treatment of the develop-
ment of the human mind proceeded on the assump-
tion of an original equality or similarity of mental
faculty, and consequently tended to ascribe all sub-
sequent differences to a diversity of circumstances.
It vastly exaggerated what has been called the part
played by nurture as compared with that of nature.
It overlooked the fact that the original capacity and
disposition of the individual mind largely determines
how it shall appropriate the experience presented to
it by its environment. This error was peculiarly
unfavourable to t he affording of an adequate account
of character. Since Darwin there has been a return
to the older and truer doctrine which recognized
fully the importance of the original endowment of
each individual. For, although the author of the
" < >rigin of Species" himself exaggerated the influence
of the environment in his biological theory, he ami his
followers were driven to lay great stress upon heredity
and the transmisson from parent to offspring of
individual variations and acquired habits.
The Four Temperaments. — The original endow- ment or native element in character with which the individual starts life is practically identical with \\ hit the Ancients and the Schoolmen recognized under the term temperament. From the times of Hippocrates and Galen they distinguished four main types of tem- perament: the sanguine, the choleric, the phlegmatic, and the melancholic. Curiously enough modern speculation from Kant to Wundt and Fouillee tends to accept Hie same general classification, though some- times under other names. These different types of temperament the Ancients held to be due to tin' pre dominance in the organism of different humours. Modern writers variously account for them by differ- ences of texture and varying solidity of the tissues of the body, by varying development of different parts. by diverse rates of activity in the processes of nutri- tion and waste, in the changes of nerve-energy, or in circulation, and by differences of tonicity in the nerves. Whatever be the true physiological explanation, tin- fourfold classification seems fairly to represent certain markedly contrasted types of disposition, though they leave room for subdivision and intermediate forms. Moreover, though scientists are still far from being agreed as to the precise elements in the organism on which temperament depends, the fact that different forms of temperament have an organic basis seems certain. The transmission from parent to offspring of hereditary dispositions, therefore, involves no conflict with the doctrine of the creation of each human soul.
Although our original temperament is thus given
to us independently of our will, we ourselves play an
important part in the moulding of our character, and
we thus become responsible for certain ethical qual-
ities in it. Character has been defined as "a com-
pletely fashioned will". It would be more accurate
to say that character is "natural temperament com-
pletely fashioned by the will". It is, in fact, a
resultant of the combination of our acquired habits
with our original disposition. As the quality, shape,
and structure of the organism and of its different
parts may be variously modified in the process of
growth — especially during the plasticity of early life —
by variations in nutrition, exercise, and environment,
so may the faculties of the soul be variously developed
by the manner in which it is exercised, and by the
nature of the objects on which its faculties are em-
ployed. Among the acquired elements which go to
the building up of character may be distinguished
those pertaining to cognition, whether sensuous or
intellectual, and those belonging to the emotional and
volitional activities of the soul. Exercise strengthens
the power and widens the range of each faculty,
creating, not uncommonly, a craving for further exer-
cise in the same direction. The regular use of the
intellect, the controlled activity of the imagination,
the practice of judgment and reflexion, all contribute
to the formation of habits of mind more or less
thoughtful and refined. The frequent indulgence in
particular forms of emotion, such as anger, envy,
sympathy, melancholy, fear, and the like, fosters
tendencies towards these sentiments which give a
subconscious bent to a large part of man's behaviour.
But finally the exercise of the will plays the predom-
inant part in moulding the type of character which is
being formed. The manner and degree in which cur-
rents of thought and waves of emotion are initiated,
guided, and controlled by the will, or allowed to follow
the course of spontaneous impulse, has not less effect
in determining the resultant type of character than
the quality of the thoughts or emotions themselves.
The life of the lower animal is entirely ruled by
instinct frotn within, and by accidental circum-
stances from without. It is therefore incapable of
acquiring a character. Man, through the awakening
of reason and the growth of reflexion, by the exercise
of deliberate choice against the movements of
impulse, gradually develops self-control; and it is by
the exercise of this power that moral character is
especially formed. Character is in fact the outco
of a series of volitions, and it is for this reason we are responsible for our characters, as we are for the individual habits which go to constitute them.
Types of Character. — Starting from the basis of the four fundamental temperaments, various classifi- cations of types of character have been adopted by different writers. The intellectual, the emotional, and the volitional or energetic stand for the chief types with A. Bain. M. Perez, taking for his prin- ciple of division the phenomenon of movement, dis- tinguishes characters as lively, slow, ardent, and
01 well balanced. M. Ribot, proceeding from a more subjective ground of division and excluding indefinite and unstable types as strictly speaking characterli bs, recognizes as the most general forms: the sensitive, subdivided into the humble, contemplative and emotional; the at ti\e. subdivided
into the great and the mediocre: and the apathetic,
subdivided into the purely apathetic or dull; and the calculateurs or intelligent. By combination these again afford new types. M. Fouillee take- sensitive,
intellectual, and volitional for his scheme anil by cross-combinations and subdivisions works out an equally complex plan. MM. Paulhan, Queyral and Fouillee and Malapert have each different divisions of their own, thus establishing, at all events, the impossi- bility of attaining agreement on the subject,
