I got a couple of quick comments for my earlier post on Graphology so let me elaborate on that further…
About my apprehensions about this ‘science’ called Graphology:
1. A person’s signature/ handwriting keeps on changing over the years – does that mean that his nature/ personality too keeps of changing? In case of changes in handwriting the so called ‘strokes’ or ‘weight’ on letters or the style of writing (spacing between characters, margin etc) does not change.
2. If a person writes with his natural hand – say right hand- and then writes something with his left hand; and then we present these two handwritings to a Graphology expert will he be able to judge that it belongs to same person? In my opinion, he would look at them, apply his technique and describe the personality differently – when actually it’s the same person!
3. In terms of examples given in the books – they take handwriting/ signature specimens of well-known people, say Mahatma gandhi or Hitler or Bill Gates etc., and since they already know these people, their qualities, they just associate those with some pattern in their handwriting. So they already have the result in font of them – how to describe that person – they just weave a nice story around it…Would it be possible to give a handwritten note by some person (could be a politician, singer, actor, sporstman or even a criminal, gangster) and then describe his or her personality?
4. The reason why I object to calling it a science is – science is universal and not person dependent or left to interpretation of the ‘Experts’. Also the results are consistent and proven. We can, at the most, call it an empirical corelation – based on analysis of thousands of handwritings and the corresponding personalities. But patterns give us guideline or templates – they don’t define RULES!
Not sure if I was able to convey my thoughts properly…probably to do so I need specimen of different handwritings…
But I would like to attend some course/ seminar on this topic or at least meet someone who knows this ‘science’ and discuss!
I have similar apprehensions about Vaastu Shastra, Jyotish/ Astrology (of various kinds) and other fad (which are promoted as science!)…more about it sometime later.
~ Kaustubh
ekoshapu 
Hello Carole,That's very insightful comment!My point is – is it a science or empirical study extended to any new piece of handwriting.By science I mean -there is not just pattern, there is CAUSE n EFFECT relationship as well…and hence it is universal.Could we say so about handwriting? For a moment assume that the strokes, particular style of writing do show certain personality traits – however they DO NOT cause it. So how could we extend it to all similar pattern?Pls. help me understand.
LikeLike
On the question about writing with the usual hand and then the non-dominent hand if the analyst would know it was the same person. Probably not but they would still be able to give the traits in the writing. My graphology class did an exercise on this several years ago. We were asked to try and find a childhood writing to bring in, do a writing with the non-dominent hand and compare them. Surprisingly the writing looked very much like the childhood writing because the muscles were trying to make moves that were not yet fluid. Also as you know the opposite part of the brain controls the body so you would be using a whold new set of neurons to write. Still once the movements became fluid thepersonality would be there in the writing.
LikeLike