Self-Quantification : From Bumps to Bytes


In the ever-evolving landscape of self-understanding and personal optimization, the practice of phrenology stands as a historical curiosity, simultaneously fascinating and controversial. Emerging in the late 18th century and reaching its zenith in the 19th century, phrenology was a pseudoscience that sought to decipher the intricacies of one's personality, character, and mental faculties through the study of the shape and contours of the human skull. Although discredited and widely regarded as a relic of the past, phrenology's exploration of the relationship between the brain's structure and human behavior offers a unique perspective when viewed through the modern lens of the quantified-self movement.

A Historical Perspective

At the core of phrenology was the belief that the brain's surface, the cerebral cortex, was divided into distinct regions, each responsible for specific mental faculties and personality traits. Phrenologists proposed that by feeling the bumps and depressions on the skull, one could identify the relative development of these regions and consequently assess an individual's character and predispositions. Traits such as benevolence, destructiveness, conscientiousness, and even spirituality were thought to be localized in specific cranial areas. 

While phrenology correctly proposed that the brain had distinct regions with specific functions, its credibility began to wane as scientific findings contradicted its claims. Studies of patients with brain injuries demonstrated that specific cognitive functions can be affected by damage to different areas of the brain, often not aligned with phrenological predictions. Even phrenologists themselves did not agree with one another, considering there was no agreed upon number for the number of parts that the brain comprised of. As a result, phrenology gradually lost its standing in the face of advancing scientific discoveries, ultimately fading into obscurity.

Curiosity of the Self

Intriguingly, the spirit of phrenology in its quest for self-discovery and personal optimization has persisted till today in the form of the quantified-self movement. In today's data-rich world, individuals are harnessing technology to track and analyze various aspects of their lives, from physical health metrics like steps taken and heart rate to mental well-being indicators such as mood and productivity. The quantified-self movement revolves around the idea that by collecting and interpreting this data, individuals can gain valuable insights into their habits, behaviors, and overall well-being. 

 Both endeavors seek to provide individuals with a better understanding of themselves, albeit through vastly different means. While phrenology's approach was deeply flawed, it can be viewed as an early attempt to quantify and categorize the self — an effort to create a personalized profile based on physical attributes. In contrast, modern self-quantification leverages the power of data and technology to construct a more accurate, dynamic, and actionable picture of one's physical and mental state.

The reason for phrenology's historical appeal lies in its audacity – the audacity to claim that one could discern an individual's character simply by measuring the contours of their skull. While we now recognize the fallacy of this belief, it reflects a human desire that persists to this day — the desire to grasp the essence of who we are and what makes us tick.

The quantified-self movement, on the other hand, relies on advanced technologies such as wearable devices, smartphone apps, and biometric sensors to collect precise data on various aspects of an individual's life.

This modern approach, however, stands in stark contrast to phrenology's reliance on physical attributes and subjective assessments. Instead, it leverages the power of data and technology to construct a more accurate, dynamic, and actionable picture of one's physical and mental state.

The Dark Side of Self Quantification

Phrenology is riddled with inherent problems that have contributed to its widely discredited status today. It lacked a scientific foundation, relying on subjective observations rather than rigorous empirical evidence. This absence of empirical support is a fundamental flaw that undermines its credibility. 

Yet, it's clear that something more than just a lack of scientific credibility played a role in phrenology's decline. It not only lost its hold on past societies but faded into obscurity altogether. In modern times, similar methods of self-quantification — like astrology — exist to give a physical explanation of our intangible characteristics, and they are used by many. 

Instead of using bumps on one's head to measure mental qualities of a person, astrology suggests that the positions and movements of celestial bodies, such as planets and stars, can influence human affairs and personality traits. It operates on the idea that the arrangement of these celestial objects at the time of a person's birth can provide insights into their character, behavior, and life path. Astrologers use a birth chart, which is a map of the positions of the planets at a specific moment, to make interpretations about an individual's strengths, challenges, and potential life events.







Inherent Evil in Self Quantification

What makes phrenology nefarious?

Considering its subjective foundations, phrenology not only propagated damaging stereotypes but also fortified prevailing biases related to race, gender, and social class. Most noticeably, phrenology was often accompanied by race realist ideas in an attempt to show that human beings can be categorized into different species, and the differences in skull shape would convey how evolved a person was from their distant primate relatives. This not only bred discrimination but also deepened societal rifts. Phrenologists would make sweeping character assessments, frequently leading to misguided judgments and misinterpretations about diverse groups of people.

While its inception may have been rooted in the pursuit of self-understanding, its flawed methodology and ethical failures ultimately overshadow any potential insights it might have promised.

Though I do believe that the implementation of the self-quantification method determines whether or not it is evil, there certainly can be self-quantification methods that have a higher potential to be used for evil. Phrenology is one of those methods.

The physical quantity that you measure to infer things regarding one's mental faculties play a huge role in determining the potential good or evil that these methods can cause. For example, in the case of phrenology, the shape of one's head could easily be linked to race, gender, or social class. These sensitive factors shape one's identity, and often in history we see conflicts arising between people because of a difference in factors that make up their identity.

Astrology, on the other hand, speaks about the nature of people in such a general way that many people find themselves agreeing with what the astrological quantifiers seemingly entail. In this case, the vagueness of the quantifier's prediction reduces the potential for harm. What astrology lacks is the specificity of prediction that could lead to the harmful stereotyping and discrimination associated with phrenology. Phrenology, by contrast, attempts to make specific character assessments based on physical attributes, which can easily lead to biased judgments.

Furthermore, the historical context in which these methods emerged also plays a crucial role. Phrenology emerged in an era marked by deeply ingrained biases and discriminatory practices. Its flawed premise only served to reinforce and legitimize existing prejudices. This historical backdrop significantly heightens the potential for phrenology to be used for malicious purposes.

Despite these differences in potential evil, ultimately the moral implications of different methods of self-quantification depend on the ways that they are implemented. If phrenology never had a racist, sexist, and classist history — even though it has the potential to be weaponized for such reasons — then it could still have been as widespread today as astrology is. 


Sources

Articles:


Image Credits:

READY FOR GRADING