Reading Faces 

 

 A Very Old Skill with Many Versions

Naomi Tickle, Founder
  Books by Naomi   Relationship Profile

Excerpts from Naomi's Books

Courses and Workshops

Order What Makes People Tick & Why

 

From a Judge's Courtroom -- A Modern Version

Judge Edward Vincent Jones watched thousands people in his courtroom for many years, until he found he could reliably predict their personality, behavior and innate abilities from their facial features. These were not expressions, emotions and gestures, but basic hereditary structures and shapes in the face. He was so fascinated by this knowledge that he maintained detailed records. From this mass of knowledge he realized he had documented a new science.

 

Today we use special tools to measure 78 facial features. This information tells us, for example, how we process information, handle new situations, our communication style, and our innate abilities.

 

As a guide to career placement the Department of Labor has listed the skills and traits for hundreds of different careers. We enter the facial information into a computer program which searches a database of career requirements to find the best career match for your innate abilities and talents.

 

Facial Features Can't Cheat

  The accuracy is astonishing. In written tests for personality, and career aptitude, e.g. Meyers Briggs and DISC there is a tendency to bias answers toward the result you're hoping for. But with facial features there are no questions asked, and no handwriting sample required. You couldn't cheat if you tried. This is why the information is so valuable, and accurate for career selection, sales, management, customer relations, counseling, coaching, team building, marriage,  relationships, family problems, etc.  

 

                           Sign up for Naomi's Newsletter Series -->




Aristotle had one of the first known systems for reading faces. The skills have been rediscovered many times during the past 4000 years.





Proving the System

Jones shared his discovery and his records with Robert Whiteside, a newspaper editor. He was impressed with the accuracy, and immediately saw the value of Jones's work for real human situations. Whiteside set up detailed tests with a group of a 1050 adults -- enough to get an accurate statistical validation.  The result -- 92% accuracy.