As I expected questions and enquiries aroused as to how one can deduce JUST from the observation of a person’s walk, what his or her personality is?
Well, it is without a doubt my fault and failure in the lack of elaboration as to what I really meant to state, when I noted that I can confidently deduce one’s personality from his/her walk, however, to expand, a walk needs to be observed on a Gestalt framework, that, Yes, I will form a real complete personality understanding from just the walk, but I will then have to take into account all those various ‘personalities windows’, the eyes, arms, expressions, facials, verbalism etc., not to gain a full picture but rather to correct my initial perception and deduction.
That, I know the theory is a little bit fuzzy, as a result of it being lets say ”partism” or even ‘peculiar’ at times, but the theory in its simplest form and argument is that, I, as an observer and you, as the object of my observation, can be understood in completeness, as a result of your mode of walking; broad, open-legs, shy, closed, receptive, confident, boosting, egoistic and so forth; it is the walk which gives your essence away to me at first contact. Then the rest comes in, only to support my observation. So why not the eyes, the ‘rest’? My personal view is, these are socialised modes of expressions; there are some cultures looking directly, or holding eye-contact is frowned upon as disrespectful, or inferiority, or sexual intimacy and the likes, unlike, here in the western interpreted as truthful, confident and open. So this is the reason, to myself at least, as to why I have not much faith in these other modes of observation in their entirety, but rather, sees these as ‘benchmarking tools’ of approval or reassessment of the walk-deduction. Walking, is unique to each individual from the first-steps of a child, we condition ourselves through our unconscious soma-intellectual reasoning to develop our unique external signature; our ”first-independence”, is our first-self-definition”.