Серед них був швейцарський священик

Серед них був швейцарський священик Іоган Каспар Лафатер (1741-1801). Він пішов далі свого вчителя, адже од володів логічним складом розуму і незвичайною інтуїцією. А що особливо цінно - він використовував відомості, отримані на сповіді людей, добре йому знайомих. І міг зіставляти риси обличчя і справжній характер людей, який вони відкривали священику. Його обожнювали і навіть побоювалися, він написав багато книг по фізіогноміці, але в підсумку його праці зазнали критики офіційної науки. Будучи людиною - практиком, він занадто суб'єктивно описав всі закономірності, і він не зміг систематизувати свої спостереження.

Results (English) 1:

Among them was a Swiss priest Johahn Kaspar Lafater (1741-1801). He went on his teacher, because od possessed the logical composition of mind and an extraordinary intuition. And what is particularly valuable-he used information obtained in confession people well to him friends. And could you compare the facial features and the true nature of the people, which they opened to the priest. His adored and even feared, he wrote many books on fìzìognomìcì, but eventually his writings were criticized the official science. Being human-practitioner, he too subjectively described all laws, and he was not able to systematize their surveillance.

Results (English) 2:

Among them was a Swiss priest Johann Kaspar Lavater (1741-1801). He went on his teacher because units had a logical turn of mind and extraordinary intuition. What is particularly valuable - he used information obtained in confession people, well he knew. I could compare the features and the true nature of people, they opened a priest. His adored and even feared he wrote many books on fiziohnomitsi, but eventually his work been criticized official science. Being a man - a practice he described all too subjective patterns, and he could not organize their observations.

Results (English) 3:

Among them was swiss priest Iogan Kaspar Lafater (1741- 1801). He went of further the teacher, because from possessed logical composition intellect and by uncommon intuition. And what especially valuably - he used data ,Are received on the confession of people to, well it familiar. And could zistavlyati the features of face and the real character of people, what they opened priest. It adored and even apprehended, he wrote many books on fiziognomitsi ,However in conclusion it work experienced the criticism of official science. Being by man - praktikom, he too subjectively delineated all laws, and he was able systematize the observations.