Physiognomy finds itself in a strange position. On the one hand, it is considered false and even dangerous by common sense as a pseudo-scientific theory; on the other hand, it is implicitly practiced by everyone every day (Brandt 1980. Face reading. The persistence of physiognomy. Psychology Today 14(7). 90–96). This situation calls for an explanation. After a brief discussion of the problems of classical physiognomic theories, I will show how they embody the equational model of the sign and how this perspective helps in the understanding of why physiognomy have proved to be false. I will then introduce two recent articles by Dumouchel (2022. Making faces. Topoi 41. 631–639) and Crippen and Rolla (2022. Faces and situational agency. Topoi 41. 659–670) that address the perception of faces from a situated and ecological point of view. I will argue that these theories embody the inferential model of the sign, thus paving the way for a new science of the face.

中文翻译：

---

方程与推论之间的面相理论

面相学发现自己处于一个奇怪的位置。一方面，它被常识认为是错误的，甚至是危险的伪科学理论；另一方面，每个人每天都在隐性地练习（Brandt 1980。面相阅读。面相的持久性。今日心理学14（7）。90–96）。这种情况需要一个解释。在简要讨论经典面相理论的问题之后，我将展示它们如何体现符号的等式模型，以及这种观点如何帮助理解为什么面相被证明是错误的。然后我将介绍 Dumouchel 最近的两篇文章（2022. 做鬼脸。托波伊41. 631–639）以及 Crippen 和 Rolla（2022。面孔和情境机构。托波伊41. 659–670）从情境和生态的角度解决了面孔的感知。我认为这些理论体现了符号的推理模型，从而为新的面部科学铺平了道路。