Many people from the educated classes have to move in two totally different milieus - the domestic circle and the world of affairs. These two totally different environments demand two totally different attitudes, which, depending on the degree of the ego's 𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 with the attitude of the moment, produce a duplication of character. In accordance with social conditions and requirements, the social character is oriented on the one hand by the expectations and demands of society, and on the other by the social aim and aspirations of the individual. The domestic character is, as a rule, moulded by emotional demands and an easy-going acquiescence for the sake of comfort and convenience; whence it frequently happens that men who in public life are extremely energetic, spirited, obstinate, wilful and ruthless appear good-natured, mild, compliant, even weak, when at home and in the bosom of the family. Which is the true character, the real personality? The question is often impossible to answer.
These reflections show that even in normal individuals character-splitting is by no means an impossibility. The answer to the above question is that such a man has no real character at all: he is not 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘶𝘢𝘭, but 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦, the plaything of circumstance and general expectations. Were he individual, he would have the same character despite the variation of attitude. He would not be identical with the attitude of the moment, and he neither would nor could prevent his 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 from expressing itself just as clearly in one state as in another. Naturally, he is individual, like every living being, but unconsciously so. Because of his more or less complete identification with the attitude of the moment, he deceives others, and often himself, as to his real character. He puts on a 𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘬, which he knows is in keeping with his conscious intentions, while it also meets the requirements and fits the opinions of society, first one motive and then the other gaining the upper hand.