proteanmix
Plumage and Moult
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2007
- Messages
- 5,514
- Enneagram
- 1w2
Does anyone know the difference between Type Theory and Temperament Theory?
I noticed that Lenore Thomson subscribes to "type theory" while Linda V. Berens subscribes to "temperament theory" and according to Thomson, these two are diametrically opposed.
This is how Thomson describes the difference between the two:
What is she saying? I didn't even realize there where two competing theories about this.
I noticed that Lenore Thomson subscribes to "type theory" while Linda V. Berens subscribes to "temperament theory" and according to Thomson, these two are diametrically opposed.
This is how Thomson describes the difference between the two:
I don't believe that each function determines a particular set of skills, and that the four "top" functions represent our primary access to the behaviors those skills make possible.
I also don't believe that temperament theory has any compatible relationship to type theory, even though they appear to have become hopelessly conflated in the MBTI community.
As far as I'm concerned, temperament theory is trafficking in social archetypes. It suggests that some core package of innate needs impels a type to take his rightful place in the cultural class system and uses a specific set of functions to get them met.
The implication is ultimately rank determinism. You wind up with the sense that there are four different species of human, but each one develops in a pre-determined way in order to feel fulfilled.
Type theory comes at this from the other way around -- the idea that there are four generic psychic activities, S, N, F, and T, but their combinations are highly variable, dependent on biological givens, environment, education, opportunity, and individual ambition. The sixteen standardized combinations are simply that -- a matter of categorical convenience. Every type is an exception to the general rule.
What is she saying? I didn't even realize there where two competing theories about this.