MBTI and the Four Temperaments (Humors)

[GranChi]

After thinking about it, I think the way I'd do it is this:

EF = Sanguine
ET = Choleric
IN = Melancholic
IS = Phlegmatic

Maybe ESFP can be the pure sanguine, ENTJ the pure choleric, INTP the pure melancholic, and ISFJ the pure phlegmatic. That would allow for the secondary temperaments - for example, I'm INFP, so I'm a melancholic blend because of the IN, but the remaining two letters are FP (together in the pure sanguine) so that would make me melancholic-sanguine (which I do think is the blend that fits me best).

It might not be perfect, but I think it works pretty well.

 

[zelo1954]

There're a number of ways of thinking about this. But I reckon that the two MBTI dimensions that are important here are the two mode of living ones - I/E and J/P. There can be little disagreement that Sanguine/Choleric are the extroverts and Melancholic/Phlegmatic the introverts. Here's one take on how the rest of it might fit in: EJ (Sanguine); EP (Choleric); IJ (Phlegmatic); IP (Melancholic).

Another way is to base it on one's judging function. I've heard the terms "unstable" and "stable" with respect to the four humours. If we replace "stable" with "thinking" and "unstable" with "feeling" then we arrive at: ET (Sanguine); EF (Choleric); IT (Phlegmatic); IF (Melancholic).

I don't think either of these quite works but each is internally consistent. Lack of internal consistency is one issue I have with the four Keirsey temperaments. The two sensing temperaments are paired with J/P but the two intuitive temperaments with F/T.

 

[Eric B]

Temperament and MBTI have totally different frameworks, and weren't created with each other in mind (Or, Myers may have been creating another four type system similar to DISC, but when she decided to incorporate Jung's concepts, classic temperament fell completely by the wayside, and the new "temperaments" were deemed to be SF, ST, NF, NT).
So when Keirsey recombined the theories, it just so happened that S/N tied together opposite temperaments (Sanguine, Melancholy; and Phlegmatic, Choleric. Kant already had the temperaments on a matrix similar to this), and that the S or N temperaments were differentiated from each other by either T/F or J/P.

Eysenck is the one who added "Neuroticism" (stability) to temperament, and it pretty much followed the original people/task dimension: Sanguine, Phlegmatic: stable; Melancholic, Choleric: unstable. People/task in both the Keirsey temperaments and Interaction Styles are tied to both T/F and J/P, but in an alternating fashion (like for the Keirsey groups with S/N as the dividing line). Basically, People-focus: F, P; task focus: T, J.

[MENTION=18005]GranChi[/MENTION]; I thought you said you identified with Supine. Remember, it expresses like a Melancholy and responds like a Sanguine, so that is why you would identify with both. Perhaps you just prefer to use the more common four temperament systems? But I think the fifth temperament really explains things, without having to try to get FP to be Melancholic.

Basically, as most acknowledge, Phlegmatic and Melancholic will be more I, while Sanguine and Choleric will be E
Melancholic and Sanguine will be more S, while Phlegmatic and Choleric will be more N, not the other way around for Melancholic and Phlegmatic. Melancholic is very insistent on familiarity, which is connected with Si, while Sanguine will be more Se oriented, of course.
Melancholic and Choleric will be more T, while Sanguine and Phlegmatic will be more F.
Melancholic and Choleric will be more J, while Sanguine and Phlegmatic will be more P.
In both cases. think of a peaceful, easygoing diplomatic Phlegmatic, and a fun and people-loving Sanguine, and serious, critical Melancholics and Cholerics.

(This is the pure temperaments, of course. It will vary in the blends).

 

[GranChi]

I did identify with supine, but I prefer the traditional temperament system - with just the original four - to the system you use, so I'm just working with the four. I can see how S shares attention to detail with melancholic, but melancholic seems more defined by idealism, philosophical thoughtfulness, and commitment to ideas, which from what I know is more associated with N. I think I've read that sanguines see the surface more while their more-or-less opposite melancholics look for meaning and depth, which sounds like an S and N contrast. (Just a side thought: I think Isaac Newton can be thought of as the ideal melancholic. Out of curiosity, does anyone know what his type was?) I actually thought of phlegmatic as the stick-to-what-they-know temperament that prefers stability - rather than melancholic - and IS's seem to fit the uncomplicated, carefree phlegmatic personality. While I agree that P seems more right for phlegmatic while J seems more right for melancholic, I thought the stable, helpful ISFJ and the perfectionistic, intellectual INTP sound very phlegmatic and melancholic, respectively, from what I've read about them. (I also couldn't put ISFP for phlegmatic and INTJ for melancholic if I was going to allow for blends, since those are simply sanguine and choleric with I instead of E.) The way I did it gave each temperament two P blends and two J blends, actually.
That's just where I'm coming from, [MENTION=3521]Eric B[/MENTION]; Your way and mine both have strengths, in my opinion, and I can see you know a lot about this. I think we use slightly different versions of the temperaments, which could account for seeing some of this differently.

 

[Eric B]

Those "traditional" systems (which aren't really developed; they go strictly by behavioral traits —rather than driving needs, which only give an idea, but could be affected by other things) don't really define temperament blends, so since both INFJ and INTJ is Melancholic on the surface (INJ-Interaction Style, introverted, directive), they could have colored this "idealism, philosophical thoughtfulness, and commitment to ideas" stereotype, and knowing ISTJ's who are the purest Melancholics, they can be those ways from a combination of things (Introversion, just being T; deep "Thinkers", tertiary Fi, inferior Ne in older people). Those four temperament systems don't sort all of this out. Temperaments can behave in similar ways, but for different reasons.

Phlegmatic's behavior is not from Si "familiarity", as from a lack of energy. (That's a big evidence of five-temperament theory. The Phlegmatic is really moderate, because it is not driven due to lower energy. Or, in four temperament theory, where it is introverted and people-focused; those two poles produce some of that behavior as well).

ISFJ is Phlegmatic (if not Supine) because of the ISF, not the IS by itself. INTP seems Melancholic because of the combination of introversion with the structure focus of the NT. Again, other temperament systems don't sort this out, so the factor traits become blurred or melded together. The classic temperament system is really blind to S/N, except for it tying together opposite conative (Keirseyan) groups.

ISFP likewise would be Phlegmatic because of the ISF. You're now saying you wouldn't put that, though you said IS was Phlegmatic. ISF can also be Supine, and it seems the Fi-preferring IF's are Supine more often than Phlegmatic (OrangeAppled is a Phlegmatic INFP, and they seem a bit different, and confuse as INTP's, who are more often Phlegmatic, with Supines confusing as NFP).
The SP part makes ISFP part Sanguine, while INTJ is Melancholic-Choleric, so that's why you would see them as Sanguine and Choleric, respectively.

Each temperament actually ends up with seven types associated with it. Four Keirsey temperaments and four Interaction Styles, with one type being that temperament in both areas. So all temperaments will be associated with all eight letters in one blend or another.

	E	I	S	N	T	F	J	P
Melancholic	2	5	5	2	4	3	6	1
Choleric	5	2	2	5	6	1	5	2
Sanguine	5	2	5	2	3	4	1	6
Phlegmatic/Supine	5	2	2	5	1	6	3	4

This is using this as the key:

 

[GranChi]

I wasn't clear about ISFP, sorry - what I meant to say was that I wouldn't put it as pure phlegmatic (which I had ISFJ for). According to the system I said before, I'd consider ISFP to be phlegmatic-sanguine (primary phlegmatic because of the IS, secondary sanguine because of the remaining FP). Likewise, I would consider INTJ to be melancholic-choleric, which you also said.
I've actually been wondering, why do people associate melancholic with the SJ "guardian" temperament? I would think people would associate melancholic with introverted NT rationals (analytical and perfectionistic) or NF idealists (creative and passionate) rather than with SJs. SJs seem to tend towards conformity and like the security of being in a group, and their worldview mostly come from their community's established values; melancholics seek to be independent and individualistic, and they develop their worldview according to their inner principles and their own ideas of morality. In fact, I'd think melancholics would frequently be disillusioned with the society around them, not loyal to it. Like I said before, they are the ones who seek to "go beyond the surface". (I can see the melancholic-SJ similarity in dedication to their work, but not in much else.)

 

[Eric B]

The way it works is ISFP= ISF (Phlegmatic or Supine) +SP (Sanguine). INTJ= INJ(Melancholic) +NT (Choleric). If you say NT is Melancholic, then IJ is supposed to be Choleric? If Choleric uses I/E, it would be E.

Again, there are two levels of temperament: affective (social or Interaction Style) and conative (Keirseyan, which deals with action, or by extension, leadership).

The Guardian description of "needing groups" threw me off as well (makes it sound Sanguine almost), but SJ is a conative group. It's not about basic social skills at the surface of personality. (That would be IST/INJ for Melancholic). So the "groups" SJ's need are not social groups, but rather institutions, whether formal (like a business or government) or informal (like family). It is the "concrete structure" they need, which makes them actually task, rather than people-focused. In APS terminology, they have a criteria for accepting control (authority), and that is that it is an authorized institution. This meets their Si need for familiarity.

This (conformity, etc) really is very typical of Melancholic behavior (goes along with "perfectionistic"), but many of those traits quizzes focus on "analytical", "independent" or "deep emotions", but you have to understand those things in context. Analytical is T in general (hence, IST and NT alike); their emotional side is tied to tertiary Fi (for the pure Melancholy) and independence is both I, plus a combination of having their control need met (They become good independent leaders within the institutions they become part of), in addition to the impression given when someone not "authorized" tries to control them. (Like with a lot of abstract, untested ideas). They resist and refuse to become "dependent" on that person.

Likewise, I was confused by Keirsey saying the SP was the "artistic" one, when in classic temperament theory, the Melancholic is. I would say artisticness, at least in a more visual or musical sense, is more S in general, and for the pure Melancholic, it will be Si+Fi, while for the SP, it will simply be their Se, which also gives them some of the Sanguine traits mentioned in classic theory, such as a "swing" between aggressiveness and passivity or "narcissistic interludes".

 

[GranChi]

The way it works is ISFP= ISF (Phlegmatic or Supine) +SP (Sanguine). INTJ= INJ(Melancholic) +NT (Choleric). If you say NT is Melancholic, then IJ is supposed to be Choleric? If Choleric uses I/E, it would be E.

I know this is late, but no, I said I'd determine primary temperament with EF/ET/IN/IS, with IN being melancholic, and so the remaining two letters TJ would signify choleric.
Also, I'm curious, how did you originally learn about the temperaments? Because as you can probably tell, we seem to have quite different concepts of the introverted temperaments. Especially for the melancholic - the need for structure and authorized institutions you're describing is far from the free-thinking, discontented types I've understood melancholics to be. (As for me, I got interested in the temperaments a while ago - before MBTI, actually - and read about them on a bunch of different web pages I found, plus Fig Hunter, a few of those Christian ones that come up, and good old Wikipedia).

 

[Eric B]

So then ISTJ would end up Phlegmatic-Choleric. Nah... they're the most Melancholic.

I learned of temperament from the Arno theory (temperaments.info), with LaHaye (Why You Act th Way You Do) as sort of the basic primer. And Interaction Styles confirm classic temperament theory for the 16 types. (Berens even recently distinguished them from Keirsey's “temperaments” as being the “classic” theory: http://lindaberens.com/worry-about-yourself-how-directing-can-you-get)
Again, the Melancholic is defined as reserved and task-focused, and that fits the descriptions I use.

Now, where exactly did you get your conception of the temperaments; particularly the Melancholic being “free-thinking” and “discontented”?
That sounds like it might fit either a Melancholic mixed with other temperaments (Sanguine-ISTP, Choleric-INTJ, or Phlegmatic-INFJ), or one whose needs are totally frustrated, by a corrupt, inefficient or unauthorized structure, and thus go into a sort of “rebellious” mode.

 

[GranChi]

Yeah, I would have ISTJs as phlegmatic-choleric based on what I outlined, but to tell the truth, I do agree that they seem more like melancholics than phlegmatics (who are often said to dislike work). I wanted to correlate IN with melancholic, though, because I think INTPs and INFJs both seem very melancholic. (Although I guess if you're an INTP and you're mostly phlegmatic/supine, I can't be totally right on that - do you know what other INTPs have said?)
Thanks, I'll look at the sites you mentioned if I get time. As for your question, I guess it's because melancholics are consistently described as the most introverted temperament as well as the most thoughtful and analytical, and people like that naturally come to conclusions inwardly based on their own careful reflection; they wouldn't care whether their ideas are conventional or not. The original definition of the melancholic was "slow to form an impression, but holds on to the impression for a long time", and this suggests that the melancholic gets its deeply-held beliefs from thinking a lot about the world, rather than from accepting the values of others or the community (especially since they tend to be loners). The Fig Hunter page, for example, characterizes them as guided by their own principles and relying on their own judgement over anyone else's. As for discontented, I got the impression that melancholics' frequent unhappiness is partly caused by seeing all the problems in the world around them, as they dislike imperfection and tend to be idealistic (Wikipedia says they often get hung up on the world's tragedy). Also, I've read that they often feel misunderstood and out of place in the world around them, in contrast to the sanguine who can usually fit right in.

 

[Eric B]

Yeah, I would have ISTJs as phlegmatic-choleric based on what I outlined, but to tell the truth, I do agree that they seem more like melancholics than phlegmatics (who are often said to dislike work). I wanted to correlate IN with melancholic, though, because I think INTPs and INFJs both seem very melancholic. (Although I guess if you're an INTP and you're mostly phlegmatic/supine, I can't be totally right on that - do you know what other INTPs have said?)
Thanks, I'll look at the sites you mentioned if I get time. As for your question, I guess it's because melancholics are consistently described as the most introverted temperament as well as the most thoughtful and analytical, and people like that naturally come to conclusions inwardly based on their own careful reflection; they wouldn't care whether their ideas are conventional or not. The original definition of the melancholic was "slow to form an impression, but holds on to the impression for a long time", and this suggests that the melancholic gets its deeply-held beliefs from thinking a lot about the world, rather than from accepting the values of others or the community (especially since they tend to be loners). The Fig Hunter page, for example, characterizes them as guided by their own principles and relying on their own judgement over anyone else's. As for discontented, I got the impression that melancholics' frequent unhappiness is partly caused by seeing all the problems in the world around them, as they dislike imperfection and tend to be idealistic (Wikipedia says they often get hung up on the world's tragedy). Also, I've read that they often feel misunderstood and out of place in the world around them, in contrast to the sanguine who can usually fit right in.

Melancholic was “long response-time delay; long response-time sustain”. That basically amounts to introversion and task-focus. Introverts are generally slower to approach others for interaction, and holding on to the negative emotions longer becomes tied to task focus, and either low “agreeableness” or high “neuroticism”.
It's not necessarily just “impressions”.

So in both dimensions, they're very inward focused. (Cognitively as well: Si need for familiarity). This, however, is what makes them tend to protect themselves from the outside world with what's known as “concrete structure” or an institution. At least in the conative area (SJ), that is. They don't accept just any “convention”; it must meet a strict criteria of their own. (Like what you said). In a society like this dominated by SJ's, they end up often defining what's “conventional”, but where they're a minority, they would seem more like the descriptions you're using.

 

[Eric B]

Forgot to add:
Most INTP's do end up identifying with Melancholic, but then I believe that's because of the blend of Phlegmatic or Supine (INP) with Choleric (NT). Of course, you could theoretically argue the same thing with ISTJ. But I think the Keirsey temperament + Interaction Styles model sorts it out better.
You can think of IT in general as being a kind of “Melancholic” on the surface (and for three of the types, it is), or what I would call a “social image” of being reserved (I), and having a critical edge (T ); but for INTP, I is apart of Interaction Styles, while T is apart of the conative temperament. The P is actually the NTP's social factor, and it's actually more agreeable or “people focused” (as opposed to the more critical, task-focused “J”). They just don't look like it on the outside.
It's a matter of how the temperaments are “sorted”.

 

[MBTIftw]

I found this info on another website:
Here are the "blended temperaments" that result, using the original four temperaments:
ISTJ: pure Melancholy ISFJ: PhlegmaticMelancholy INFJ: MelancholyPhlegmatic INTJ: MelancholyCholeric
ISTP: MelancholySanguine ISFP: PhlegmaticSanguine INFP: Pure phlegmatic INTP: PhlegmaticCholeric
ESTP: CholericSanguine ESFP: pure Sanguine ENFP: SanguinePhlegmatic ENTP: SanguineCholeric
ESTJ: CholericMelancholy ESFJ: SanguineMelancholy ENFJ: CholericPhlegmatic ENTJ: pure Choleric

 

[Eric B]

Yes, that was from my sites. It's Interaction Styles = Keirsey temperaments (but using the corresponding Galen names).

 

[Dancing_Queen]

Correlating systems it's undoubtedly interesting and fun for speculation purposes, but unfortunately a lot of people take it too seriously and think it can pin down to a science.

Whenever I take Temperament tests I get either Sanguine or Sanguine/Choleric, depending on the options. Because of that I had most people insisting I had to be either ESTP, ESFP or even ENTJ in my "Please, type me" threads in this forum and another.

But my real type is ENFP, which I only got after being professionally tested. The problem is I only really feel like the "Artisan" and "In Charge" interaction styles really describe me in both my best and worst aspects.

Which according to Keirsey theories and the last correlation charts made by [MENTION=3521]Eric B[/MENTION],doesn't make any sense at all

 

[Eric B]

How do these together fit? (Don't remember if I've ever ran these by you).

http://www.temperaments.info/Temperament-Area-of-Inclusion/sanguine-inclusion.htm
http://www.temperaments.info/Temperament-Area-of-Control/supine-control.htm

That second one is exclusive to that system, so if you take other temperament tests, it will be off. IT would make sense to come out as just Sanguine then, because Supine and Sanguine have the same needs. You could come out as some Sanguine Choleric mix because they are both expressive, and a Sanguine when angry might seem like a Choleric, and this could be picked up as such on the cheaper tests. So that would explain you swinging between SP and In Charge.

 

[autumnandtherain]

I've thought about the possibility of temperaments (humors) working together with MBTI to form more "flavors" through the types and I think it's a very interesting subject. But I disagree that you can pin down someone's temperament based on their MBTI type... I'm an INFJ, which means if I were to just assume by what's been discussed here, I'd be Melancholic/Phlegmatic, but in reality I'm Melancholic/Sanguine, and my least temperament is Phlegmatic. I think Fe may have something to do with my secondary Sanguineness...

 

[Eric B]

Again, you might be Melancholy Supine (check that second link in the above post), and if you took a four temperament only test, then the Supine won't be recognized, so some of its traits might come out Sanguine.

Phlegmatic and Supine are similar in some ways, but are different. Both are what you could call "amiable" and rather reserved, but the Phlegmatic is reserved because of low energy and can take people or leave them, while the Supine is reserved because of fear of rejection, and really wants acceptance and recognition, which is like the Sanguine.
It overall is closest to Phlegmatic of the ancient four, so that's why the two get bundled together in the Behind the Scenes or NF type groups.

 

[greenfairy]

EXXP=Sanguine
EXXJ=Choleric
IXXP=Phlegmatic
IXXJ=Melancholic

This is what I was thinking.


I don't relate to any of them.

 

[RoadPaveMent]

The ppl I know IRL...
Choleric: ESTJ
Melancholic: INTJ
Supine: INFJ, INFP
Phlegmatic: ISTP
Sanguine: ESFJ, ESFP