Temperament by Inclusion, Control and Affection

[Eric B]

I’m not sure if I’m melancholy exactly just with the descriptions melancholy phlegmatic fits better then the others in comparison. My F is certain it’s just balanced though at times I do wonder but I put that to being indecisive.
Yeah SJ I can relate, I think my Si is pretty strong.

Would make perfect sense for your in-between Control.

I typed myself and from people on the Enneagram institute as a E6, could I be? Cause I see a lot of E4traits but not as much as E6 so I assumed I have a four in my tri-fix.

6 seems very Supine (especially from the videos on one of the Enneagram sites), and that would basically be a reasonable match. 4 seemed like a more moderate Supine or Melancholy; hence I placed it in between those as S-P or M-P. So if you're saying you can be either 4 or 6, that would make perfect sense. (I believe 4 and 6 should be next to each other in the wing system, and they are more similar to each other than 5. 4 seems like it would be between 5 and 6).

I know for the most part that I'm behind the scenes interaction style according to berens I.S, unless I'm confusing the receptivity of Phlegmatic in Affection for being BtS. I aways put it being behind the scenes to not really be bothered where we begin and end in activities *task focus*. I have an outcome focus so the result will always be the same no matter what we do first or last.

I'm not 100% sure where Affection would fit in the comparison. It would seem to be apart of Interaction Styles, but then a person's Affection can be completely different from Inclusion, which I would say is the closest counterpart to Interaction Style. But again, if you're S-P in Inclusion, that is sort of in between, so there would be no conflict leaning towards BtS (especially since there is no such moderation recognized in the type-based systems), and then the Phlegmatic in Affection then would definitely push you towards the BtS side.

Pretty much, I always miss the signals *wants to know she’s valued but she‘s very indirect in my eyes of course* that I’m suppose to be able to recognize when the Supine hasn’t really been very clear. Then I just get so confused I don’t even know how to respond other then to ask if it means she wants help or not?

Cause I’ll ask sometimes and I’ll get a “no it’s okay I got it” thus leaving me in confusion. But other times when I didn’t ask I used to get abit of hostility in response from her which I would find out it was cause I didn’t ask if she wanted help.
That’s my problem if I see someone doing just fine I let them be, she wants to know I care about her enough to ask if she needs help even if she “doesn’t” really need it *this confuses me*. Things have improved between us so that’s great we meet half way now. I don’t really get indifferent, maybe it comes off that way but I’m just confused or feeling like she was getting upset with me for nothing.

That's definite Supine behavior, just like described in the manuals! As for you, I guess you don't have to be "indifferent" to be Phlegmatic. Still wondering how you react. You you use dry humor when she reacts to you like that?

So say if a person who Expresses Supine
but responds as a Phlegmatic how would that go?

You would find it harder to express affection, and have only a moderate need for it. That one is described here:
Temperament: Supine Phlegmatic in Affection

It sounds like it fits me so far for supine phlegmatic.

That sounds right, and if that's your true Affection, you would be low "e", moderate "w" in all three areas!

I’m curious by what you mean by Responsiveness is what we really want?

Expressiveness is basically extroversion, or how oriented we are to the outside world of people. However, some can express to people, but not really want from them. So we would say that they only want according to a particular criteria or goal. Their behavior effectively says that they want interaction with people, but that's ultimately not what they really want, but rather it's their goals. That's why on Ryan's map, it's called "Now You See Him; Now You Don't".
These people will tend to be more focused on tasks (and the negative side of their temperament is using people as objects), and thus often speak in a "directive" fashion. So this would be an In Charge or Choleric (In Inclusion, at least). The Sanguine (or GtG) expresses to others just as much, but truly wants the interaction from others, without such criteria.

The Supine wants like the Sanguine, but does not have the mechanism to be able to express. So he will often remain more frustrated, wanting interaction from others, and resenting them for not giving it, just as you describe for your mother, in Affection. The Melancholy does not express, and does not want (except from those meeting a criteria, like the Choleric). Phlegmatics express and want a moderate amount, and the Phlegmatic blends will express or want a moderate amount, depending on which blend it is.

Would this explain why I feel I am more phlegmatic and melancholy is harder to see? Because my area of affection is Expressed Supine-Responsive phlegmatic which Responsive is what we really want?

Again, all it means is that you are technically between Supine and Melancholy in the Wanted dimension (and equal to both on the Expressed dimension). You need less than a Supine, but need more than a Melancholy. The need would be equal to that of a Phlegmatic, so yes, you would recognize Phlegmatic more than Melancholy.

That makes a lot of sense, less room for confusion probably too with expressed vs. wanted behavior coupled with MBTI really creates precision and clarity which is always awesome.
So Mel-phlegmatic in control
*E*Supine *R* phlegmatic in Affection.
Melancholy-Phlegmatic in inclusion.
How does expressed and responsive work for In control and inclusion?
Do those get used for those two or just for Affection?

Thank you Eric .

Yes, expressed and wanted (responsive) work the same way in all three areas.
Inclusion is where I say it is a more definite match for Berens' Informing and Directing; and Affection probably is also tied in with it.
In Control, I have found Expressed to be the analogue to Keirsey's "cooperative/pragmatic". Cooperatives ("do what's right") will be a bit slower to take initiative action, because they tend to be loyal to the concrete structures or personal ideals they are working under. Pragmatics ("do what works") are naturally quicker to act. SP's (Berens' "Improviser"), obviously; and with the NTs, its their competitiveness and dogged determination.

Wanted Control would seem to correspond to Berens' "structure/motive", which ties together SP with NF, and SJ with NT. SJ/Melancholy in Control trust concrete structures such as the family or institution. They will accept control from those sources, but will resist anyone else. That's basically the "criteria" of the low responsiveness. NT's or Choleric in control trust their abstract structures such as plans or logic (their criteria). They do not want any control over them outside those things. You can see right here where the two will clash, as the Choleric tries to take over with his own abstract plans, and the Melancholy then resists, favoring what's familiar, or what the organization's rules say. Does anyone else recognize a similar clash between NT's and SJ's?

NF's and SP's would be more willing to accept decisions by others, in order to work with them (the definition of "motive"). Supines, Phlegmatics and Supine Phlegmatics want others to make decisions for or at least with them, and part of this is from a need for peace. Sanguines in Control swing between controlling and dependence or narcissism, which would seem to stem from Se's pulling them one way or another.

 

[Eric B]

my best self-analysis:

Inclusion: Phlegmatic
Control: Melancholy-Phlegmatic
Affection: Sanguine-Phlegmatic

cheers,
Ian

This is similar to Duchess. Would be a close match for INFP.
Sanguine Phlegmatic in affection means that you are a bit more expressive of affection than other Phlegmatics. You would only want a moderate amount in return. My wife is S-P in Affection, but I'm Supine Compulsive. So she's very affectionate, but has a hard time getting even the moderate amount she needs in return, and then often responds with "biting" humor, as the manuals put it.

 

[garbage]

Yes, and this also explains why you bounce between the types you do. Here is the FIRO/APS matrix:

Gotta love the ability of Ti to just promote logical harmony among disparate systems.

I've got no other commentary other than that I think you're definitely on to something with correlating the temperament system with MBTI as you are.

 

[Eric B]

Control: Supine - Phlegmatic
Affection: Supine

The inclusion is hard for me to decide. It is either Supine or Supine - Phlegmatic

I bolded the parts that fit me. I can't decide. I find this talk about "dry humor" something that definitely doesn't fit me. Supine would seem like a better choice, but I am quite sure that I really am an introvert. I just like people, that's all...

You're likely pure Supine, and that would be a perfect fit for INFP!
INFP clearly is not Choleric like Keirsey said, yet it does have an emotional energy Phlegmatic lacks, so that would explain why NF did not seem quite Phlegmatic.

Here's another area where misunderstanding can occur, which I did not cover before. When you see "introvert and extrovert" mentioned for the Supine, the "extrovert" part of it as actually responsive, and not expressive, as we normally think of E. In other words, being "people"-focused (rather than task focus), they call "responding as an extrovert". The Supine's responsiveness or want of interaction is as high as the Sanguine, who is the pure extrovert. The Supine expresses as an introvert, which would likely be what determines "Introversion". So the Supine is considered basically an "introverted extrovert". We see this term tossed around for ENP's often, hence I would allow that some Supines might come out as E's. (Thought Greed fit this for awhile, until he looked at these reports). But for most of them, since they are low in expressiveness, they will likely be I's.
Likewise, the Choleric is said to express as an extrovert and respond as an introvert (though these reports don't specify that). The Melancholy is the pure introvert, expressing and wanting little. The Phlegmatic actually expresses and responds moderate, though when translating to the four temperaments and Interaction Styles, it ends up expressive and responsive like the Supine.

So don't let that throw you off. That seemed to be your main aversion to Supine, while less things seem to fit for Supine Phlegmatic, so you are likely pure Supine.
Why the self-esteem and moodiness you're not identifying with, I don't know. Perhaps you have your needs met, or are in an environment where those never had to come up. Or maybe you're just not aware of them.
Otherwise, it seems like a good fit.

 

[Polaris]

Thank you for those pointers, Eric. From what I can tell (I didn't scrutinize everything, because even with your guide it's still a lot to wade through), I fall along these lines:

Inclusion: Melancholic-Phlegmatic or Phlegmatic-Melancholic or Supine-Phegmatic

Control: Phlegmatic-Choleric or Melancholic-Phlegmatic

Affection: Phlegmatic-Supine or Supine-Phlegmatic

So what do you think?

 

[Eric B]

You're sort of all over the place in Inclusion and Control, though concentrated in the lower left. I remember you went from INTP (on INTPc) to INFP, and now have INfj. Since Inclusion seems to form a circle around Melancholy (and even Supine Phlegmatic borders on it), I would say that fits Chart the Course, and supports your current INJ.

Control would explain why you went from an NT type (Choleric) to NF (In this case, Phlegmatic, and Melancholy Phlegmatic is also close. So you're likely a Matcher or Checker (on the map on the first page of the thread).

 

[nolla]

You're likely pure Supine, and that would be a perfect fit for INFP!
INFP clearly is not Choleric like Keirsey said, yet it does have an emotional energy Phlegmatic lacks, so that would explain why NF did not seem quite Phlegmatic.

Here's another area where misunderstanding can occur, which I did not cover before. When you see "introvert and extrovert" mentioned for the Supine, the "extrovert" part of it as actually responsive, and not expressive, as we normally think of E. In other words, being "people"-focused (rather than task focus), they call "responding as an extrovert". The Supine's responsiveness or want of interaction is as high as the Sanguine, who is the pure extrovert. The Supine expresses as an introvert, which would likely be what determines "Introversion". So the Supine is considered basically an "introverted extrovert". We see this term tossed around for ENP's often, hence I would allow that some Supines might come out as E's. (Thought Greed fit this for awhile, until he looked at these reports). But for most of them, since they are low in expressiveness, they will likely be I's.

Very interesting... "The Supine's responsiveness or want of interaction is as high as the Sanguine, who is the pure extrovert." You draw an image of contradictions, but it seems quite fitting. Dividing the social need to expressive and responsive is very handy, especially when I think of my own behavior.

Why the self-esteem and moodiness you're not identifying with, I don't know. Perhaps you have your needs met, or are in an environment where those never had to come up. Or maybe you're just not aware of them.

Actually, I do find environment effecting my moods. I just don't think that "moodiness" is really the term I would use. My mood changes are something slow and subtle. And the self-esteem issue, I'd say it has been an issue for me but I've dealt with it.

 

[Polaris]

You're sort of all over the place in Inclusion and Control, though concentrated in the lower left. I remember you went from INTP (on INTPc) to INFP, and now have INfj. Since Inclusion seems to form a circle around Melancholy (and even Supine Phlegmatic borders on it), I would say that fits Chart the Course, and supports your current INJ.

Control would explain why you went from an NT type (Choleric) to NF (In this case, Phlegmatic, and Melancholy Phlegmatic is also close. So you're likely a Matcher or Checker (on the map on the first page of the thread).

Interesting. Could you explain what it means to be a Matcher or a Checker?

 

[Eric B]

Very interesting... "The Supine's responsiveness or want of interaction is as high as the Sanguine, who is the pure extrovert." You draw an image of contradictions, but it seems quite fitting. Dividing the social need to expressive and responsive is very handy, especially when I think of my own behavior.

Yeah; this is what I've found makes it a very elegant system. Dividing temperament according to the three areas as well.

Actually, I do find environment effecting my moods. I just don't think that "moodiness" is really the term I would use. My mood changes are something slow and subtle. And the self-esteem issue, I'd say it has been an issue for me but I've dealt with it.

I'm pretty much that way too. "Moodiness" in the more classic sense of the word would be more the Melancholy. The Sanguine has mood swings too, only much faster.

Interesting. Could you explain what it means to be a Matcher or a Checker?

Those are Dr. Leo Ryan's terms for Control score groups. You can see this on the map I posted in the beginning of the thread. They are in red, which I use for The Control area.
Checker for the most part encompasses Arno's "Supine-Phlegmatic" and "Melancholy-Phlegmatic". Ryan (A Clinical Interpretation of the FIRO-B) describes them as needing to "check" with others in making decisions.
The Matcher is similar, but is more capable of making decisions and assuming responsibility (from having a higher expressed Control). They still want reassurance and support from others in the process. "He does not make excessive demands on others for support, but merely asks others to match his own level of responsibility".
The statement "His democratic attitude is reflected in the statement 'I want you to work shoulder to shoulder with me'" is one of my biggest proofs this is the NF. The Checker would fit as well. NT on the other hand would be a "Mission Impossible" or at least "Self-Confident".

 

[INFtha14]

Would make perfect sense for your in-between Control. 6 seems very Supine (especially from the videos on one of the Enneagram sites), and that would basically be a reasonable match. 4 seemed like a more moderate Supine or Melancholy; hence I placed it in between those as S-P or M-P. So if you're saying you can be either 4 or 6, that would make perfect sense. (I believe 4 and 6 should be next to each other in the wing system, and they are more similar to each other than 5. 4 seems like it would be between 5 and 6).
I'm not 100% sure where Affection would fit in the comparison. It would seem to be apart of Interaction Styles, but then a person's Affection can be completely different from Inclusion, which I would say is the closest counterpart to Interaction Style. But again, if you're S-P in Inclusion, that is sort of in between, so there would be no conflict leaning towards BtS (especially since there is no such moderation recognized in the type-based systems), and then the Phlegmatic in Affection then would definitely push you towards the BtS side.

S-P in Inclusion...S-P being Sanguine Phleg or Supine Phleg?

But I see Supine-Phlegmatic in affection *W responsive* much more and it explains alot of my problems I have in expression.

That's definite Supine behavior, just like described in the manuals! As for you, I guess you don't have to be "indifferent" to be Phlegmatic. Still wondering how you react. You you use dry humor when she reacts to you like that?

I usually would get confused then address it to her that "sometimes I don't receive your signals of wanting me to ask. I don't know if you need help if you don't say it. It goes over my head etc. May even suggest sometimes just to let me know she needs help if she sees me not noticing. Then on her side she gets mad and says " I shouldn't have to ask. Never mind I'm not going to kiss your ***". Me at this point:... oookay.

Wow I'm really impressed with how well I see supine in my mother. bingo more like it . I mean I see supine but I don't do that to people where I expect them to read my mind and when they don't get upset. I see the tendency alittle *when younger especially* but i'm more laid back about it.

You would find it harder to express affection, and have only a moderate need for it. That one is described here:
Temperament: Supine Phlegmatic in Affection

Got it yes!! That's wonderful and explains alot. Expressing affection is definitely not something i'm hip too. I do feel sometimes that there is tape on my mouth like they've said for supine's, which I have gotten rather upset with myself over cause I couldn't understand why when I feel so much.
The only i definitely don't expect people to take care of me heh.

So Supine-Phlegmatic in Affection Perfect fit .


That sounds right, and if that's your true Affection, you would be low "e", moderate "w" in all three areas!

That definitely sounds very accurate. I have a very low Expressiveness in my interaction with others and it can be a problem if I want to go deeper in knowing someone cause it can seem like I don't care or am not interested.

How do I determine what is the low e and Moderate W in Inclusion and In Control? I'm thinking for Inclusion Phlegmatic-melancholy when I read the descriptions *fits with my introversion too* and Melancholy-Phlegmatic for In Control. Just to be clear that's what your talking about too right that those fit as well? . This is wonderful yay!!.


Expressiveness is basically extroversion, or how oriented we are to the outside world of people. However, some can express to people, but not really want from them. So we would say that they only want according to a particular criteria or goal. Their behavior effectively says that they want interaction with people, but that's ultimately not what they really want, but rather it's their goals. That's why on Ryan's map, it's called "Now You See Him; Now You Don't".

These people will tend to be more focused on tasks (and the negative side of their temperament is using people as objects), and thus often speak in a "directive" fashion. So this would be an In Charge or Choleric (In Inclusion, at least). The Sanguine (or GtG) expresses to others just as much, but truly wants the interaction from others, without such criteria.

The Supine wants like the Sanguine, but does not have the mechanism to be able to express. So he will often remain more frustrated, wanting interaction from others, and resenting them for not giving it, just as you describe for your mother, in Affection. The Melancholy does not express, and does not want (except from those meeting a criteria, like the Choleric).
Phlegmatics express and want a moderate amount, and the Phlegmatic blends will express or want a moderate amount, depending on which blend it is.

Again, all it means is that you are technically between Supine and Melancholy in the Wanted dimension (and equal to both on the Expressed dimension). You need less than a Supine, but need more than a Melancholy. The need would be equal to that of a Phlegmatic, so yes, you would recognize Phlegmatic more than Melancholy.

So I'm between a Supine and Melancholy then? That makes sense .
Does that mean I would be a Phlegmatic-Mel for Inclusion. I see melancholy but that's probably from the In control area being Mel-Phleg. I think I got it/getting somewhere. Okay so cause I need less than a Supine but need more then a melancholy that would be equal to a phlegmatic ahhhh got ya . So I can come across to myself and others rather phlegmatic I would assume. I sure can see how I would perceive that.
Sweet. Thank you Eric woohoo!!!.


Yes, expressed and wanted (responsive) work the same way in all three areas.
Inclusion is where I say it is a more definite match for Berens' Informing and Directing; and Affection probably is also tied in with it.
In Control, I have found Expressed to be the analogue to Keirsey's "cooperative/pragmatic". Cooperatives ("do what's right") will be a bit slower to take initiative action, because they tend to be loyal to the concrete structures or personal ideals they are working under. Pragmatics ("do what works") are naturally quicker to act. SP's (Berens' "Improviser"), obviously; and with the NTs, its their competitiveness and dogged determination.

Wanted Control would seem to correspond to Berens' "structure/motive", which ties together SP with NF, and SJ with NT. SJ/Melancholy in Control trust concrete structures such as the family or institution. They will accept control from those sources, but will resist anyone else. That's basically the "criteria" of the low responsiveness. NT's or Choleric in control trust their abstract structures such as plans or logic (their criteria). They do not want any control over them outside those things. You can see right here where the two will clash, as the Choleric tries to take over with his own abstract plans, and the Melancholy then resists, favoring what's familiar, or what the organization's rules say. Does anyone else recognize a similar clash between NT's and SJ's?

NF's and SP's would be more willing to accept decisions by others, in order to work with them (the definition of "motive"). Supines, Phlegmatics and Supine Phlegmatics want others to make decisions for or at least with them, and part of this is from a need for peace. Sanguines in Control swing between controlling and dependence or narcissism, which would seem to stem from Se's pulling them one way or another.

So What I have so far is
Phlegmatic-melancholy in Inclusion.
Melancholy-phlegmatic In control.
Expressive Supine-Responsive Phlegmatic in Affection.
Am I following you alright? *My brain feels out of it today/lately XD*

Awesome, that's perfect. Loving this, very easy to learn and apply.

Thank you so much Eric .

 

[sticker]

In Inclusion, this would mean you are a bit more expressive than other Melancholies. Basically, between I and I, though leaning toward I. My brother has this Inclusion, and he appears cool and observant of other people, but responds with cynicism and has a very sarcastic wit.

Control, I would say if you are SJ, that would be Melancholy (with the Supines being more NF), but I could see where Supine would seem SJ as well. Supine Phlegmatic is on the border with Melancholy, so that would not be far off either, and that seems accurate from what you described. It's a low expressed Control (not quick to lead, and the whole confidence issue), and wanting others to do their part (moderate wanted).

I'm not sure what you mean by "tie between Melancholy and Phlegmatic". If you mean a sort of overall average temperament? This system doesn't really do that, though the temperaments do temper each other in the overall mix. So yes, overall, you would be very Melancholy and very Phlegmatic.

Ah, it was just a simple observation of both 'Phelgmatic' and 'Melancholy' appearing 2 times for those 3 areas and I wondered if it meant anything.
Thanks for the analysis, seems pretty accurate.

 

[aeon]

This is similar to Duchess. Would be a close match for INFP.

Yep - I type as INFP - slight introversion, very strong intuition, strong feeling, moderate perceiving.

Enneagram-wise, I am Type 9w1.


cheers,
Ian

 

[lane777]

I took the professional APS test several months ago. For those who care to know how an INFJ scores, here are my results:

Inclusion: Compulsive Melancholy
Control: Supine
Affection: Phlegmatic - Melancholy

I plan on taking the test again (eventually), so whenever that happens, I'll post those results here.

 

[Eric B]

Yeah, that was a perfect match for an INFJ. Most of them who took the "traits list" version also came out heavily Mel-sup or Mel-Phleg.
(

Note: When I use these LaHaye-esque combining terms for whole type correlations, it is for Inclusion/Control combinations, and not the "moderate blends" within an I/C/A area, we are discussing below).

So What I have so far is
Phlegmatic-melancholy in Inclusion.
Melancholy-phlegmatic In control.
Expressive Supine-Responsive Phlegmatic in Affection.
Am I following you alright? *My brain feels out of it today/lately XD*

Awesome, that's perfect. Loving this, very easy to learn and apply.

Thank you so much Eric .

Oh, I'm sorry; I didn't even realize the bulk of your responses were in bold within the quote.

S-P in Inclusion...S-P being Sanguine Phleg or Supine Phleg?

S is Supine, and they use "G" for "sanGuine". (I don't like that, since Sanguine is more familiar. Even I sometimes forget and read the "S" as "Sanguine". I would have used "U" for Supine).

But I see Supine-Phlegmatic in affection *W responsive* much more and it explains alot of my problems I have in expression.

Well, a "________-Phlegmatic" blend is moderate in W or responsiveness. It is more responsive than the Melancholy and Choleric, though not as responsive as the pure Sanguine or Supine.

I usually would get confused then address it to her that "sometimes I don't receive your signals of wanting me to ask. I don't know if you need help if you don't say it. It goes over my head etc. May even suggest sometimes just to let me know she needs help if she sees me not noticing.

I guess you don't use dry humor, but then that's just one particular trait that gets mentioned alot for Phlegmatic blends. An example would be if you phrased it "well, you know, I should have known, for I do get so many signals from you that you needed help, after all". [/sarcasm].
Do you ever react like that?

Then on her side she gets mad and says " I shouldn't have to ask. Never mind I'm not going to kiss your ***". Me at this point:... oookay.

Wow I'm really impressed with how well I see supine in my mother. bingo more like it .

Just curious, what do you think the rest of her temperament, or her type is?
(Your final reaction does seem Phlegmatic, even without the sarcasm. If somebody lashed out at me like that, I would be on one hand shaken with guilt, and then my Control would erupt and go on the defensive attack!)

I mean I see supine but I don't do that to people where I expect them to read my mind and when they don't get upset. I see the tendency alittle *when younger especially* but i'm more laid back about it.

Got it yes!! That's wonderful and explains alot. Expressing affection is definitely not something i'm hip too. I do feel sometimes that there is tape on my mouth like they've said for supine's, which I have gotten rather upset with myself over cause I couldn't understand why when I feel so much.
The only i definitely don't expect people to take care of me heh.

So Supine-Phlegmatic in Affection Perfect fit

Yeah, that would sound like a moderated Supine. And you don't have as much of a want as a pure Supine, so you easily grow out of that "read my mind" tendency.

That definitely sounds very accurate. I have a very low Expressiveness in my interaction with others and it can be a problem if I want to go deeper in knowing someone cause it can seem like I don't care or am not interested.

How do I determine what is the low e and Moderate W in Inclusion and In Control? I'm thinking for Inclusion Phlegmatic-melancholy when I read the descriptions *fits with my introversion too* and Melancholy-Phlegmatic for In Control. Just to be clear that's what your talking about too right that those fit as well? . This is wonderful yay!!.

So I'm between a Supine and Melancholy then? That makes sense .
Does that mean I would be a Phlegmatic-Mel for Inclusion. I see melancholy but that's probably from the In control area being Mel-Phleg. I think I got it/getting somewhere.

OK, you're saying "Phlegmatic-Melancholy" now. I was going by "Melancholy-Phlegmatic" which is what you initially said. So you had Melancholy Phlegmatic in both Inclusion and Control, and then you settled on Supine Phlegmatic in Affection. All three of those are close on the map (aka "Locator Chart" Ryan calls it, BTW), expressing little, like a Melancholy or Supine, but responding moderately like a Phlegmatic.

Now, you're saying Phlegmatic-Melancholy in Inclusion. That's different! That one expresses moderately like a Phlegmatic, but responds as a Melancholy.
To express moderately ("Phlegmatic-_________") in Inclusion is basically to be what we sometimes call an "ambivert". You express, or approach others for interaction more than an introvert. So you would kind of not be a solid introvert. One step higher, you would be in the Choleric range, and an extrovert.
To respond as a Melancholy means you have a low want for interaction unless the criteria is met. You would be completely task-focused or directive. You would be a Chart the Course (IST/INJ) bordering on In Charge. So basically, it's between Melancholy and Choleric.
(The E1 sounds very PM to me. I think others have noted that that type should be between 5 {introverted} and 8 {extroverted}).
Since your P does not seem to be in question, I would think it would be Melancholy-Phlegmatic. (If you were fluctuating on J/P, then P-M would make more sense). Is it possible you mixed them up; i.e. you meant "Melancholy-Phlegmatic" like you had said before?

Okay so cause I need less than a Supine but need more then a melancholy that would be equal to a phlegmatic ahhhh got ya . So I can come across to myself and others rather phlegmatic I would assume. I sure can see how I would perceive that.
Sweet. Thank you Eric woohoo!!!.

Yeah. Because what you respond as is ultimately what you really are.

 

[INFtha14]

Oh, I'm sorry; I didn't even realize the bulk of your responses were in bold within the quote.
S is Supine, and they use "G" for "sanGuine". (I don't like that, since Sanguine is more familiar. Even I sometimes forget and read the "S" as "Sanguine". I would have used "U" for Supine).

Well, a "________-Phlegmatic" blend is moderate in W or responsiveness. It is more responsive than the Melancholy and Choleric, though not as responsive as the pure Sanguine or Supine.

I guess you don't use dry humor, but then that's just one particular trait that gets mentioned alot for Phlegmatic blends. An example would be if you phrased it "well, you know, I should have known, for I do get so many signals from you that you needed help, after all". [/sarcasm].
Do you ever react like that?
Just curious, what do you think the rest of her temperament, or her type is?
(Your final reaction does seem Phlegmatic, even without the sarcasm. If somebody lashed out at me like that, I would be on one hand shaken with guilt, and then my Control would erupt and go on the defensive attack!)
Yeah, that would sound like a moderated Supine. And you don't have as much of a want as a pure Supine, so you easily grow out of that "read my mind" tendency.

OK, you're saying "Phlegmatic-Melancholy" now. I was going by "Melancholy-Phlegmatic" which is what you initially said. So you had Melancholy Phlegmatic in both Inclusion and Control, and then you settled on Supine Phlegmatic in Affection. All three of those are close on the map (aka "Locator Chart" Ryan calls it, BTW), expressing little, like a Melancholy or Supine, but responding moderately like a Phlegmatic.

Now, you're saying Phlegmatic-Melancholy in Inclusion. That's different! That one expresses moderately like a Phlegmatic, but responds as a Melancholy.
To express moderately ("Phlegmatic-_________") in Inclusion is basically to be what we sometimes call an "ambivert". You express, or approach others for interaction more than an introvert. So you would kind of not be a solid introvert. One step higher, you would be in the Choleric range, and an extrovert.
To respond as a Melancholy means you have a low want for interaction unless the criteria is met. You would be completely task-focused or directive. You would be a Chart the Course (IST/INJ) bordering on In Charge. So basically, it's between Melancholy and Choleric.
(The E1 sounds very PM to me. I think others have noted that that type should be between 5 {introverted} and 8 {extroverted}).
Since your P does not seem to be in question, I would think it would be Melancholy-Phlegmatic. (If you were fluctuating on J/P, then P-M would make more sense). Is it possible you mixed them up; i.e. you meant "Melancholy-Phlegmatic" like you had said before? ooopsies. I must of somewhere in trying to understand it all. Didn't mean to confuse you .

Yeah. Because what you respond as is ultimately what you really are.

I’m sorry I’ll put it on the outside of the quoted part so it’s easier for you .

*I apologize I think my brain has been half asleep lately from some personal minor frustration*

I’ll say at most “you could of actually said something instead of expecting me to read your mind” in frustration.

I also think I’m not the type to “lock horns” without suffering a tremendous energy loss from it. I’ll only engage if it’s absolutely vital.

I especially noticed this when I was 16ish when a lot more hostility was around me which caused a great cut to my energy so I’d walk away from an argument even it made me upset. I can get defensive though but I don’t prefer to. I won't hesitate to stand up for myself though but as i mentioned ^ i get drained pretty quick from it all.

That's good cause what you were going by I was agreeing with very well,
so it was a matter of mix up on my half. So Mel-phleg Inclusion .

Now that you I read that paragraph that makes sense. I knew something was missing from being P-M for Inc.
Durr I’m sorry *smacks forhead* Mel-Phleg for Inc it is. I definitely respond as a Phlegmatic not Melancholy. I think I misunderstood the terms oopsies.
Thank you for your patience with my currently foggy brain.

So how this sound?
Mel-Phleg in Inclusion
Mel-Phleg In Control
And Supine-Phleg in Affection.
Am I following you okay? .

 

[Polaris]

Yeah, that was a perfect match for an INFJ. Most of them who took the "traits list" version also came out heavily Mel-sup or Mel-Phleg.

Lane's results don't seem to be very similar to mine, and yet you and I both agree that I'm an "INJ" (to quote you). You're not suggesting that third letter should be a T, are you? No, you can't possibly be, but I would still be interested to hear what you think the differences say about me in comparison with "perfect matches for INFJ."

By the way, in regards to those personality styles you mentioned earlier, I would say that I'm more of a Checker in the normal course of things and more of a Matcher when working with people. Since we're trying to describe my control style, weight would probably go on Matcher.

EDIT: Now that I've had the time to do so, I've tried to narrow things down a bit:

Inclusion: Phlegmatic-Melancholy

Control: Melancholy-Phlegmatic

Affection: Supine-Phlegmatic (Phlegmatic-Supine would be spot-on, except I don't feel a need for loved ones to show me a ton of affection. I'm more interested in being the one who shows affection, although it's hard for me to do so unless I'm extremely comfortable.)

I find it slightly hard to choose between the profiles, because many of them are almost identical. Also, my results are eerily similar to Duchess's, but I don't really relate to her and what she's describing. What does that mean?

 

[Eric B]

Well, Lane is wearing solid INFJ, and then took the actual APS and got Melancholy Compulsive in Inclusion and Supine in Control (the two we're most concerned with in comparing to type) which are both pure temperaments.
You on the other hand had been trying on different types, and still have two letters in lowercase (which I assume means they're either weak, or not certain), and then you had different choices for your IC&A, and at that, all three (or seven, actually) of them were Phlegmatic blends, (inbetween temperaments, basically). So in both systems, you're more inbetween, which is actually another match in comparing.
So You're apparently kind of INFJ, like Lane, and then you're a moderate Melancholy (one way or the other) in Inclusion, where she's compulsive. For both, that would suggest Chart the Course. In Control, you have two possible Phlegmatic blends, and since you have Nf, I say those could possibly correlate. Remember, I say both Supine and Phlegmatic in Control correpond to NF. So again, your results match a very inbetween preference that came out in the different types you tried on.
If you have Choleric leanings in Control, I would think that suggests NT, and you did once try on NT. But then you also listed Melancholy Phlegmatic, which is almost Supine, so then that could match NF like Lane.

Now, you've narrowed it down to Phlegmatic-Melancholy (I)/Melancholy Phlegmatic (C).Those are in two different areas, even though they are technically blends of the same two temperaments. Phlegmatic Melancholy is squarely in the low W range, but moderate E. Melancholy Phlegmatic, again, is moderate W, inbetween Melancholy (low W) and Supine (high W), and squarely in the low E range like those other two. So that would also make sense as a fit for a Chart the Course-Catalyst (INFJ), though in a looser sense than Lane's Mc/S.

Duchess is similar in having all Phlegmatic blends, yet she wears INfP. She has the moderate MP in Inclusion and Control. MP can go either way, as a Chart the Course (Pure Melancholy) or a Behind the Scenes (Supine or Phlegmatic, which it borders on), and as a Stabilizer (M) or a Catalyst (S or P). She's claiming Behind the Scenes/Catalyst, so that is a fairly close match.

Remember, APS covers moderate ranges that MBTI doesn't cover (yet this would explain type ambiguity!) So you're moderate, and inbetween INFP and INFJ, but apparently on the INFJ side, and that is very different from INFP; hence, you would not relate to her. (Have to analyze further her reactions from a cognitive perspective, but she would be an Fi user, and the type you're wearing uses Fe.

 

[Polaris]

Well, Lane is wearing solid INFJ, and then took the actual APS and got Melancholy Compulsive in Inclusion and Supine in Control (the two we're most concerned with in comparing to type) which are both pure temperaments.
You on the other hand had been trying on different types, and still have two letters in lowercase (which I assume means they're either weak, or not certain), and then you had different choices for your IC&A, and at that, all three (or seven, actually) of them were Phlegmatic blends, (inbetween temperaments, basically). So in both systems, you're more inbetween, which is actually another match in comparing.
So You're apparently kind of INFJ, like Lane, and then you're a moderate Melancholy (one way or the other) in Inclusion, where she's compulsive. For both, that would suggest Chart the Course. In Control, you have two possible Phlegmatic blends, and since you have Nf, I say those could possibly correlate. Remember, I say both Supine and Phlegmatic in Control correpond to NF. So again, your results match a very inbetween preference that came out in the different types you tried on.
If you have Choleric leanings in Control, I would think that suggests NT, and you did once try on NT. But then you also listed Melancholy Phlegmatic, which is almost Supine, so then that could match NF like Lane.

Now, you've narrowed it down to Phlegmatic-Melancholy (I)/Melancholy Phlegmatic (C).Those are in two different areas, even though they are technically blends of the same two temperaments. Phlegmatic Melancholy is squarely in the low W range, but moderate E. Melancholy Phlegmatic, again, is moderate W, inbetween Melancholy (low W) and Supine (high W), and squarely in the low E range like those other two. So that would also make sense as a fit for a Chart the Course-Catalyst (INFJ), though in a looser sense than Lane's Mc/S.

Duchess is similar in having all Phlegmatic blends, yet she wears INfP. She has the moderate MP in Inclusion and Control. MP can go either way, as a Chart the Course (Pure Melancholy) or a Behind the Scenes (Supine or Phlegmatic, which it borders on), and as a Stabilizer (M) or a Catalyst (S or P). She's claiming Behind the Scenes/Catalyst, so that is a fairly close match.

Remember, APS covers moderate ranges that MBTI doesn't cover (yet this would explain type ambiguity!) So you're moderate, and inbetween INFP and INFJ, but apparently on the INFJ side, and that is very different from INFP; hence, you would not relate to her. (Have to analyze further her reactions from a cognitive perspective, but she would be an Fi user, and the type you're wearing uses Fe.

I see; it makes perfect sense to me now, and it matches my weak F and J nicely. Thank you, Eric.

 

[NewEra]

Is there any simple test to determine this?

 

[Eric B]

No, the APS or FIRO is the test associated with this, which are not free. There's also the
Free "traits list" sorter test were were discussing in the ealier thread: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/online-personality-tests/6956-five-temperaments-test.html
That will give a general idea of the temperament mix, but not divide them into the three areas.