| || |
This is a discussion on Humoral theory (temperament) and MBTI correlation? within the Myers Briggs Forum forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; Originally Posted by Eric B Great way of looking at it! Since the other blended temperament covers social skills (hence, ...
The humors don't totally fit the MBTI and the humors can have combinations but I would have to say that for the most part:
Tertiary and inferior are less mature, and more vulnerable positions, where Te is supporting preferred Fi, which is opposite of Choleric (more Supine or Phlegmatic). So strong Te in an NFP does not equal Choleric.
I also added afterward,
Where did you get those results from? A test?
If you are close to equal on all of them, then you can't really go by that order. Hence, the temperaments are "built into" type through the Keirsey/Berens model, so that's the best way to get the sense of what your top two humors really are.
ISTJ: pure Melancholy √
ISTP: MelancholySanguine *
INFP: Phlegmatic √
INTP: PhlegmaticCholeric *
ESFP: pure Sanguine √
ENFJ: CholericPhlegmatic *
ENTJ: pure Choleric √
*Now, ITP's and EFJ's are the most "enigmatic" of all the types, because they are blends of diametric opposites: Choleric with Phlegmatic (ENFJ, INTP), and Sanguine with Melancholy (ESFJ, ISTP). For the ESFJ, the Sanguine is very obvious, so there is not as much confusion about that. For the others, the temperaments meld together, looking like other temperaments not in the mix.
Hence, INTP as Melancholic (I +[N]T); ENFJ as Sanguine (E +[N]F), and ISTP as Phlegmatic (I +[S]P).
But ENFJ is clearly "IN Charge"=ENJ=Choleric, INTP is "Behind the Scenes"=INP=Phlegmatic, and ISTP is "Chart the Course"=IST=Melancholic.
Yes. I was thinking on combinations, but tried to go with one to be more exact. I definitely agree with what you have to say. The results were actually just from research I found about people and my personal thoughts. I don't totally agree with all your ideas, but then it is the person and I think it depends on which you can say came first. Technically the humors did in Ancient Greece[?], but I don't believe that the MBTI or the Keirsey Temperament was totally based of the humors. INTP and ENFJ confused me the most so I kind of didn't look up the facts. The blending of diametric opposites intrigued me, but I don't really think the humors have opposites.
Basically, what you covered there were mostly the Interaction Styles. They will naturally be the most visible in the mix.
The opposites would be defined by the two factors temperament is based on. In one temperament system, they are called "expressiveness" and "responsiveness". Basically, expressiveness is I/E and cooperative/pragmatic; and responsiveness is directing/informing, and structure/motive. High or low poles in each factor will be shared by two temperaments, and two pairs of temperaments will be opposite in both dimensions. Sanguine is high on both dimensions, ad Melancholic is low in both dimensions. Choleric is high expressiveness, low responsiveness, and Phlegmatic is low expressiveness, high responsiveness (actually, it's moderate in both dimensions, and Supine is low e/high r, but Supine and Phlegmatic appear to be interchangeable in these correlations).
So when those pairs of temperaments are blended, it's harder to sort out exactly what they are. In fact, the earlier "blended" temperament system of Kant, blends between opposites were omitted, so that Sanguine could be blended with Choleric or Phlegmatic, but not Melancholic. "4-Marks" and some other tests online today are like that.
MBTI wasn't based onthe humours, but it was Keirsey and Berens who mapped out where they fit in the system. Keirsey did so indirectly through something called the Kretschmer character styles, and used Plato's “four types of men” rather than Galen's “humours”.
Last edited by Eric B; 06-05-2012 at 08:55 AM.
as an INFJ i usually test as Melancholy. Which is kind of funny because my favorite season is fall!
Eric B has a picture
Also, this one (my TYPOc avatar):