# Comparing MBTI A/T factor to neuroticism in Big 5 and the phlegmatic-supine duality in the five temperaments



## ShushFox (3 mo ago)

I see personality functions from a mathy view, like every aspect is a spectrum (not a binary!) of behaviour and we could make a x-dimensional square, cube, etc from it. We can then cross-compare using some kind of calculus to map one kind of square to another (like how you might map four temperaments to nine enneagrams).

MBTI is normally a 4-dimensional function, we normally draw it on a square if we want to compare it but it's really losing info when we do that. (Last I checked nobody can 'see' a 4-D cube lol). And this newer assertive/turbulent fifth thing makes it a 5-dim function.

Big 5, the most accepted, is already 5. Could we find some overlap between the two now? I would strongly say we can try. A lot of people will connect conscientiousness and openness to N/S and P/J in either order, or even T/F. Not easy to tell if it's really a 1 to 1 comparison, doesn't seem to be. Agreeableness even more so.

But there is one i'm fairly confident on - I think neuroticism is but *exactly* A/T.
Assertive vs turbulent. Neuroticism is stress when you do one thing and want another. Causes emotions, makes it harder to stand up for yourself.

Looking at the temperaments now, I recall that "Direct" temperaments ( wanted and expressed extroversions match -pure extrovert/ambivert/introvert - sanguine-phlegmatic-melancholic) have less neuroticism than those with "Indirect" or "Opposite" (choleric, supine, E/I inverses) (Credit to @Eric B because these are his ideas and his research I'm referencing).

Well it's also true that the further top-right you are, the happier you are. There's less distance between phlegmatics and smiley sanguines than supines and sanguines.
This is something you can sense feel or intuit, you could also actually take time to think how the center of a square is closer to a corner than a corner to a corner. If our square's 1x1 the hypotenuse (corner to opposite corner) is 1.41 (root 2*). So half that is 0.7 (phlegmatic to sanguine) which is less than 1 (supine to sanguine).
A phlegmatic person isn't "happy" but they're sure happier than supines; bringing me to the main point here.

It's tempting to see temperament as just 2-dim but there's already the inclusion, control, and affection divisions which make it 6-dim normally (!!). I don't want to go there right now, I don't know.

But we can go to 4 dims using MBTI, and maybe, with this idea I felt/intuited up now - 5.

What I do know is, several charts Mr. Eric Bolden has compared from people analyzing temperament and MBTI tend to use four temperaments, not five. Phlegmatic and supine are combined into one lukewarm phlegmatic that has about half of each's traits. When you take a chart like image attached (again credit due to Bolden), you start to wonder, _is there a difference between a phlegmatic blend here and a supine one_?)

Whether we use "phleg" or "sup" here in this chart could make a big difference in who someone is. It could even be A/T...









(The Keirsey variation puts cholerics as NF instead and remodels around that, which Eric has discussed quite well in his works  ). Temperament Part 2: The MBTI's 16 types and Cognitive Functions (erictb.info)

And it hit me today - leading me to writing this- yes, there could be. The T/A factor. Neuroticism.
At the surface, phlegs and sups look pretty damn similar. After all, they were combined for how many centuries??

I'm an INTP-T. I've been compared to people who act like me but are much calmer, and read about the behaviours of INTPs like that. Wouldn't it make sense that those people are INTP-A?

Then there is this I propose;
*a phlegmatic blend *is a blended (impure) MBTI personality with Assertiveness.
_a supine blend _is a blended MBTI with Turbulence.

When a person is a pure temperament, the difference can no longer be identified with this proposal. So that's a big flaw right now. I'd not be able to describe why two INFPs I know have the same MBTI but different fifth factors.

EDIT: actually, I'm wrong at least on INFPs. INFP-A would be a phlegmatic, pure phleg. INFP-T a pure supine.

But say how do we distinguish ENTJ-T and ENTJ-A for our pure cholerics, or ISTJ for our melancholics and ESFPs for our sanguines?
*__*

IDK lol
Anyway, off the tangent;


This site here is excellent:  Personality Temperament Test (fcuc.edu.gh)
Also attached it as a pdf for anyone who likes this stuff ^_^
All these are *phlegmatic blends*

Temperament-Blends.pdf (michaelchristian.us)
Temperaments: Understanding your Temperament and The 12 blends of Temperament — Steemit

These are in between and come closer to supine blends at times.
For cross-comparison.

Examples;

A phlegmatic sanguine is going to be a ISFP-A. A supine sanguine is a ISFP-T.
PhlegSans are calmer, less out-there sans. Sup-sans are more worrisome, nervous sans.
Some increase of introversion applies to both (non-independence of E/I to A/T?) but consider-

phlegmatic sanguine here sounds pretty calm. Knows what they want. Maybe not much, maybe more.
That sounds assertive to me.
supine sanguine sounds anxious. Sounds like they want something a fair amount. Afraid to not get it.
That sounds turbulent.

Mine, INTP. INTP-T -> someone who's outwardly nice to people and seems afraid, inwardly critical and pragmatic.
INTP-A -> someone who's outwardly calm to people and seems aloof, inwardly critical and phlegmatic.
A supine will always express themselves more than a phlegmatic if pressed to or given a chance to.

An "aloof" INTP might hold judgment of people but you won't hear them say it - they'd be the 'content-to-be-the-background-character' type. Focus on their own things. The "Goal oriented" INTP according to some comparisons.
The more 'submissive and underhanded' one would then be "People oriented". Win people over. Be affected by them, show some care, even though this can let the mask slip into judgment if the "lie" is questioned.

I draw this from this Quora post: What are the different (sub) types of INTPs? - Quora
But I _strongly_ believe it applies to other blended MBTI-temperament pairings too!
There is research to do here, I really think so

P.S.
Eric's analyses reference the notion that supines are the most neurotic, and by definition phlegmatics are the least- a choleric cannot even control one.
Now as I understand his presentation, there are 4 traits here that map (4 choose 3), not 5 traits, and neuroticism is NOT a phleg/sup thing. It is a NOT-sanguine thing that rolls clockwise in intensity (Chol < Mel < Sup).

But maybe this idea I put here could walk into a fifth trait in a way or another. That acts as a "on/off switch" for being part phlegmatic regardless of which temperament(s) you have otherwise and unrelated to supines.
Temperament for Dummies (erictb.info) - *Shared Needs: Three to two *section

P.P.S. if I really wanted to I could open this up to enneagram and some newer system I read with "natural, learned, and masked" behaviours (e.g. cholerics are natural introverts learned extroverts). Enneagram wings sound a lot like the A/T dual with pure enneagrams being in the middle - so like maybe my 5w6 as a T goes to 5w4 with an INTP-A who's a 5 too? IDK.)

P.P.P.S.
Proofreading this I noticed I contradicted myself.
Saying cholerics are indirect thus more neurotic than melancholics, but on the clockwise-function I said melancholics are more neutoric than cholerics. I honestly don't know which is the case here.


----------



## ShushFox (3 mo ago)

Noone replied to me, I am not happy


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

My mapping of Neuroticism (and the other FFM factors) is here:
http://www.erictb.info/factors.jpg If you look closely, it's not baased on "direct" (congruent e/r) temperaments. (You might be thinking of S/N, in the "Control" area, which you can also see there).

Originally in Eysenck's system, Neuroticism was like an inverse of responsiveness. The high responsive temperaments Sanguine and Phlegmatic were "low" N ((stable, and the low responsive temperaments Melancholic and Choleric were "high" N; i.e. "Neurotic". Melancholic was never considered lower in neuroticism. Even the name signifies its inclination to holding onto negative emotions (which was the definition of neuroticism. Even the responsiveness scale was at one point described as a long "sustain" of emotions, which would include negative ones. So Melancholic was across the board "neurotic".

When you add Supine, (which of course wasn't even known about in Eysenck's time), it would, by the definition of the factor be high, from the descriptions of the temperament you read in APS literature. This is from the conflict of wanting to be included by people, but not having the expressiveness to let them know that. So they will sit frustrated in this endless loop. That where the "inconsistent" behavior of the "incongruent e/r" figures (and perhaps also what you were thinking of).
Melancholy is not lower in Neuroticism just because the expressed and wanted are the same. It's just _doubly_ unsocial! Which would actually end up making it all the _more_ "Neurotic". So I actually never said Supine was the most "Neurotic". What you're thinking of is me citing Leo Ryan's _Clinical Interpretation of the FIRO-B_ where he calls the corresponding set of scores across all three areas (ICA) "Full Blown Neurotic". APS is based directly on FIRO (that's where the whole matrix and scoring system comes from), so I used that as further evidence of my claim that Supine would be considered "Neurotic" according to Eysenck's definition. 

Sanguine is low in N because it expresses what it wants, and thus is more likely to get it. Phlegmatic is low N because they don't have the emotional energy. They can basically "take 'em or leave 'em".
So when you put it al together, Low neuroticism is having only high or moderate e _or_ r scores. ANY low score is a measure of Neuroticism. (and all the moreso, if double negative!) I illustrate how this works here: https://i.pinimg.com/564x/80/47/ad/8047add78f735560dd2f17992dff8649.jpg

So yes, I believe that adding Phlegmatic to a temperament (which being moderate, has the effect of tempering its traits), will reduce Neuroticism. Like a SupinePhlegmatic has only a moderate desire for inclusion and acceptance, and so there won't be as much of a need to be frustrated when it is not met. A MelancholyPhlegmatic (which will border in the SupinePhlegmatic) will have moderately more of a want for people than a Melancholy, which is really less of a rejection of them, and hence, less neurotic. The same for a PhlegmaticSupine, who has the moderate expressivness which is less of the reservedness that makes expressiveness low (and then borders the "stable" Sanguine range).

Now, I'm referring now to blends _within_ the I, C or A area. (which exist _only_ in the APS and WorleyIDP systems). The "blends" you linked to (and which I have mapped directly to the 16 types) would correspond to one temperament in "Inclusion" and another temperament in "Control". But there too, adding the stable temperament to the neurotic one will temper the trait. (So a PhlegMel will be less neurotic than a pure Melancholy. But then so will a SanMel).
This will have the effect of fixing degrees of neuroticism to the 16 types based on which temperament the Interaction Style and Keirsey temperament correspond to, and would render Neuroticism as a factor completely redundant. But it doesn't seem to be redundat at all in practice. Yet another way it can figure is through the omitted third area of Affection. So an ESFP (Sanguine-Sangine) will tend to gravitate toward being Stable, but if you add Melancholy or Choleric as the Affection temperament, then it will have some Neuroticism. ISTJ or ENTJ (pure Melancholy or Choleric) would be Neurotic, but adding Sanguine of Phegmatic in Affection would make it less so.
But there's no studies on this (and APS or WIDP are not well known enough)

And then, we're using that system that uses "Assertive/turbulent" instead of "Stable/Neurotic" (I would much preferred Myers' own once proposed "Comfort/Discomfort"). But yes, I have theorized that for the "Behind the Scenes" (IST/ISF) and NF types, Phlegmatic vs Supine will affeect Neuroticism, so that the Phlegmatic will be INTP-A, for instance, and the Supine, INTP-T.


----------



## ShushFox (3 mo ago)

Eric B said:


> My mapping of Neuroticism (and the other FFM factors) is here:
> http://www.erictb.info/factors.jpg If you look closely, it's not baased on "direct" (congruent e/r) temperaments. (You might be thinking of S/N, in the "Control" area, which you can also see there).
> 
> Originally in Eysenck's system, Neuroticism was like an inverse of responsiveness. The high responsive temperaments Sanguine and Phlegmatic were "low" N ((stable, and the low responsive temperaments Melancholic and Choleric were "high" N; i.e. "Neurotic". Melancholic was never considered lower in neuroticism. Even the name signifies its inclination to holding onto negative emotions (which was the definition of neuroticism. Even the responsiveness scale was at one point described as a long "sustain" of emotions, which would include negative ones. So Melancholic was across the board "neurotic".
> ...


Wow, okay! That is a lot more for me to ponder on.

Yes, now that I rethink it, I don't know why I thought melancholics would be less neurotic than supines. It actually doesn't make sense from the mappings you made. Maybe I was leaning to the notion of Mels as 'confidently pushing people away' vs Sups 'wimpily asking for people' tropes. I would think one gets more self-respect from rejecting people instead of begging for their attention.

Do you think there could be studies on the Affection area in the future, if APS and WIDP become more acknowledged in the community? It's hard to imagine it not having some effect or another, especially if there's correlations between certain blends and other personality systems.

It's also a bit odd to me, considering it now, that phlegmatics are low neuroticism and not moderate. Phlegmatics are not 'emotional survivors' nor emotionally negative. And they still desire some things, sleep, diffusion of responsibility...it sounds like this sort of apathy would create a bit of stress itself even without a particular emotion or direction. Especially if a choleric was trying to push a phlegmatic - test site here says that never works - would that not require intentional apathy and thus emotional energy? Or is it just natural...


----------



## ShushFox (3 mo ago)

Eric B said:


> (<snip> for brevity, sorry)


Also! This diagram is easy to understand, accurate, and outright hilarious!
8047add78f735560dd2f17992dff8649.jpg (564×485) (pinimg.com) 
Thank you for that


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

Yes, an aloof Melancholy might _look_ more healthy ("confident"; etc.) than a "needy" Supine, but they too have a need of people that is going unmet; they are just less aware of it. But it's _inside_ where the Neuroticism is clearly present! 
I had since determined that the entire factor of responsiveness can be defined as *awareness of the need of people*. 

Even more recently, I've been rethinking some of the terminology, and I think "responsiveness" is more accurately *"RECEPTIVENESS"*, for it's about how "_receptive_" the person is to others (we *all* "respond" in one way or another), so we all have the same need for people, but the low receptives are less aware of it; and so the introverted Melancholy just withdraws, and the "extroverted" Choleric approaches people, not to fill this need, but for impersonal goals (and is generaly not receptive to people approaching him, beyond those goals). 
Both at the end of the day wonder why they still feel miserable, and even the Choleric will eventually get tired of people and withdraw, and even think they are introverts (I see this in ENTJ's a lot! Makes me wonder why people keep saying ENP's are the most introverted looking. They are clearly textbook Sanguines in the social area).

The high receptives are aware of their need, and so the extroverted Sanguine just goes out to meet the need, while the Supine is still drawn within, and just hopes the others reach out to him. This is why of these four, only the Sanguine was "stable" (they do engage in "neurotic behavior", but the cycle for them, of constantly seeking and gaining gratification is what keeps them overall "stable". The Supine's version of the cycle, again, is the neverending conflict of wanting and waiting; hence, Neurotic.

With the Phlegmatic; yes, they would be moderately aware of their need for people, and moderately willing to seek fulfillment, but the whole issue for them (at least according to APS) is the "low energy reserve". So maintaining the low energy is what "drives" them, and it will vary according to whatever is the "path of least resistance", and this could be giving in, or being stubborn, according to the situation. This variability is what will prevent them from getting stuck in a rut, which would lead to Neuroticism. So in Eysenck's system, they appeared more stable; especially compared to the Melancholy and Choleric.

I guess for studies on the Affection area, we would research Will Schutz who invented is as part of the FIRO-B system. (Though he wasn't using it for "inborn temperament" or "type", but rather changeable behavior patterns. I would love to see the APS's use of the system for temperament become known enough to be studied like that, but it just doesn't seem to be going beyond their own circle of Christian counseling ministries using it (or individuals like Worley creating their own version of it).


----------

