# Temperaments = MBTI functions?



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

darude11 said:


> You know what I think? That the INTP isn't choleric. I am one and I am not choleric. I don't want to lead people, and if I want to, I want to lead them like they would complete every single task I would give them (which is IMO only dream I want to achieve with psychology studies). But then I say just something like "Wait, that is stupid. People are too complex for being scripted like that and so controlable. If they would be, there would be somebody, who would control them ALL already. Heh, dumb idea."
> 
> But this dumb idea is stuck in my head always when I am around psychology stuff. Really.


Again, the Choleric for INTP's is not so much about "leading" others. In fact, that might be more about the Interaction Style than the conative temperament. The extraverts (especially In Charge, as the name even implies), are the ones who are quick to approach others like that.
And for the INTP, the Choleric is mellowed out by a diametrically opposite temperament that is reserved and more responsive to people (as in trying to give them their space to be different).

Where to look for the Choleric, is are you really stubborn about having things your own way? Do you demand answers when something doesn't go right (irritated when people like SJ's say "that's just life; just accept it", etc), pragmatically aim to correct the problem, plus the familiar Keirseyan definition of the NT as needing "mastery" and "competence"? And being hard on and critical of others who do things stupid? That's the Choleric! (in the conative area). 
It's like that attitude is "well, then; if others can't do it right; _then_ I need to take control [as much as I might not want to be bothered]").

(One can be that way while still being as you describe, and that's part of what makes us so "enigmatic").


----------



## darude11 (Jul 6, 2011)

If I would describe myself with 4 temperaments, first two would be Melancholic and Phlegmatic. But I have accepted my melancholy, so it is not so important anymore (maybe... personality [core] transfer? anybody? ). So there would be left next two other temperaments. Sanguine or Choleric? I am stubborn, that's true, but... but when somebody even ask me for help, I just answer them with sentence "Sorry, XYZanybodyXYZ, but I can't help you, because if I would, I would must help you for the rest of your/mine life." Maybe sometimes I don't add the part after 'because'. It is the thing that makes their opinion on me really bad. That sentence. And stubborness with not helping with thing that the person alone can't get done, so they ask me.

I don't know if it counts as stubbornes, but obviously I would IRL say, that it is. 
Something doesn't go right? I just then say either "Bad explanation was given to me." or "It is not mine fault, deal with it!". 
Needing mastery and competence? Yes, I need it. I am studying those psychologic personality sorters just because... well, maybe it is this thread where I've revealed it already.
They maybe do things like "Maths" stupid. But maybe this one is enough.
And I say (to last attitude you've written), that they need to learn how to do it. As I've written up in this post, I don't want to help anybody with something for rest of his/her/their/my life.


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

I don't quite understand the "help anybody with something for rest of his/her/their/my life" part. That's not particularly a Choleric trait, if that's what you're saying.

As I had explained, the Choleric for an INTP often becoems "mellowed", so to speak, into a Melancholic. So it seems most of them identify as Phlegmatic-Melancholic.
Melancholy is just as critical as Choleric, but not as aggressive (in this case, cooperative rather than pragmatic). Because of the introversion, the pragmatism is tempered a bit, so you don't identify with that aspect of the Choleric. (I just got through explaining to my wife again why although I complain about a lot of things in life, I don't have the drive to really up and _do_ something, because of the Interaction Style, basically. —As the term "Behind the Scenes" even implies! So I don't act/seem like a Choleric upfront).
ENT's generally recognize their Choleric more, as they have the extraversion, which makes them quicker to approach others. INTJ as well (because they share the directiveness, and are therefore a bit "closer" to the pure Choleric in that dimension).


----------



## darude11 (Jul 6, 2011)

Well, I think you're right with the thing about Melancholy-phlegma thing...

To that helping: It is the idea of mine. It is based on some proverb, I think it goes like "What is better? To give beggar 10$ or teach him how to get them by himself?" Yes, it is based on this. Simply I believe that person needs to teach how to do something. Because in case when that same person would need it again, he/she would be ready and wouldn't have to ask me. May sound complicated, because I am not that great at english.

And to the choleric temperament: I guess you're right. I have saw the ESTJ (he is my cousin), who is... how to say it... manipulative. He simply wants people to do his orders and think he is the perfect human. The ONLY perfect human. I think he is pretty extreme choleric.


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

I'm like that with the helping thing too. I wish people would learn to do things for themselves, and not have to interrupt me over and over. This can be my wife (just now) with a computer prompt (and all that had to be done was a couple of clicks on succeeding prompts), or the people on the subway asking for either complicated or overly simple directions when we have to close down and move on, and it's like they don't plan their trip at all or read maps or notice the automated announcements and signs that have been put up everywhere.

This isn't directly a familiar Choleric description, though it is compatible with their overall behavior. They are independent, competent intuitive kinds of people, and they expect others to be (The INTJ is the one whom this is described for the most).
Other temperaments would be more into helping others, especially the NF "diplomatic" Phlegmatic or "servant heart" Supine. The SJ Melancholic also seems to like to instruct people with the concrete data, though they might expect the person to become more self-sufficient eventually, as well.

ESTJ is Choleric Melancholy. The ENTJ (purest Choleric) will be similar, but even more independent and pragmatic.


----------



## madhatter (May 30, 2010)

@Eric B, in your links, it said that ISTPs are generally Melancholy Sanguine (which actually fits me pretty well). But I think I am probably more Melancholy-Phlegmatic in Inclusion/Affection. Would that affect the Melancholy Sanguine dynamic?


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

No, as the three different areas are independent of each other. The temperaments do modify each other in the overall behavior, but in the I/C-type correlation, a variation within one of the areas still fits.

What Melancholy-Phlegmatic in Inclusion means is simply that you express as a Melancholy (totally introverted), but respond as a Phlegmatic. That means that you are still a Chart the Course (IST), but with a moderate level of responsiveness (where CtC is low in responsiveness). That's basically between informing and directing, and thus between Chart the Course and Behind the Scenes; but slightly on the CtC/directive side.

That's why when you earlier said just Phlegmatic in Inclusion; I still allowed it as a close-enough fit. Phlegmatic is in the middle of everything. So it makes sense you would initially identify with just Phlegmatic, but turn out to be Melancholy-Phlegmatic.

Affection, again, can be any temperament for any type. It doesn't really correlate. Some people it might fill in as the Interaction Style. Especially when it's the same as Inclusion. So for you; you can just look at that as part of your Interaction Style.

So I'm wondering if you might happen to be close on the T/F dichotomy. That would seem to fit you being inbetween in the Interaction Style (Inclusion), though solidly SP.


----------



## madhatter (May 30, 2010)

Hm, I always have been clearly a T, but there are some traits that are thought of as F that I identified with in the past, that I was hard-pressed to pick between the two on tests, like considering other people in decision making, compassion, mercy, etc. I always thought that just because one likes to make decisions based on facts doesn't mean you can't think about other people too. I also noticed that I'll alternate between the informing and directing communication styles, depending on what mood I'm in.

But now that you mention it, while being Chart the Course, I also relate to Behind the Scenes interaction style to a degree. I thought that my Enneagram type 9 explained this, but it's nice to see the temperament theory supporting that conclusion.


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

That all fits, an yes, 9 would be the Phlegmatic of the Ennea types, further fitting.


----------



## darude11 (Jul 6, 2011)

All right, now time for my questions.

1. If I am phlegmatic-melancholic (melancholic really as secondary description), what can you say about me? That I am 100% introverted?  Well, it wasn't meant literaly of course. But choleric as I think would be with sanguine on same level.

2. I am Enneagram type 5w4. Next two of them are, well... optional, because I haven't met such a situations in my life yet. This can mean (by my opnion), that I am really INTP.

3. If I would do test on cognitive functions (I am too lazy to do it), I would probably have Fi bewteen the strongest ones. But I identify myself as the person, which understands everything he is interested in, more.

4. So... we have there misunderstandings about the real temperaments descriptions, right? Everybody (at least from my RL), almost everybody identifies himself/herself as the phlegmatic. Why? Because they don't want to be:
- nerd like melancholic
- angerlord like choleric
- kind person like sanguine
They want to stay cool and then they identify themselves as phlegmatics. Why? Because teachers are giving bad descriptions of temperaments.
Well, to the point: What would be real temperament descriptions? I don't know, like
- Sanguine: Happy, Excited, etc. ...
- Choleric: Angry (sometimes!), Manipulative, etc. ...
- Melancholy: Sad, Thinker, etc. ...
- Phlegmatic: Calm, "Whatev'" guy etc. ...

Thanks!


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

1) It would be as I explained earlier, about INTP's Choleric mellowing into an apparent Melancolic. Choleric and Sanguine are both expressive. In the Interaction Styles or Inclusion, this is E (extroversion). However, in the conative temperaments, it's no longer E; the "expressiveness" NT and SP share is called "pragmatism" or "utilitarianism". That means they "do what works", and thus will tend to be quicker to action. (this is another form of the "short response delay" that characterized the Choleric and Sanguine).

2)I believe this is actually the same thing as above. 5 seems to be the most Melancholic of the enneatypes. 4 is like a Melancholy-Phlegmatic (inbetween Melancholy-5, Phlegmatic-9 and Supine-6). 8 is the Choleric, but again, this is mellowed out; especially since it's not adjacent to others, so you can't have 4 or 6 with an 8 wing. 
So 5 ends up the closest thing.

I'm generally in the 4/5/6 range as well. Since the instinctual variants look like direct parallels to Inclusion, Control and Affection, I would say I was 6so8sp6sx, if you could stack like that. Since you can't, then it's 5 and 6, and often the nearby 4.

3) That again is pretty common. Fi is the right-brain alternative to Ti, and might come up strongly, even though it's supposed to be the "8th" function.

4)Phlegmatic is generally in the middle; between everything, and all around moderate. So a lot of people might identify wit it. The other temperaments (including fifth temperament Supine) have driving needs, which often come out as negative traits. Like the low expressives (introverts: Melancholy and Supine) are driven by fear of rejection. The extroverts (Sanguine, Choleric) are driven by need of acknowledgment. The low responsives (directives: Choleric and Melancholy) are driven by fear of control or influence by others. And the high responsives (Sanguine, Supine) are driven by a need for acceptance.

All of this is what becomes those traits you mentioned.
the Phlegmatic is actually driven by none of them.That's the point. they don't have the driving energy either pushing them one way or the other in the two dimensions. so they are moderate, take 'em or leave 'em, and also sluggish and lacking energy. that becomes their negative trait. How many people want to be characterized as "lazy"? (I've actually never heard what you said, that so many people want to be Phlegmatic and reject the others. Choleric is the main one that has the baddest rap and people are most likely to disclaim).


----------



## darude11 (Jul 6, 2011)

Thank you for the answers! 

Yeah, and to 4.:
How many? Well, let's say it was in school, 15/16 yrs. old. Everybody actually characterized himself as phlegmatic, based only on facts that they are lazy and they are not bothering about anything. ESTP, which was sitting next to me, was really sanguine and choleric, as I watched him. He takes the space of others, but his own space can't be interrupted by any others... space-taking... action? Whatev', long text short!
So, what is it about? He really wants to control people? I think that he is at first place person that seeks fun. Then, on second place, he can be some kind of "Searching for control over people" person. Yeah, he often gives commands to everybody.

Yeah, and one more thing. It would be off-topic, but when I already described this person... I don't know how, but he steals my ideas! We were like thinking about christmas decoration all the class, something original we wanted, and then he came up with MY idea, which was in my head, but I had no time to say it! Is it because of Ti?


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

Perhaps because they were kids, and didn't really understand temperament? The whole lazy thing is a broad generalization, and while the Phlegmatic gets tagged with it, you figure that most kids are going to seem lazy, when pressed into doing their school work, chores, etc.
(Man, I had never heard of temperament when I was at that age; nor would any of the other kids around me have cared about it. It would have been very useful to know, however. All I ever got was my father mentioning introversion and extroversion to me once, and then thinking and feeling. And I could tell that some extroverts were more serious while others were more "light and airy").

As for that person you mention, what type is he? I don't think Ti (at least in a preferred position) would just steal someone's idea like that. What it does is weigh it by the internal models, and then perhaps try to integrate it if possible. Ne then spits it back out as a new idea.


----------



## darude11 (Jul 6, 2011)

Ne? I was thinking it is because of Ti, like "Same thinking process", but when you say... hmm, stealing ideas, Ne... that makes sense!
He is IMO ESTP, but if he could be other type, I would say he is ESFP or ENTP. But he is more fun-loving and athletic, so... this makes me more sure about fact he is S.


----------

