Personality Cafe banner

181 - 200 of 224 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
Choleric may lean toward Thinking, While Sanguine or Phlegmatic will lean towards Feeling.
Lol, so you still associate Phlegmatics with NFs.. It's not about the individual letters of a certain personality type. It has always been only about the functions. (and by the way, the sanguines and the melancholics are the emotional ones.. hence the words sanguine (correlated to blood/heart) and melancholia (deep sadness, nostalgia or gloom). Cholerics are also known for having extreme mood swings and experience negative-intense emotions very often. The phlegmatics are the only ones who appear emotionless.. Also the emotionally stable ones are sanguines and phlegmatics. Maybe this is what you meant.)

Anyways, ENFJs should normally have a blend of these 3 temperaments: 1. sanguine (due to Fe), 2. phlegmatic (due to Ni) and 3. choleric (due to Se) but she's having 1. Choleric (Te) 2. Phlegmatic (Ni), 3. Melancholic (maybe?) (Fi) like an ENTJ.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
301 Posts
Meh, I used to be a pure phlegmatic, nowaday I'd see myself more as an choleric. But sanguine? Nah, bullshit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
Yes! I agree with all of that. It seems nowadays that the fifth(new/"artificial"/"fake"/unoriginal/made-up) temperament is associated (replaced) with the phlegmatic temperament while the "neutral temperament"(the original phlegmatic temperament) is not considered one of the 4 temperaments anymore.. (Lol) Which makes perfect sense why NFs are labeled as "phlegmatics" by "newbies".. but they're not true/original phlegmatics (with the exception of INFJs -> due to their Ni -> a phlegmatic function), they fall under the 5th temperament, somewhere between the phlegmatic and melancholic temperament.

The traits (that you listed above) of the original phlegmatic temperament can not be mainly found in NF personality types.. with the exception of the INFJs.. but INFJs are very different from the other (highly introverted) phlegmatics (INTPs, ISTPs, INTJs) because of their auxiliary function (Fe - which is the most sanguine/social function - which often makes them appear extroverted since they do socialize a lot - and the only auxiliary feeling function of a phlegmatic). INFJs are the so called "social introverts" or "ambiverts" or "emotional phlegmatics". (Melancholics are not social introverts. They're rather asocial introverts.) The rest of phlegmatics (INTPs, ISTPs and INTJs) have a much lower need of socializing than INFJs.. INTPs are the 2nd most sociable phlegmatics because of their Ne (the 2nd sanguine function)
I'm definitely rambling now. I'll get to the point.

(^Had to mention again the "formula" of calculating the mixture of temperaments of a certain personality type.^)

A personality type is not having only a single temperament. Every personality type is usually having a mixture of 3 temperaments. Let's take INFJs for example: Their first temperament is Phlegmatic (Ni), 2nd is Sanguine (Fe), 3rd should be (again) phlegmatic (Ti) and 4th is choleric (Se). The melancholic temperament shouldn't exist into a mentally healthy INFJ personality type.. meanwhile an INFP is firstly melancholic (Fi), 2nd sanguine (Ne), 3rd (again) melancholic (Si) and 4th choleric (Te). In my case my first temperament is phlegmatic (Ni), 2nd is choleric (Te), 3rd is melancholic (Fi) and 4th is again choleric (Se). Sanguine is nonexistent. @TB_Wisdom
I found a test (an old one) who still has the original phlegmatic temperament in it:
https://openpsychometrics.org/tests/O4TS/1.php

Come on, there's a distinctive difference between the two introverted temperaments (not so much between melancholic and the 5th temperament who is nowadays mistaken for phlegmatic)! INFPs and ISFs are clearly melancholics due to their introverted feelings (obsessing over their personal feelings and emotions) or introverted sensing (obsessing over their past). But their 2nd and 3rd temperament makes them different from other melancholics.
Lol, so you still associate Phlegmatics with NFs.. It's not about the individual letters of a certain personality type. It has always been only about the functions. (and by the way, the sanguines and the melancholics are the emotional ones.. hence the words sanguine (correlated to blood/heart) and melancholia (deep sadness, nostalgia or gloom). Cholerics are also known for having extreme mood swings and experience negative-intense emotions very often. The phlegmatics are the only ones who appear emotionless.. Also the emotionally stable ones are sanguines and phlegmatics. Maybe this is what you meant.)

Anyways, ENFJs should normally have a blend of these 3 temperaments: 1. sanguine (due to Fe), 2. phlegmatic (due to Ni) and 3. choleric (due to Se) but she's having 1. Choleric (Te) 2. Phlegmatic (Ni), 3. Melancholic (maybe?) (Fi) like an ENTJ.
I don't believe the temperaments are determined strictly by functions like that, though there are two exceptions, and some different degrees of correlation elsewhere.
Temperament was originally determined not by "cognitive functions", but by expressiveness and responsiveness. Back when the old "humor" concept was conceived it was known in the form of element temperature: "warm" (E) vs "cold" (I) and texture: "moist" (people focus) vs "dry" (task focus).

Jung did not accept this old model, and so came up with a totally different system, based on functions, so there wasn't a direct correlation. But when Myers (who was originally trying to create a new "four type" system similar to the temperaments, but then modified it as she incorporated Jung into it) turned it into "letter" dichotomies, then I and E would match temperature, and it would figure that both T/F and J/P would match texture, though it wasn't until Keirsey came out with his "intelligence Variants" (the last three letter groups, introduced in Portraits of Temperament), and then Berens completed the Interaction styles from them, that this became really evident.

Temperament (according to the theory I hold) exists on three levels (social, leadership, deep personal relationships), and two of them map right on the existing Keirsey temperaments and Interaction Styles of type. That's why letter combinations correspond to the temperaments better.
As for the NF, the mistake being made is not recognizing these two levels of temperament, and looking for Phlegmatic social traits in the NF, and then figuring it doesn't fit. That's what you're doing now; (associating the INFJ's "phlegmatic" traits with Ni, but Ni is not Phlegmatic; it's too task-focused or "dry" according to the old terms). But NF is the "leadership" area, and the NF's "cooperativeness" fits the Phlegmatic's "coolness", and the temperament is people-focused, which also matches the Phlegmatic. (Keirsey even deemed it having the "Diplomatic" skills-set, also matching the classic Phlegmatic, [even as he himself said it was Choleric because of the "emotion"]).

That's what temperament is plotted by, not "sadness" or "emotion"; at least not in the way you have it. If you must use emotion (and keep in mind, these are broad stereotypes), then Melancholic "sad" (reserved, critical); Choleric "angry"; (expressive, critical); Sanguine "joyous"; (expressive, agreeable), and Phlegmatic's "calm" would be "reserved, agreeable". So you see there, even regarding "emotions", the common underlying thread of the expressiveness/responsiveness factors.

Two of the letter combinations also correspond directly to function-attitudes; and those are SP and SJ, which are the Sanguine and the Melancholic, but in the area of leadership. The Keirsey temperaments are considered "conative", meaning "dealing with action" (and thus, by extension, "leadership").
Sanguine and Melancholic were originally considered diametric opposite, as one is reserved and task focused, and the other was expressive and people-focused; but Immanuel Kant tied together Sanguine and Melancholic as what he called "Beauty Perceivers", which would basically prefigure the Sensory focus held in common by the two Keirsey groups, and would also cover what you and some others are considering the "emotional" focus of the two.

Merely "being emotional" does not indicate the Feeling function (and especially not one attitude in particular; i.e. introverted). That is a common mistake many make, and why so many often struggle determining their T/F preference. For one; as I've said, between Fi and Si, the INFP (purest Phlegmatic or 5th temperament) and ISTJ (purest Melancholic) have each other's dominant as the other's tertiary, so that's why those two temperaments in their purest form will have a prominent Fi and Si. But the two functions are not what make the temperament.

Other correlations:
Te being always "directive" (task focused) in a preferred position; Choleric when dominant; Melancholic when aux.
Fi always being "informative" (people-focused) when preferred; Phlegmatic or 5th temperament when dom. Sanguine when aux.
Ni and Ne figuring in Interaction style; Ni always "directive"; Ne always "informative"

Fe is not the most Sanguine; as a "J" function (extraverted Judgment) it has a strong measure of "task-focus" (though that seems hard to believe, since they are the most "outwardly" focused on "people"). It can be like a softer version of Te. Je is about arranging the environment, (tasks) where Ji[Pe] is less so, and thus more people-focused. It's just that Fe's "tasks" are more directly considering of people that Te's tasks.
When tied with S, Fe will be people-focused on the social level, but structure focused on the conative level, which gives it more of a critical edge than SeFi (and I live with FeSi, so I know first hand). Ni, on the other hand, will make it directive on the social level, and more people ["motive"—Berens]-focused on the conative level.
Ti is the flipside, being an introverted judgment (P), having a softer edge than Te.

This actually explains a lot of other aspects of type, such as TP's and FJ's being so "enigmatic", and often unsure of their type. TP's and FJ's are a mix of responsive behaviors, and NTP and NFJ in particular, are reverse of what you would expect on t he social level. Most F's (either attitude) are "informative", except for the NFJ's; hence them being a bit tougher on the surface, and seeming like T's, and most T's are directive, except NTP's, who are a bit softer in communication, and often confuse as F's.

I never said that Phlegmatic was not considered a temperament anymore; but of interest is that some time ago, people were considering it as "absence of temperament". That's because, it's not driven one way or the other in expressiveness and responsiveness like the others. But inasmuch as "temperament" simply means "disposition", then people without those drives are still left with a resulting "disposition", and thus can be said to have a temperament. What's called the "5th" temperament then is simply another disposition, that is more reserved and more people focused than the phlegmatic, but otherwise, can fit the same slot in a four temperament matrix. It will be good for explaining more or less energized versions of the ISF, INP and NF groups, which do seem to be evident.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
Meh, I used to be a pure phlegmatic, nowaday I'd see myself more as an choleric. But sanguine? Nah, bullshit.
ENTP is the blend of Sanguine and Choleric (and this is one of the most consistent matches), which are similar in being very expressive. So it's easy for them to meld together so that you don't recognize the Sanguine aspects. Perhaps, to try to get a sense of that, just compare yourself, behaviorally (particularly socially) to an ENTJ.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,381 Posts
Yeah, its wrong. Sorry mate, don't mean to offend you but theres a lot of conflicting things going on here.

First, you claim to be an ENFJ. Second, you claim to be an Enneagram-8. Third, a Phlegmatic temperament. Mate, these types are three completely separate temperaments.

- The enneagram-8 is the strongest enneagram version of your typical Choleric temperament. All enneagram-8 are choleric. Just like all ENTJs are choleric. Big surprise that ENTJ:s usually end up scoring as enneagram-8:s. Traits: Domineering, decisive, leadership like, structured, organized, etc. The function present here is Te, or Te-dominance (E_TJ).

- The Phlegmatic is introverted, people-oriented, calm, patient, a good listener. Think of your typical I_F_ type, particularly INFP and INFJ.

- The ENFJ is outgoing, people-oriented, high level of interpersonal intelligence and EQ, visionary, leadership-like (in a feeling-sense, not a thinking-sense), outgoing, etc. This is your typical Sanguine temperament, or Sanguine/Choleric (second).

Which one are you? You cannot be dominant in three separate temperaments at once...

One more note on the Enneagram-MBTI relation: There is no symmetric relation between MBTI and the Enneagram. However, there are certain relationships. Some MBTI types are prone to usually be one or another of the Enneagram types (examples, ESFP and Type 7, INTP and Type 5, ENTJ and Type 8, etc.). Some are inbetween (myself for example, I am INTJ type 1). But some are just not possible (you cannot be an ESFP and an Enneagram type 5, or an INTJ and an enneagram type 7, etc.). Being an ENFJ/ESFJ and an Enneagram type 8 is also not possible.
While I agree with you that Rydori is unlikely an 8, I disagree with you that ENFJ + 8 is not a viable option in reality.

Please explain your reasoning and/or your evidence for the bolded.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
While I agree with you that Rydori is unlikely an 8, I disagree with you that ENFJ + 8 is not a viable option in reality.

Please explain your reasoning and/or your evidence for the bolded.
Type 8 fits ExFJ types beautifully, imo:

The strengths of healthy Eights are based on a tremendous vitality and a keen intuition that can see possibilities in situations and in people that others often miss. They feel strong and capable, and can use their immense self-confidence, courage, and leadership abilities to inspire others to great accomplishments.

Average Eights, however, tend to dominate everything in the environment too aggressively, asserting themselves impulsively and indulging their instinctual needs for control and satisfaction without much regard for the consequences.


Unhealthy Eights relate to their environment as bullies and tyrants, ruthlessly tearing down anyone and anything that stands in their way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rydori

·
Registered
Joined
·
156 Posts
Lol, so you still associate Phlegmatics with NFs.. It's not about the individual letters of a certain personality type. It has always been only about the functions. (and by the way, the sanguines and the melancholics are the emotional ones.. hence the words sanguine (correlated to blood/heart) and melancholia (deep sadness, nostalgia or gloom). Cholerics are also known for having extreme mood swings and experience negative-intense emotions very often. The phlegmatics are the only ones who appear emotionless.. Also the emotionally stable ones are sanguines and phlegmatics. Maybe this is what you meant.)

Anyways, ENFJs should normally have a blend of these 3 temperaments: 1. sanguine (due to Fe), 2. phlegmatic (due to Ni) and 3. choleric (due to Se) but she's having 1. Choleric (Te) 2. Phlegmatic (Ni), 3. Melancholic (maybe?) (Fi) like an ENTJ.
how is phlegmatic correlated to Ni?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,665 Posts
I got melancholic/sanguine, or ISTP.
It's not a type i've considered much for myself, but I have been told that 1ce or twice before. ESTP as well.
 

·
Registered
INFJ EII 5w4 so/sp (145) Pisces♓️
Joined
·
592 Posts
INFJ: Melancholic --> Phlegmatic --> Choleric --------------------> Sanguine
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47 Posts
how is phlegmatic correlated to Ni?
Well, there are 4 introverted functions (Ti, Ni, Fi, Si) and 2 introverted temperaments (phlegmatic and melancholic).
Ti and Ni are very similar.. It's introverted thinking, except Ti is focused on the present while Ni is focused on the future.
Fi and Si are similar. It's about introverted feelings, emotions and life experiences and they're focused on the past.
Phlegmatics don't think in the past. They focus their thinking on present and/or future. Phlegmatics (Ti-dom and Ni-dom) also have the highest IQs of all 4 temperaments. I don't get how lately melancholics got the reputation of being intellectuals (highly intelligent people). 15 years ago when I first learned about the 4 temperaments from psychology books, the melancholics were considered the biggest emotional losers. Being driven mostly by your negative emotions & feelings and allowing yourself to be traumatized or influenced by your bad life experiences is not a sign of intelligence, nor logic. Melancholics are not even capable of holding a rational conversation without getting offended due to their intense (negative) emotions (Fi) and/or due to their hyper sensitivity (Si).

I'm all ears in case you have a better explanation regarding the 4 introverted functions in correlation with the 2 introverted temperaments. Which are the 2 phlegmatic functions according to you?

I feel obligated to give some examples of people with these 2 introverted temperaments. Maybe this will help you understand better the differences between these 2 introverted temperaments.

Phlegmatics (Ti doms and Ni doms): Isaac Newton (Physicist); Karl Marx (Philosopher); Abraham Lincoln (U.S. President); Albert Einstein (Physicist); Charles Darwin (Biologist); Parmenides (Greek philosopher); Friedrich Nietzsche (Philosopher); Mark Zuckerberg (CEO of Facebook); Elon Musk (Founder of SpaceX, Tesla Motors, etc); Bobby Fischer (Chess champion); Nikola Tesla (Inventor); Thucydides (Greek historian); Jimmy Wales (Founder of Wikipedia); Stephen Hawking (Physicist); John Nash (Mathematician); Isaac Asimov; Christopher Hitchens (Journalist); Bill Gates (some say he's an ENTJ but he's clearly an INTP); Heraclitus (Greek philosopher); Jean-Paul Sartre (Philosopher); Larry Page and Sergey Brin (Founders of Google); Albert Speer (Minister of Armaments in Nazi Germany); G.W.F. Hegel (Philosopher); Vladimir Lenin (Dictator of the Soviet Union); Carl Gustav Jung (Psychiatrist); Plato (Philosopher); Mahatma Gandhi (he may be a melancholic INFP though); Arthur Schopenhauer (Philosopher); Fyodor Dostoevsky; Adolf Hitler; Osama bin Laden. Now ISTPs are a little different than the other 3 types of Phlegmatics because of their auxiliary function (Se - a sensory choleric function) while INFJs are different for being the only phlegmatic feelers. Anyways, even with Se as their auxiliary function there still are decent phlegmatic examples of ISTPs: Erwin Rommel (World War II general); Steve Jobs; Jack Dorsey (Founder of Twitter); Diogenes the Dog (Greek philosopher); Vladimir Putin and Bruce Lee.

Melancholics (Fi doms and Si doms): C.S. Lewis (Author of 'The Chronicles of Narnia'); J.R.R. Tolkien (Author of 'The Lord of the Rings'); A. A. Milne (Author of 'Winnie The Pooh'); J.K. Rowling (Author of the 'Harry Potter' series); Vincent van Gogh; William Shakespeare; Homer (Author of 'The Iliad' and 'The Odyssey'); Johnny Depp; Most Poets who wrote about their deep feelings instead of their deep thoughts (they're too many to write them all); Nero (Emperor of Rome); Michael Jackson; Prince (Singer-songwriter); **** Jagger (Rolling Stones); Justin Timberlake; Nicole Kidman; Princess Diana; Rihanna; "Skrillex"; George H.W. Bush (U.S. President, father of George W. Bush and Jeb Bush); Marcus Aurelius (Roman philosopher and Emperor); Mother Teresa (Catholic nun); Heinrich Himmler(Minister of the Interior in Nazi Germany); Francisco Franco (Dictator of Fascist Spain); Christopher Walken (Actor); 50 Cent(Rapper); Tiger Woods; Bruce Willis; Now ISTJs are a little more cerebral/rational for being the only melancholic thinkers: Augustus(Emperor of Rome); George Washington (U.S. President); Thomas Hobbes(Philosopher); Sigmund Freud (Psychoanalyst, mentor of Jung and Adler); Xenophon (Greek historian, student of Socrates); Joseph Ratzinger (Pope); Angela Merkel (Chancellor of Germany); Morgan Freeman; Robert De Niro; Sean Connery; Elizabeth II (Queen of England) and Matt Damon.

P.S. In my opinion, a significant percentage of ISTJs and INFJs are the exception to the "rule". Some ISTJs may be more phlegmatic than melancholic (like the rest of introverted thinkers) while some INFJs may be more melancholic than phlegmatic (like the rest of introverted feelers).

I hope you now have a better view about the differences between the phlegmatic and melancholic temperament.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
What exactly do you mean an "EXFJ" can't be ennegram 8? It is prominant in me and there is absolute no way I'm an ENTJ, ask anyone around here and you'll get no, not an ENTJ but an ENFJ. Not to bust your case but Chloeric is more of my dominant over Phleg even though are both are quite close to each other. You got to remember the 4 temperament system was design DURING ANCIENT GREEK time. Of course there's going to be a clash between types and temperaments because the temperament system is so damn outdated. As for it's not physically possible for an EXFJ to be ennegram 8, any type can have a certain ennegram and are not locked into certain descriptions.
I'll try to respond as well and as summarized as I can.

First, check out the following study for MBTI/Enneagram correlation. Look up ENFJ and Type 8. It's not a perfect study, the subjects can have been mistyped, but it should give an indication of what's a likely relation between the MBTI and the Enneagram. Out of 118 ENFJs (self-typed), only 1 (=0,8%) identified as an Enneagram Type 8 whilst 41,5% identified as Enneagram Type 2. Those statistics should indicate something ...
https://www.typologycentral.com/wiki/index.php/Enneagram_and_MBTI_Correlation

Second, typology is not as complex or mystical as people make it. Why it's mystical is because people simply don't have enough knowledge of themselves (how they appear to other people, i.e. how they appear in the external world) to accurately answer e.g. an MBTI test to get the proper result. We have all been there, I was there myself and I was mistyped. I thought internally (in the introverted world) that I was something that I wasn't. Thus got mistyped as a Choleric/ENTJ, but I'm in reality a Melancholic/INTJ. Other people have always seen me as shy, sensitive and inward. Therefore, I am lieing to myself if I claim to be an extraverted type (and I was back then, but I am not anymore...). This is not my own words, its confirmed by many typologist, e.g. the RHETI book on the Enneagram claims to be the most accurate Enneagram test and they state the #1 mistyping reason as lack of enough self knowledge to answer the test according to how you really are.

A side-note: Sometimes, the overly mystification of typology gets under my nerves. Particularly certain INFJs who claim to be "mystically" more or less good at everything, i.e., God-like. When a certain person sees herself as "perfect" or "good at everything", you know the person suffers from a lack of self-knowledge and lives in denial, i.e., does not want to accept the Shadow personality (as Jung put it).

Third, certain functions simply manifest in certain typical traits and behaviors. We can't observe a cognitive function (e.g. Fe, Te, Ni, ...), we can only observe behaviors that are typically associated with a certain mental process i.e. cognitive function. All Enneagram types manifest typical behaviors. Type 8 is an anger-based type who manifests anger outward to the world and takes the form of being domineering, decisive, assertive, etc. These traits are a text book example of a Choleric temperament. These traits are also clear evidence of a dominant extraverted thinking function (Te, or E_TJ). Obviously, if you are dominant in extraverted feeling (ESFJ,ENFJ) - your decision making is completely aligned with external morale, i.e., the mood of the group or the general accepted norms of society. You will want to make people feel good. Every single E_FJ type I've met are all about making people feel good (creating "Harmony" according to Personalityhacker).

Summary: You cannot be an ENFJ while being decisive, domineering, decisive, willful, and confrontational (which are traits of 8). It goes against your very cognitive wiring to make rational decisions that constantly piss people off. A domineering and confrontational ENFJ - are you kidding me? ENFJ:s constantly self-sacrifice to make others feel good, this is true for all FJ types (extraverted feeling dominant/auxiliary). You can't be all at once. And you are not, according to Jung. Your type is the ordering of which functions you have developed through your life and are thus more comfortable and effective in using. This comes at the expense of other functions that are opposed to your strong function(s) which remain underdeveloped. If you are dominant in Fe (E_FJ), your Te (E_TJ) will be underdeveloped.

Fourth, the four temperaments was neither designed or invented by Hippocrates (ancient greek). It was first manifested in ancient Egypt in the Bronze age. And like all ancient wisdom from Egypt and Persia, the greeks learned it and claimed ownership of it. HIS story, i.e., the winners story. Moreover, the four temperaments was developed and analyzed during the 800-900's (cf. Avicenna), the middle ages and the church, in asia, by various psychologists. The four temperaments are actively taught today in psychology but they are rebranded as colors: Red (chol.), Blue (mela.), Green (Phl.), Yellow (San.), or the Merrill-Reid social styles Analytical (mela.), Driver (chol.), Expressive (San.) and Amiable (Phl.). Thus, quite a lot of historical and psychological substance in the four temperaments...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
The Four Temperaments - Phlegmatic

It clearly doesn't define INP types at all. I could be mean and generalizing but it would suit ISFJs and ISTJs more. (especially ISFJs)
As I mentioned earlier, Fighunter's conception of the Phlegmatic is actually more (or at least in part) "Supine", the fifth temperament, which he in one place dismisses as being the traditional Phlegmatic. Phlegmatic is really a more "neutral" temperament; and he emphasizes "submissiveness", but the Phlegmatic is not always really so submissive, but also can be very stubborn and hard to move. That's why it was associated with "phlegm". The common thread with Phlegmatic is low energy, which will sometimes make them submissive, and yet sometimes stubborn. In either case, the drive is the "path of least resistance" (as even Fighunter mentions, there), to preserve their low energy reserve.
So some INP's will fit those descriptions, but the more stereotypical ones (especially INTP) are not as "submissive".

Well, there are 4 introverted functions (Ti, Ni, Fi, Si) and 2 introverted temperaments (phlegmatic and melancholic).
Ti and Ni are very similar.. It's introverted thinking, except Ti is focused on the present while Ni is focused on the future.
Fi and Si are similar. It's about introverted feelings, emotions and life experiences and they're focused on the past.
Phlegmatics don't think in the past. They focus their thinking on present and/or future. Phlegmatics (Ti-dom and Ni-dom) also have the highest IQs of all 4 temperaments. I don't get how lately melancholics got the reputation of being intellectuals (highly intelligent people). 15 years ago when I first learned about the 4 temperaments from psychology books, the melancholics were considered the biggest emotional losers. Being driven mostly by your negative emotions & feelings and allowing yourself to be traumatized or influenced by your bad life experiences is not a sign of intelligence, nor logic. Melancholics are not even capable of holding a rational conversation without getting offended due to their intense (negative) emotions (Fi) and/or due to their hyper sensitivity (Si).
Which psychology books were these? (Most mainstream "psychology" doesn't even recognize the ancient temperaments, but instead, if anything, would follow the modern Birch & Chess standalone factors version). Any book calling a temperament something like "emotional losers" doesn't seem like something to be taken seriously (unless that was simply your paraphrase). I don't think the temperaments are really to be correlated with IQ either. Most of what you're saying there is broad generalization (e.g. "not even capable", etc).
Melancholies are both intellectual, and have a strong emotional component. As I explained before, this can be explained through tertiary Fi. So they are logically focused, but if unhealthy, the less mature Feeling (coupled with Si memory of negative experiences) can drag them down. That's not a lack of "logic", it's the unpreferred Feeling tripping it up.

I'll try to respond as well and as summarized as I can.

First, check out the following study for MBTI/Enneagram correlation. Look up ENFJ and Type 8. It's not a perfect study, the subjects can have been mistyped, but it should give an indication of what's a likely relation between the MBTI and the Enneagram. Out of 118 ENFJs (self-typed), only 1 (=0,8%) identified as an Enneagram Type 8 whilst 41,5% identified as Enneagram Type 2. Those statistics should indicate something ...
https://www.typologycentral.com/wiki/index.php/Enneagram_and_MBTI_Correlation

Second, typology is not as complex or mystical as people make it. Why it's mystical is because people simply don't have enough knowledge of themselves (how they appear to other people, i.e. how they appear in the external world) to accurately answer e.g. an MBTI test to get the proper result. We have all been there, I was there myself and I was mistyped. I thought internally (in the introverted world) that I was something that I wasn't. Thus got mistyped as a Choleric/ENTJ, but I'm in reality a Melancholic/INTJ. Other people have always seen me as shy, sensitive and inward. Therefore, I am lieing to myself if I claim to be an extraverted type (and I was back then, but I am not anymore...). This is not my own words, its confirmed by many typologist, e.g. the RHETI book on the Enneagram claims to be the most accurate Enneagram test and they state the #1 mistyping reason as lack of enough self knowledge to answer the test according to how you really are.

A side-note: Sometimes, the overly mystification of typology gets under my nerves. Particularly certain INFJs who claim to be "mystically" more or less good at everything, i.e., God-like. When a certain person sees herself as "perfect" or "good at everything", you know the person suffers from a lack of self-knowledge and lives in denial, i.e., does not want to accept the Shadow personality (as Jung put it).

Third, certain functions simply manifest in certain typical traits and behaviors. We can't observe a cognitive function (e.g. Fe, Te, Ni, ...), we can only observe behaviors that are typically associated with a certain mental process i.e. cognitive function. All Enneagram types manifest typical behaviors. Type 8 is an anger-based type who manifests anger outward to the world and takes the form of being domineering, decisive, assertive, etc. These traits are a text book example of a Choleric temperament. These traits are also clear evidence of a dominant extraverted thinking function (Te, or E_TJ). Obviously, if you are dominant in extraverted feeling (ESFJ,ENFJ) - your decision making is completely aligned with external morale, i.e., the mood of the group or the general accepted norms of society. You will want to make people feel good. Every single E_FJ type I've met are all about making people feel good (creating "Harmony" according to Personalityhacker).

Summary: You cannot be an ENFJ while being decisive, domineering, decisive, willful, and confrontational (which are traits of 8). It goes against your very cognitive wiring to make rational decisions that constantly piss people off. A domineering and confrontational ENFJ - are you kidding me? ENFJ:s constantly self-sacrifice to make others feel good, this is true for all FJ types (extraverted feeling dominant/auxiliary). You can't be all at once. And you are not, according to Jung. Your type is the ordering of which functions you have developed through your life and are thus more comfortable and effective in using. This comes at the expense of other functions that are opposed to your strong function(s) which remain underdeveloped. If you are dominant in Fe (E_FJ), your Te (E_TJ) will be underdeveloped.

Fourth, the four temperaments was neither designed or invented by Hippocrates (ancient greek). It was first manifested in ancient Egypt in the Bronze age. And like all ancient wisdom from Egypt and Persia, the greeks learned it and claimed ownership of it. HIS story, i.e., the winners story. Moreover, the four temperaments was developed and analyzed during the 800-900's (cf. Avicenna), the middle ages and the church, in asia, by various psychologists. The four temperaments are actively taught today in psychology but they are rebranded as colors: Red (chol.), Blue (mela.), Green (Phl.), Yellow (San.), or the Merrill-Reid social styles Analytical (mela.), Driver (chol.), Expressive (San.) and Amiable (Phl.). Thus, quite a lot of historical and psychological substance in the four temperaments...
The types are blends of temperaments, along the lines of Keirsey's temperaments, and the Interaction Styles. (Basically, Keirsey is ultimately derived from Plato, while Interaction Styles would be closer to classic Hippocrates and the others, up to Social Styles, etc). The ENJ (interaction Style) part of it is extraverted and directive (which defined the ancient Choleric; i.e. "hot and dry", and is what makes it look so stereotypically "anger-based", fitting the E8) and even called "In Charge". This is blended with the NF, which is the opposite (cooperative and motive[people]-focused), which would be Phlegmatic (or even Supine), and Keirsey did claim NF was "Choleric", due to its "emotiveness" (which would then make the ENFJ "Choleric" on both levels, or the "pure Choleric"), but I believe he was mistaken on that.

So the ENFJ would be a Choleric-Phlegmatic or Choleric-Supine, which is a blend of two diametrically opposite temperaments (expressive and directive with reserved and responsive), and so what happens is that the different temperaments moderate the traits of each other. So that the ENFJ will not be as purely Choleric as the ENTJ, or even similar types like the ESTJ or ESTP. That's how the type could be Choleric and have some of those un-Choleric traits you mentioned. Those are really coming from the [N]F part of it, which is not the Choleric, but really the opposite.
However, on the surface, the type will still tend to be quicker to approach others for interaction, and yet have a higher criteria for accepting unsolicited interaction from others. (think "Don't call me; I'll call you"). This is what's at the root of the Choleric temperament. Oprah is the textbook ENFJ example, and while she may look all Sanguiney on TV, people who deal with her in person describe her behavior as what fits a Choleric. (The other Fe dom. ESFJ, by comparison, is Sanguine-Melancholy; which is also a blend of opposites).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
382 Posts
This feels like a typical INTJ-INTP disagreement as you're approaching the issue from a strong internally logic perspective (Ti) while I'm looking at empirical evidence, such stand point is simply not supported, all evidence speaks for ENFJs (and all E_F_ types) being Sanguine predominantly.

The traits I use to describe the temperaments are based on literature from A. Carberry, A. Whyte, R. Steiner, G. Childs, T. Erikson as well as various online articles, presentations, lectures and VLOGs on the topic.

The types are blends of temperaments, along the lines of Keirsey's temperaments, and the Interaction Styles. (Basically, Keirsey is ultimately derived from Plato, while Interaction Styles would be closer to classic Hippocrates and the others, up to Social Styles, etc).
Agree.
The ENJ (interaction Style) part of it is extraverted and directive (which defined the ancient Choleric; i.e. "hot and dry", and is what makes it look so stereotypically "anger-based", fitting the E8)
Lots of errors here in my opinion. You group ENTJ and ENFJ as the ENJ:s, but they only share the middle functional axis of Ni-Se but are completely opposing in their dominant-inferior axis of Te-Fi (ENTJ) vs Fe-Ti (ENFJ). Results in two different type. ENTJ is quite common empirically among Enneagram-8's but not the ENFJ, the ENFJ is most common among Enneagram-2's. There is empirical evidence to prove this point, cf link I posted.
and even called "In Charge". This is blended with the NF, which is the opposite (cooperative and motive[people]-focused), which would be Phlegmatic (or even Supine), and Keirsey did claim NF was "Choleric", due to its "emotiveness" (which would then make the ENFJ "Choleric" on both levels, or the "pure Choleric"), but I believe he was mistaken on that.
Well, Keirsey is completely wrong from an empirical point of view. An INFP choleric? The INFP is arguably the most phlegmatic type that exists. My mother is INFP and my best friend is INFP, both of them know typology and they both identify as strong Enneagram 9's and Phlegmatics. You call the ENFP Choleric? Another complete error. Or the INFJ? Choleric people drive INFJ:s crazy, I've seen this time after time. I even know one INFJ person who quit our company because the 1-2 Cholerics constantly kept on running her over and the values that she held dear. ENFJ:s (such as Oprah) are predominantly Sanguine but I agree that there is a certain tone of assertiveness to ENFJ:s which makes many of them Sanguine/Choleric blends.

Again, the empirical evidence simply doesn't support the fact.
So the ENFJ would be a Choleric-Phlegmatic or Choleric-Supine, which is a blend of two diametrically opposite temperaments (expressive and directive with reserved and responsive),
Again, no empirical evidence to support that a Fe-dominant type is Choleric. Note that almost all literature that explains Cholerics explains them as emotionally cold and hard-headed, a type that has difficulties expressing emotions...

and so what happens is that the different temperaments moderate the traits of each other. So that the ENFJ will not be as purely Choleric as the ENTJ, or even similar types like the ESTJ or ESTP. That's how the type could be Choleric and have some of those un-Choleric traits you mentioned. Those are really coming from the [N]F part of it, which is not the Choleric, but really the opposite.
Yes, the functions moderate the types such as the Choleric types of ENTP and ESTP who display only mild forms of typical Choleric traits. Again, Choleric is not a type that makes decisions based on feeling. They would appear much more warm and mild to the outside world (such as Sanguines and Phlegmatics do) if they used feeling. Yet the world thinks of Cholerics as Fire...
However, on the surface, the type will still tend to be quicker to approach others for interaction, and yet have a higher criteria for accepting unsolicited interaction from others. (think "Don't call me; I'll call you"). This is what's at the root of the Choleric temperament. Oprah is the textbook ENFJ example, and while she may look all Sanguiney on TV, people who deal with her in person describe her behavior as what fits a Choleric. (The other Fe dom. ESFJ, by comparison, is Sanguine-Melancholy; which is also a blend of opposites).
Again, you're too focused on proving your internal logic such that you disregard empirical evidence. Sanguines are the popular ones. Sanguines are those people who usually have a lot of friends and a lot of admirers. Those who have maximum social intelligence. Those who receive the most likes on social media. Those who can talk to everyone. Those people who smile, who use warm and inviting body language (such as hugging and touching - not in a sexual sense). All of these traits fit Oprah and she is probably one of the most popular talk show hosts ever.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,866 Posts
OK, you address, but are not really taking into consideration, the main point of the effect of the blending of the temperaments. And you're dealing with opposite temperaments, and so the mixing of traits will be more dramatic. That's one reason both NFJ's and NTP's are so notably “enigmatic”. (Are you one of those who hold diametric opposites can't be blended? Someone, IIRC mentioned that version of temperament somewhere recently).
Also, the blends aren't random, but rather according to the two different areas, social and leadership. NF is the “leadership” area, which is the Phlegmatic. In the ENFJ, it is combined with the Choleric in the social area.


What you're giving there are really more broad Sanguine stereotypes; not empirical evidence. (And even those "sources" you cite may not be considering blends, or reject blends of opposites). What you're describing are really more general “extroversion” traits. So Cholerics can be that way too. ("popular...usually have a lot of friends and a lot of admirers...maximum social intelligence...receive the most likes on social media... can talk to everyone...people who smile, who use warm and inviting body language...". Are you kidding in denying Cholerics are at least several of these?)
The difference is the “people” vs “task” focus. Sanguines are genuinely focused on the people themselves, where Cholerics approach people for more of a “goal” in mind. Cholerics are thus described in the APS as being able to “undertake any behavior necessary”, to achieve those goals. So often, they will find it beneficial to be open and friendly like a Sanguine.

The ENFJ is the unique case (the only Choleric Feeler, which grants you the normal virtual incompatibility of Choleric with F traits), where the social Choleric is driven by Feeling, which will in effect CANCEL OUT the "emotionally cold and hard-headed, difficulty expressing emotions..." tendencies.
Those complete (and generalistic) behavioral descriptions are not really the root definition of the Choleric. The Choleric is defined as "expressive and directive". That will usually be connected with emotional coldness, etc. but this can be altered by blending with another temperament. This is what will make them "appear much more warm and mild to the outside world". But what will remain will be the expressiveness (E) and "directiveness" (common to all ST's and NJ's), in the social area. They will still have that "fire" to them, though in diminished form as even you admitted in acknowledging their "assetiveness".

(And this, again, is what I hear Oprah is really like offstage. Even seeing her onstage; I could imagine it. Sanguines have more of a "light and airiness" to them (it was the "air" temperament, recall), in addition to being simply "friendly".
I don't know many other ENFJ's. One in MBTI certification class did seem like a Choleric, even had that "Choleric" look on her face you would expect from an ETJ. There was also a great aunt who might have been one, and she seemed sweet and all, but really had another side to her, my grandmother [her sister] always warned of, and became quite evident the way she took over and changed around my grandmother's funeral arrangements when she died first. It was actually a very Fe kind of move, but still very "Choleric" the way it was carried out. The true "Sanguine" Fe ESFJ type like my wife would be much less likely to do something like that, because the "practical" S coupled with the F is more people-focused on the social level, and not driven by the task-focused, subjective "visions" of Ni, which again is what drives the "directive" aspects).


I did not make this part of it up; Interaction Styles are originally from Linda Berens, and Keirsey himself is the one who first identified "informative/directive", and later factored them with I/E creating the same groups, (calling them simply "roles of interaction"). ENFJ's Interaction Style is called "In Charge". That's clearly the Choleric, where "Get Things Going" (EFS/ENP) is the Sanguine. (Where I differ with them is the NF/NT mixup. BTW; I did not say ENFP is Choleric; that again would be Keirsey. [perhaps by "you", you were referring hypothetically to Keirsey?] I bet if you compare an ENFP with an ENFJ, where the "P" crosses it over to "Get things Going"; you will see the contrast, where ENFJ may look "Sanguine" by itself, but the ENFP will be much more Sanguine in comparison).

Also, while E8 is definitely Choleric, 2 doesn't seem to fit well to a "pure" temperament like that, but rather be more blended, and so it would make perfect sense from a temperament angle that EFJ's would fall into that type a lot.
ENTP is the Sanguine-Choleric (not ENFJ) and ESTP is the Choleric-Sanguine. Again, in both cases, the Sanguine does soften the Choleric down, as you refer to as "mild". The Choleric in turn also gives the Sanguine a bit more seriousness. So the ENFJ blend would be an even more radical "softening".
 
181 - 200 of 224 Posts
Top