1. When I refer to the word 'temperament' I am referring to this temperament theory
2. My underlying assumption is that the above temperament theory is a helpful theoretical model for categorizing people; I feel that if the theory is applied correctly it can be a catalyst for a person's self-actualization.
3. I acknowledge my observations are experiential. Therefore I may be biased, misinformed or uneducated in some regard. As such I would appreciate constructive criticism if I'm in error.
I noticed that there seems to be a subtle indication to me of another person's core temperament. A person's core temperament feels to me metaphorically like a waterfall.
My observation was influenced by my intrapersonal conflict between which temperament I identified with: either Improviser or Catalyst.
I observed that true Improvisers and Catalysts were more 'authentic', 'graceful', 'flowing' and 'natural' in their external expression of their core temperament when they felt comfortable to be who they were. They felt like actual people.
On the other hand I observed that through identity confusion when they acted as another temperament it felt 'inauthentic', 'feigned', 'forced' and 'unnatural'. Each person acted more or less like a crude stereotype than an actual person.
I also observed that through psychological destabilization (which I would define more like an existential crisis and not an acute crisis) I metaphorically 'saw' my own and others' temperament. When the core needs that each temperament unconsciously gravitate toward disappears there seems to be a fixation on both finding those core needs and despairing that those core needs will never reappear. I would argue that psychological destabilization is a catalyst for us to misidentify ourselves as another temperament.
What are your observations? Your thoughts? Your feelings? Please discuss.