PDA

View Full Version : Type and Eysenck's Understanding of the Four Temperaments



fduniho
5 Sep 2010, 04:33 AM
I just came up with a new theory on the relation between the 16 types and the four temperaments, not Keirsey's four temperaments, but the four going back to Hippocrates and Galen: sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic, and melancholic. According to Hans Eysenck, these four temperaments correspond to preferences along two dimensions. One is introversion/extraversion, and the other is stability/neuroticism. On his theory, sanguines are stable extraverts, phlegmatics are stable introverts, cholerics are neurotic extraverts, and melancholics are neurotic introverts. My theory assumes that his notions of introversion/extraversion correlate well with Jung's and hypothesizes that stability/neuroticism correlates with rationality/irrationality, which is about whether a type's dominant function is judging or perceiving. Based on this hypothesis, I would predict that EJs are sanguine, IPs are phlegmatic, EPs are choleric, and IJs are melancholic.

But that's not the end of the story. Since we normally engage in both introverted and extraverted activities, we may sometimes exhibit one temperament while introverting and another while extraverting. But instead of alternating between neighboring temperaments, such as phlegmatic and sanguine, it will be between opposite temperaments. As the phlegmatic IP engages in more extraverted activity, he will become more choleric. As the choleric EP engages in more introverted activity, he will become more phlegmatic. Likewise, the IJs and EJ's will alternate between being more sanguine or more melancholic.

As we use all four of our functions, my theory predicts that we should be able to access each of the temperaments. An INTP would be phlegmatic while using Ti, choleric while using Ne, melancholic while using Si, and sanguine while using Fe. An INTJ would be melancholic while using Ni, sanguine while using Te, phlegmatic while using Fi, and choleric while using Se. But this may pose some problems. Should we identify opposite functions as belonging to the same temperament, such as Ti and Fi both being phlegmatic, or Ni and Si as both being melancholic? I'm not sure.

Eric B
10 Sep 2010, 04:54 PM
Wow, you sound just like me now, talking about the old Galen temperaments in these two threads!

I believe the temperaments map on to both Keirsey's groups, and the Insteraction Styles (which are EP, IP, EJ and IJ for N's; but are EF, IF, ET and IT for S's..

And I believe that the other factor besides I/E is originally (before Eysenck) what became Agreeableness, rather than Neuroticism. This shows up as "directing/informing" for the Interaction Styles, and "structure/motive" for Keirsey's groups (that's a cross factor Berens identified; linking SJ with NT and SP with NF.
On both levels, F and P tend to be more agreeable (people focused), and T and J, less so (task-focused).
On Keirsey's level, introversion and extroversion are replaced by cooperative/pragmatic, which similarly indicated the person's expressiveness in a way.

So what we end up with is two temperament matrices; one covering surface social skills (affective), and the other, leadership and action (conative).

Where I believe Neuroticism fits is that any low score in either dimension (introversion, task focus, etc) tends to be more neurotic, and higher scores are less so. This is based on mapping the extraversion and agreeableness factors to Horney's scales, where those that move "towards" people (either expressing to or wanting from) tend to be healthier.

My whole discussion on this is here:
http://www.erictb.info/erica.html

I have also put up a 15 KB "super short" version of my essays (the part on the temperament correlation is on the bottom):

http://www.erictb.info/temperament2ss.html