. . .

Posts relating to Temperaments:

5 years ago

Temperaments and MBTI Correlation

◊ Posted by A β Pseudolonewolf
I know I said I'd start using this only for game updates, but I feel that this might be something mildly interesting to a few of you since both of these personality systems are used on this site.

I've essentially abandoned the use of temperaments myself since discovering Myers-Briggs and the Enneagram, since they're inferior in many ways. However, I've just been reading something that assigns one of the temperament names to certain interaction styles, and lists each Myers-Briggs type that fits each one.

These four 'interaction styles' are based around the idea of Directing/Informing, and Responding/Initiating.

Directive behaviour is commanding, while Informing is not; compare "give me some help" with "I need some help here!". Both are meant as a way of communicating a request, but the directing one is blunt, imperative and to the point, while the informing one merely conveys information and expects the recipient to act on it of their own volition. Some directive types can be oblivious to informing types' requests because they don't realise they're requests at all, while informing types may find directive commands brusque and rude.

Responding and Initiating are in many ways introversion and extroversion, or background and foreground; initiators get things going, while responders wait for others to make the first move, essentially.

The four temperaments are pairs of these, and four Myers-Briggs types tend to fit into each one:

Choleric ("In Charge")
Directing + Initiating

Melancholic ("Chart the Course")
Directing + Responding

Sanguine ("Get things Going")
Informing + Initiating

Phlegmatic ("Behind the Scenes")
Informing + Responding

As an INFJ, I'm directing and responding, and that fits well enough with Melancholic, which is good to know. Despite being naturally directing, I actually don't like the directing style at all, and tend to consciously use informing language and prefer to be on the receiving end of it too.

Does your type fit with your temperament here?!?
6 years ago


◊ Posted by A β Pseudolonewolf
I'm still working on getting Miasmon ready for beta testing - there's still quite a bit left to do - and I have been reading all the comments on the other two news posts... But for now, I want to talk about something completely unrelated to that.

This is something that I wrote about elsewhere recently, so I'll just copy and paste and edit what I wrote there:

I've been fond of the Temperaments for ages, as you can tell from the fact that I use them on this site.
The main 'competitor' to this concept was the 'Myers-Briggs Type Indicator', or whatever it's called, which it seems that every intellectual teenager worth their salt knows about.
I never did though, and I avoided it due to stubborn preference for the temperaments. I knew vaguely about it, but never in detail.

However, I've been reading about it recently, finding out my type and all that, and it's been quite interesting! I feel I've been missing out by incredulously dismissing it out of ignorance.

It turns out that my type is most likely INFJ... which happens to be the rarest type, especially amongst men (about 0.5% of all men), though it's more common in women (2-3%).
I suppose that might go a long way towards explaining why I've never felt comfortable around males and always admired typical female traits, like gentleness over roughness, emotional understanding over swaggering conflict, and so on...
It also explains why I've always felt that I have a strong sense of empathy... and why I struggle to find people on the same wavelength as myself (if it's so rare).

Since I'm still new to the concept and have a lot of reading left to do, I might change my mind about my type later, but for now, this appears to be the best fit.

I'm curious about whether anyone else knows their Myers-Briggs type thing! I imagine that at least some of you will.

If not, there's a test that you can do, though it shouldn't be relied upon; it only gives you an idea of your type, and it would require more reading about them in detail to really settle on one.
It's here: ∞ LINK ∞

There are loads of websites that describe them individually in some detail, such as this poorly-made one, for example: ∞ LINK ∞

I also want to say something about personality types in general, because it frustrates me how commonly I hear the same argument time and time again that leads people to reject these concepts incredulously...

"Humans are too complex to be typed so simply like this, therefore these systems are rubbish. You can't put a label on me. I'm too unique."

That's the gist of it.
It seems to assume that these personality types attempt to describe every tiny little detail about a person, from their favourite type of mushroom to their mother's maiden name.
But they don't! They only group you as part of a *collection*, and don't try to explain your every aspect.

Personalities are multi-faceted, and everyone's very different; there's no denying that. Personality types merely try to describe one (or more) facets; not the whole thing.
It's like how being 'male' or 'female' doesn't describe everything about you, but it *does* put you into a distinct group with other people who fall under the same label. Two women may have similar anatomy, which makes them both 'female', but that doesn't mean that they're anything alike.
Similarly, two people might both be INFJ, but that doesn't mean they're clones either. One might be male, the other female. One might be into rap and skateboarding, the other Classical and stamp collecting. Just because they have one shared facet doesn't mean that their uniqueness is reduced in any way.

It's similar to how pieces of music can be classed under genre labels, like 'rock' or 'jazz' or 'classical'.
Not every piece of rock music is identical, but if you go to a 'rock concert', you'll have a good idea of what to expect, and if someone says they like 'rock music', it conveys a great deal of information succinctly without reducing the uniqueness of each piece of music that they like.

It's also similar to how animals can be classed as 'mammals' or 'canines' or even 'dogs', but that doesn't mean that every dog is identical to every other dog; they just have enough in common to be classed under the same label.
These labels exist to communicate large amounts of information in a single word, and for that purpose, they're extremely useful.
Imagine if we had no words for species, or even whole classes of animals... Talking about out pets would become ridiculous!

A lot of people seem to feel that their desire for 'uniqueness' comes above the fascinating usefulness of being classified under certain personality types... which I feel is a shame, because understanding personality types seems to me like a great way to learn how to treat others right, to understand that they have different emotional needs to you, and to explain their behaviour which you might disagree with because it's different to yours. (For example, extroverts telling introverts to 'get out more' is *not* understanding that they don't have the same needs as themselves.)
Understanding that we're not all working from the same base, and having ideas of how best to treat those who are different to us, seems like a great way to achieve peace and understanding to me.

Saying "it's all rubbish because I'm too special!!!" throws all that out the window for the sake of ego though, I think...

But anyway!! o_O

I am indeed curious about other peoples' types!

Another thing that I'd like to mention is that the test and Myers-Briggs are not one and the same. To truly understand which type you are, you'd really have to read about all of them in detail and choose the best fit for yourself. But not everyone has the time to understand it all on a deep, conceptual level, so the test merely serves as a convenient, accessible shortcut.
It shouldn't be relied upon as accurate, but just because the test isn't doesn't mean that the whole Myers-Briggs concept falls apart.

Anyway, I'd like to hear your four-letter type things, since I'm really curious about how they compare to peoples' temperaments...
I think that the two attempt to describe different facets of the personality, so some people might have the same MBTI things but different temperaments, or vice versa, so I'm curious about whether that'll hold true.

I'm also wondering whether to add MBTI things to profiles here alongside temperaments... but I won't spend my time doing that now or anything, when I need to be working on Miasmon.

I'm curious about whether you think your type is accurate and whether you've read about it in detail, too, as well as maybe what you think of the system as a whole, rather than just hearing "ISTJ FILLER FILLER FILLER FILLER" or something.
The four-letter things are more interesting than quoting the four percentages that you get.
6 years ago

Weekly Update

◊ Posted by A β Pseudolonewolf
I've been working on Miasmon this week, and I'm edging closer to the finishing line, though there's still quite a bit left to do. I've not really got anything particularly interesting to say about it though.

I've also finally got around to rewriting the temperaments page, though this time I've put the information on a smaller sub-site thing rather than this main site. It can be seen here: ∞ Fig Hunter ∞

It's been rewritten from scratch to be clearer than the last page. I have years more experience than I did last time, so I hope that it can clear up some misconceptions.

I'd be interested to hear what people think, so then I might improve it to make it even clearer.