Main Four Temperament Ensemble Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

10:35:26 AM Jun 2nd 2015
I have been trying to edit the South Park section in the Western Animation sub-page so it is more accurate to show. I've even asked people to edit it so it's more accurate too, but nobody has helped. There is somebody who keeps re-editing the section towards making it inaccurate. As a result, I am going to delete the South Park section on the Western Animation page and the character page, because I am absolutely sick of my edits being deleted into something that is not accurate in the slightest.
11:49:17 AM Jun 2nd 2015
Oh dear Pele. That's a sinkhole-sea if I ever saw one.
06:28:35 PM Apr 15th 2015
edited by AwSamWeston
I can see how "All stereotypes can be any of the four temperaments" is important to know, but does it have to be at the top of the page? It's not exactly a "most important" kind of detail.

Any chance that note can be moved near the bottom?
11:45:15 PM Apr 15th 2015
06:13:31 PM Apr 13th 2015
Anybody else think this reads more like a Quizilla page from 2009 than a TV Tropes page? Should we make it fit in with the rest of the wiki a bit more, stylistically speaking?
10:58:13 PM Apr 13th 2015
It's a very problematic page. I'd throw it into the Trope Repair Shop.
03:39:27 AM Mar 21st 2015
edited by MarqFJA
I think we need to include a note about why we name the fifth temperament/humour as "leukine"/"supine" instead of "phlegmatic", as the actual Five Temperaments Model does (which places "phlegmatic" in the center while "supine" takes its place as choleric's opposite). I certainly want to know why we ditched the original format where the fourfold model was described first, then the fivefold model's modifications described afterwards (where the original Phlegamtic had its traits split so that its old position was taken by Supine, with the rest inherting the old name and becoming the central position).
07:40:06 AM Mar 21st 2015
As coincidence might have it, we were just discussing it in the moderator discussions. I dunno why we have all these extra things, really.
07:55:06 AM Mar 21st 2015
We also might want to split off a page for the four humours themselves separately since we have a lot of random examples of works that happen to use the humours for other things.
10:28:09 AM Apr 12th 2015
I also wondered where the humors went, they sort of disappeared and there was no reason given under the edit history. I'm assuming it's all about a new format, but it might be good to create a page for humors, because as said, they have examples and uses, and it'd be a shame to see all the work that was done on it be for nothing. I know some changes are neccessary, though.
09:19:11 AM Feb 19th 2015
In regards to the section for South Park, there is something I need to discuss and that is listing Kyle as phlegmatic. I can safely say that he doesn't fit this temperament in the slightest due to his frequent arguments with Cartman. One common element in the four temperaments is the choleric and melancholic arguing with one another. The choleric argues for a sense of superiority aka Cartman while the melancholic argues to set things right aka Kyle.

There is also the fact that Kyle possesses a Hair-Trigger Temper, a strong indicator that he is NOT phlegmatic as phlegmatic are very slow to lose their temper.

In the case of Stan, I get where people come from due to the events of "You're Getting Old", but it's quite obvious that was the case of Clinical Depression and not personality. It's worth noting that phlegmatics often enough represent the laid-back Everyman which describes Stan's character nicely.

Overall, I edited the section to represent Kyle as the melancholic and Stan as the phlegmatic and if this is changed, I'd appreciate it if it's changed back to this layout in the future. Thank you.
04:51:04 AM Jan 12th 2015
I have a question; why don't the archived Myers Briggs temperaments don't correspond with the temperaments themselves? Some of the MB temperaments under "Artisan" seem a bit too calm to be under that category...
01:32:34 AM Dec 12th 2014
How are archetypal colors decided? Wouldn't Sanguine be yellow, not Melancholic and Choleric? And why is black representing Phlegmatic?
12:11:04 PM Jun 13th 2015
edited by Bassball_Batman
I know the reasoning behind yellow for sanguine, knowing how much more often the sun is thought of as yellow than white and our Western culture's take on yellow for a sunny disposition. (In fact, a lot of people have used yellow for sanguine.) But bile (choleric) tends more toward the yellow part of the spectrum, and blood (sanguine) tends more toward the crimson. Yellow has its meaning of caution, at least in road rules. Magenta is a fairly bright color too, and can as well represent positivity, power and passion (esp. on a Planet Fitness logo). I know magenta is feminine to Americans, but I won't go into that. As for black as a phlegmatic color, I have honestly no clue, other than possibly its corresponding part of each day — which is apparently night. But a dark enough blue is just as fitting, so Idk.
12:44:48 AM Oct 30th 2014
edited by Bassball_Batman
My mind has made some kind of adjustment lately. Phlegm is not, as far as we know, a mix of all the other humors, nor the base component from which the other ones derive. So I'm leaning toward pushing it back to the Phlegmatic I position, throwing out its apathetic, unemotional middle-of-the-road traits and leaving it a synonym for supine. Essentially, what I called melsang I now call phlegmatic. I also decided to split yellow bile into yellow-green bile (stomach acid) and orange bile (all other non-black bile functions). What I formerly termed cholermel could instead be the stomach acid one, now termed Choleric II. I've decided that the former Choleric (with a minor sanguine side) be named for orange bile, the new name being Pyrrcholic.

Remember the words leucine and leukine which are already coined medically (copyright I think)? But I could contract leucocytic into leucytic. It's now my temperament name for those who fit sanguine with a phlegmatic side. Meanwhile former sanguine, whether with or without a hint of choleric, I shall call Sanguine II.

The result is this: three of bile (orange, acid-yellow, and black) and three related to blood (phlegm, white plasm, and red blood). That makes for quite a symmetry!

Pyrrcholic narrows choleric to the strong, ambitious, "drill sergeant" type. Choleric II narrows choleric down to its more melancholic side — the rational planner and instructor of the bunch. Melancholic stays the same as always. Phlegmatic narrows down to supine. Leucytic narrows sanguine down to empathy, compassion, and all the other things it has in common with supine/phlegmatic I. Sanguine II narrows sanguine down to what it has in common with pyrrcholic, cutting away the compassionate/sentimental side (not completely, as though it were choleric or pyrrcholic) as distinct from leucytic.

Former leukine or phlegmatic II I would call the self-explanatory name eclectic.

As a result, the ensemble is fullest and least lopsided in groups of 3, 4, 6, 7, and several other numbers we can think up:
  • 3-Temp Ensemble: A triad (regular triangle of temperaments), possible Power Trio
  • 4-Temp Ensemble: Temperament triad like above, plus an eclectic character.
  • 6-Temp Ensemble: 2 triads — all 6 temperaments in the color-wheel
  • 7-Temp Ensemble: The above + eclectic = all 7 temperaments.
If some temperaments have 2 characters but not all, it should be either 2 eclectics or 2-each in a triad of 6.
03:34:33 PM Aug 26th 2014
Um excuse me but would the four personality catagories of tomodachi count? Confident types being choeric, independent types being melancholic, outgoing types being sanguine and easygoing types being phlegmatic? I apologize if I wrong however and on a side note which might sound irrelevant , may I also please ask if loirei from the pokemon kanto elite four would technically be melancholic due to he seriousness she displays in battle and when inthe anime as prima how I think but am not too sure she was described being analytical?
06:49:27 PM Nov 8th 2013
edited by
The color-wheel system would mean the following adjustments:
02:11:45 AM Sep 24th 2013
Not sure what high/low response actually means could anyone clarify that a bit?
09:57:21 PM Oct 8th 2013
edited by
Expressive has to do with expressing needs and goals; responsive has to do with seeking reactions and answering what others express. People-oriented and responsive go hand-in-hand. Being an encourager and/or a good shoulder to cry on are two examples of being high responsive. Being task/goal-oriented and low responsive go hand-in-hand.
02:11:43 AM Sep 24th 2013
Not sure what high/low response actually means could anyone clarify that a bit?
12:03:06 PM Sep 7th 2013
edited by
Well lately, I've been leaning away from the grid (4-direction) and more toward the color-wheel (6-direction). Mixing the Kiersey temperaments in with the 4 humors, perhaps choleric, melancholic, and sanguine are in a triad. Choleric + melancholic = rationist; melancholic + sanguine = idealist; and choleric + sanguine = artisan. Eclegmatic (eclectic phlegmatic), of course, in the middle, as it could be neutral or eclectic. It is the balanced temperament.
What I've come up with thus far in correspondence:
Guardisan element: lightning; guardisan color: fuchsia. Choleric element: oil smoke/metal wire; choleric color: red.
Sanguine element: air/mist; sanguine color: blue. Rationist element: acid/volcano; rationist color: yellow.
Idealist element: water or ice; idealist color: cyan. Melancholic element: earth/soil; melancholic color: green.
The eclegmatic element can be wood/plant.
The color-wheel system sets up quite a symmetry system:
  • Symmetry A — melancholic, eclegmatic, and guardisan (damp elements earth/soil, wood/plant, and lightning) are all three balanced of the following:
    • The two unchanging-mind confrontational temps: choleric and rationist (dry elements oil smoke/metal wire and acid/volcano)
    • The two compassionate (understanding) temps: idealist and sanguine (moist elements water and air/mist)
  • Symmetry B — rationist, eclegmatic, and sanguine (cooled-or-hot elements acid/volcano, wood/plant, and air/mist) are all three balanced of the following:
  • Symmetry C — choleric, eclegmatic, and idealist (50-50 elements oil smoke/metal wire, wood/plant, and water) are all three balanced of the following:
    • The two I Work Alone temps: rationist and melancholic (earth-oriented elements acid/volcano and earth/soil)
    • The two "social butterfly" temps: sanguine and guardisan (vapor/energy elements air/mist and lightning)
      Would that work?
11:13:16 PM Oct 29th 2013
edited by
That's an interesting idea! As a fan of colors, personality types, and fantasy elements, I like it. And your match-ups of the Kiersey temperaments and humor temperaments look right to me. (I especially like melancholic being between NF and NT - a lot of people have associated melancholic with SJ, and I've never understood that, as melancholic has always been the philosophical, independent temperament, quite unlike the typical SJ.)
12:30:00 PM Nov 8th 2013
edited by
And I've noticed some have equated idealist with choleric, two concepts that are quite diametric opposites. The only thing I know they have in common is some sort of optimism, which is in vastly two differing ways. I would place everything describing leukine (plus some things from old phlegmatic) as eclegmatic; keeping choleric the same, plus some things from the sanguine/choleric blend; keeping rationist and melancholic the same; mixing in old phlegmatic and the melancholic/phlegmatic blend into idealist; adjusting sanguine to where the phlegmatic/sanguine blend are; and changing artisan to guardisan, and minus a few things and plus a number of things from pure sanguine.
Resulting in the practical/purposeful choleric, political/prophetic rationist, perfect/proper melancholic, peaceful/patient idealist, pleasant/popular sanguine, powerful/persuasive guardisan, and paced/pragmatic eclegmatic. These temperaments would correspond each to a pair of months: choleric to the apex of summer, rationist to autumn, melancholic to the winter solstice, idealist to the dead of winter, sanguine to spring, and guardisan to the summer solstice. The next post up above will mention the other adjustments.

01:23:03 PM Nov 6th 2014
edited by
Boy I know, GranChi, I've seen my fair share of theorists liken Mel to SJ (Guardian). Others have said that Mel = NF (Idealist) and that either Chol or Phleg = Guardian. I've seen most often by theorists Guardian equal everything but Sang. Chol and Phleg, otherwise, have traded back-and-forth between Rational and Idealist. Whichever theorists made Rational and Idealist two Chol-and-Phleg opposites (for whatever reason) and matched Sang with Artisan (like everyone does), I'll bet Mel was made Guardian due only to the process of elimination. They cut and chewed a puzzle piece to make it fit where it couldn't, rather than adjust any of the others. (Possibly the same process to make Chol equal Idealist.) It seems you and I are the only two making any link between Mel and Rational. I personally would have matched SP as Guardian and SJ as Artisan, but that's off topic. How the remaker on someone else (a romantic partner) into one's own image, a highly melancholic detail, ended up in the link's description of Guardian, I don't really know (sounds to me more like Rational or possibly Idealist). But I'll bet theorists used that detail to link Mel to Guardian, just 'cuz all three other humors were already taken.
07:37:30 PM Aug 16th 2013
edited by
Not sure about two of the Catholic Spirituality styles. I originally put Ignatian as Choleric because I can imagine Inigo bossing the soldiers and students around. I also put Augustinian as Melancholic because Augustine could get very emotional in his writings. However, they could go the other way around, with Inigo being the methodical workaholic Melancholic, and Augustine being the emotional Choleric. While Francesco was as Sanguine as they come, and Tommaso was very intellectual and bookish and thus Phlegmatic, the other two I am not sure which one to pair up with. They do match the four Myers-Briggs/Keirsey/Jungian temperaments well- but when it comes to two of the styles, I am not 100% sure.
07:28:16 PM May 2nd 2013
edited by
I understand about the four temps and their original names being preserved being what lots of people are used to. But the dictionary definition of phlegmatic says that it's a stolidly calm, unemotional disposition. Some dictionaries include "sluggish" and "apathetic" as well, but for the most part, they seem to imply phlegmatic as being well-balanced.
  • Phlegmatic has, in definition, already drifted away from being choleric's "supine opposite" (assuming it ever has been in the first place). Though I don't imagine crowds would be ready to settle on phlegmatic as the central temperament yet, bear in mind (though I could be wrong) it seems unlikely that the accepted meaning of phlegmatic should back-track anytime soon.
    • I fancy, for instance, that worry and neurosis (things opposite to choleric) will continue to be seen as rather odd in defining phlegmatic.
So in defining phlegmatic, given the dictionary definition, something will easily seem unusual and out of place either way, whether it's opposite choleric or sitting in the center. So it doesn't really seem to make a difference which model we follow, old or new.
I saw on Eripedia, apparently a sub-site of, that it was "Eric B" who coined the word "leukine" for a temperament, not on here, but on mindtweaks and INTP Central, both on which he mentions that "leukine" resolves the "S" dilemma (so that only one is initialized S).
  • It is mentioned on Eripedia that he has no idea how that word "leukine" ended up here on TV Tropes. From that I take it that he, when renaming supine with a sound-alike, was intending on positioning "leukine" right where supine is, not in the center where TV Tropes (re)positioned it.
08:13:56 PM Apr 3rd 2013
I see the reason that Leukine has been corresponded to the introverted and people-oriented position (so that it can correspond with sanguine as the two blood-related humors). However, this does not make sense with the established humors/temperaments system. Leukine was created here on TV Tropes, and previously served as a neutral fifth temperament. The only two names for the introverted and people-oriented temperament outside of this website are phlegmatic (originally) and supine (for when phlegmatic was made to be the neutral temperament. Therefore, if we're going to make phlegmatic the neutral temperament, the appropriate name for the introverted and people-oriented temperament would be supine. However, I think it makes more sense to do it the way we did before, to give the original four temperaments their original names (including phlegmatic) and to keep leukine as a neutral temperament for when one is needed.
11:05:47 AM Mar 23rd 2013
What about the Furious Five (even though theres five) from Kung Fu Panda?
11:17:48 AM Mar 23rd 2013
Um, by definition they aren't the trope, though there has been lots of misuse of the team tropes. Five ≠ four.
12:06:26 PM May 6th 2013
Examples are 'not always exact matches for the pages of their directing. "Wear heart on sleeve" directs to the Drama Queen page, but that doesn't mean "heart worn on sleeve" always makes someone a Drama King/Queen.
  • It's true that 4 does not equal 5. I don't believe that any examples given is any attempt at making 4 and 5 equal. The fifth temperament (whether called "leukine" or "phlegmatic" on other models) is treated as an optional temperament. Some stories have that one; some don't. Ensemble of 4 or ensemble of 5 — it's still a balanced ensemble. I think an ensemble of 5 is preferable over one of 4 that's missing an "opposite" (using the middle temp instead), because if one of the four has no "opposite", that'll make the ensemble lopsided. A lopsided ensemble has been completed by a temporary or secondary character included and/or a new character introduced, which I find acceptable — long as the ensemble is completed.
04:57:08 PM May 14th 2013
Also, pretty much any character will fit into one of these categories, regardless of the dynamic the character creates with other ones.
01:26:05 AM Feb 28th 2013
edited by
"Phlegmatic I" is the 4th temp according to the first temp model. "Supine" is the 4th temp and "phlegmatic II" the middle-of-the-road according to the second model. The 4th temp is logically opposite from choleric.
  • That 4th temp is not so full of joking like phlegmatic I, or else who's to distinguish it from sanguine?
  • Nor is it full of such stoicism and apathy like (again) phlegmatic I, or else who's to distinguish it from phlegmatic II?
  • On the flip side, I don't see the 4th temp as being overly neurotic, self-sensitive, or trapped in harboring hurt/anger, as is supine, or else who's to distinguish it from melancholic?
So, to avoid the mistakes of phlegmatic I and supine, I propose a new temp based on blood's white plasm. The result? Two colors of blood and two of bile!
  • Leucine is a type of amino acid (I don't know much about it, but it might be well-known).
  • The name "Leukine" already belongs to a medicine drug and might be copyright.
    • But I've a new word that isn't easily mistakable for others (except maybe "leucasin" or "leucosin") with an os in the middle and e on the end: leucosine. And I see no sign of that word being patented; it seems to be up for grabs.
The "leucosine" temp can be handed over to worry and neurosis at times, as well as not like displaying own personal emotions, but it is certainly amiable, reliable, agreeable, nurturing, supportive, and sensitive to the feelings of others. A good pair of keywords would be "motherly servant."
  • And anything phlegmatic I and supine have in common? That, too, finds a place in this temp.
  • It's a pretty good opposite to choleric, no?
And, in agreement with the second temp model, shall we thus place "phlegmatic" in the center as the 5th temp?
  • Not to mention, this arrangement will solve the whole baffling dilemma of writing "phleg I" and "phleg II." To me that seems the best arrangement. Comments?
07:35:28 PM Jan 6th 2013
edited by DevonKennedy2
It looks like there's some disagreement about how The Beatles line up. Before I've seen John (choleric), Paul (sanguine), George (melancholic), and Ringo (phlegmatic). Now it's John (melancholic), Paul (choleric), George (phlegmatic), and Ringo (sanguine). I'm a big Beatles fan and I personally agree with the first line-up: John was bold and independent (which led to his peace activism in later years), Paul was the cheerful one who was more concerned with social interaction (just listen to all his love songs), George was the reflective and thoughtful one who pursued his love for Indian philosophy, and Ringo was the amiable but mostly quiet one (he doesn't say much if you watch interviews with the band). What do you guys think?
07:15:03 PM Sep 6th 2013
edited by AceDetective
I think that John Lennon was mostly phlegmatic because of his wit and heavy reliance on sarcasm. He puts up an overly aggressive facade to hide his insecurities. He's deep down a very generous person and rather a sweetheart. He acts similar to how Raphael (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles) acts because of that behavior. Paul McCartney, I consider him to be choleric because he actually showed some leadership qualities during the time he was with the Beatles. Heck I noticed from some books I read, He was a prime example of a control freak who accomplished things all for his own sake, not everyone else's. George Harrison is melancholic because of his pessimistic attitude towards The Beatles. After the recordings of Revolver, he (along with John) was ready to leave the group much quicker than everyone else and when it came to his attitude towards Paul McCartney, it seems as though George despised Paul for being bossy and rather condescending to him and the other bandmates. Ringo Starr, he is actually sanguine as well because of his friendly and unassuming personality. Personally I see John as the aggressive yet insecure and apathetic "leader" who severely lacked motivation and confidence, Paul as second in command who aimed to take control of the band and is very domineering and optimistic, George as the rebellious and stubborn pessimist, and Ringo as the easygoing realist.
09:12:38 PM Nov 3rd 2013
edited by
If u want a Scottish-prefix last name on here (McCartney) without making a non-existent link of it, remember: it will assume that double-caps without a space between always means a link, unless u tell it otherwise with a bracket smileys around it, like so: [=McCartney=].
01:52:25 PM Nov 7th 2013
edited by AceDetective
I have done a bit more research and now I believe these are the more accurate personalities for those four:

John Lennon was phlegmatic because of his aggressive yet insecure and sensitive nature along with his tendency to be cynical at sporadic moments. He was especially very witty and had his moments of having his head in the clouds. He himself stated that he had a big mouth and would say things he never really meant and was once considered by a reporter as lazy and disorganized. He also had moments where he would have random anger outbursts, but was able to forgive and forget. He was an impatient, naive, sarcastic, and highly insecure man of extremes who would be openly confident in front of others, then privately be very quiet and unsure of himself. He had a habit of exaggerating his own accomplishments and being vain, arrogant, and a narcissist which all sort of point to his aggressive facade he abides by when out in public as if it's to somehow protect himself. Despite being rather apathetic about the band by the late 1960s, He was classified as one of the agitators in the band since he was rather a total dick to a lot of people (including his family and bandmates) and was willing to leave the band by 1966 after he impulsively made the "Bigger than Jesus" remark. He, along with George, were the rebels of the band who played a big part in trying to sabotage the band (much to Paul's dismay).

Ringo Starr is sanguine because of his friendly, warm and unassuming personality although he has his moments of mood swings and having a bit of an inferiority complex in the band. He is known for being the mediator in the band when creative tensions were to arise between his bandmates. According to Here, There, And Everywhere, a memoir by Beatles engineer Geoff Emerick, Ringo is actually the quiet one in the band who said very little, always seemed to have his guard up, and lacked confidence in his drumming abilities. He was also very uptight and nervous when it came to singing since he was not much of a vocalist. That sort of nervousness and insecurity could also point back to his inferiority complex, along with being the "newbie" in the band. On the flip side, he's as much of a wisecracking joker as John at times, hence the two being the closest of friends compared to the other Beatles. He's the only ex-Beatle who happened to collaborate with all three of his bandmates which lends to the fact that he was the mediator and easygoing realist in the band.

Paul McCartney is choleric/melancholic because of his upbeat nature yet conservative and domineering personality. According to traveling journalists, Paul and George were known as the pranksters of the band, as well as the most talkative. Although John was considered the leader of the band, Paul was more or less the domineering member who made most of the creative decisions, is a overly dedicated workaholic and arguably is the most talented. He has a massive ego so he has numerous moments of being a control freak who wanted things to go his way, and a perfectionist towards a lot of his songs (Maxwell's Silver Hammer anyone?). He especially has moments of being condescending towards his bandmates and being a show off. He is the only ex-Beatle who hardly ever collaborated with the others (if he did, it's mostly with Ringo) and he has a habit of being thin-skinned or sensitive to criticism as well as having a vicious temper when things don't go his way. Despite his flaws, he was classified as the diplomat or optimist in the band since he really enjoyed being a Beatle and only wished to keep the band going even though he knew that the band's dissolution was inevitable (according to John however, Paul was only keeping the band going for his own sake, not everyone else's).

George Harrison was melancholic because of his introverted, perfectionistic and brooding nature along with an indifference towards fame. He was considered by many as calm, gentleman-like, stoic, and came across as very serious and judgmental. He had a fearsome temper, started fights with policemen and photographers during his early years touring with The Beatles, and was a red-blooded man. According to a biography by Bob Spitz, George was very stubborn and despised authority figures. He was the one who argued a lot during numerous sessions like the White Album and Let It Be sessions. He almost got into a fist fight with John because he acted rude towards his wife Yoko Ono. Another thing was his nearly life-long resentment towards Paul for "ruining him as a guitarist" and his experience as a Beatle almost to the point that he likely suffered from post traumatic stress disorder. The people who knew him clarify that he hardly was the "Quiet Beatle" fans view him as! In fact, some of his friends recalled how he would never stop talking. Altogether he was more of the "Stubborn Beatle" than anything else!

So, what do you guys think?
01:33:58 AM Dec 12th 2014
Wouldn't Harrison be Choleric-Sanguine, by the sound of things?
09:52:22 AM Apr 15th 2015
edited by AceDetective
Nah, he's more introverted and despite his moments of being angry and bitter, he's a calm and collected individual. He has a lot of traits of a melancholic. He's stubborn, judgmental, demanding and most of all, he's rigid and a perfectionist. His rebellious attitude pretty much lends to his very temperament. That's how I came to that conclusion anyway.
10:00:43 PM Nov 22nd 2012
So I've been seeing you guys writing "Phlegmatic II" on the main page AND here. But you never specified on the main page what "Type II Phlegmatic" is and what Type I would be in contrast. What's the difference?
05:24:04 PM Apr 2nd 2013
In the original four temperaments, the phlegmatic was the people oriented introvert. In the later five temperament version, it was changed to be the moderate temperament and we used to call the new version of the phlegmatic "phlegmatic type II".
11:55:29 AM Oct 17th 2012
I hate to be the party pooper here, but the description of these humours is very wrong as it is.

The other wiki, in this link: , claims that Phlegmatic is one of the original four humours, and makes absolutely no mention of Leukine at all, not even as Supine.
11:53:29 AM Oct 19th 2012
edited by player2start
I agree, the content appears to have changed rather drastically from what it was, and seems quite incorrect according to The Other Wiki. The current description completely disregards the old model.

"The four temperament system was an interesting one, but flawed. Several tests noticed people that did not conform to any of the behaviour types, so a neutral temperament was created." The current description describes The Five Temperaments, not the Four.

Consideration of this neutral temperament is a practical addition, but it should be just that, an addition. The classical four temperaments should be listed as such, and then there should be additional information on The Five Temperaments.

"In the Five Temperaments theory, the classical Phlegmatic temperament is in fact deemed to be a neutral temperament, whereas the "relationship-oriented introvert" position traditionally held by the Phlegmatic is declared to be a new "fifth temperament.""

Having the descriptions for both will help eliminate confusion for directs referencing the classical model.
09:43:34 PM Nov 3rd 2013
Perhaps look at my Seven-Temperament color-wheel theory above. It actually places phlegmatic in the middle and makes two Power Trio sets of the other six: choleric, melancholic, and sanguine for one Power Trio; and melan-choleric, melan-guine, and sang-oleric for the other Power Trio.
12:01:40 AM Oct 16th 2012
edited by romxxii
This page needs a major overhaul. I just spent the last 30 minutes cleaning up the formatting mishap which removed all the carriage returns before the asterisks, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. I saw a lot of Square Peg Round Trope, rambling descriptions, natter, and a boatload of unnecessary potholing that makes editing this page a nightmare.

05:46:18 AM May 18th 2012
edited by clovely
I think for the 5 girl characters in L.O.L. (Laughing Out Loud), the french original version from 2008 this works pretty good too.

Sanguine: Lola

Choleric: Isabell De Peyrefitte

Melancholic: Charlotte

Phlegmatic: Stéphane

Supine: Provence
12:57:52 AM Nov 18th 2011
edited by SirOrion
I guess this might be jumping the gun a bit but it seems as far as the Marvel Cinematic Universe the four main heroes might play out pretty close to the 4 temperaments if their portrayals in their respective movies are any indication.

So basically:

Tony/Iron Man- Choleric

Steve/Cap- Phlegmatic (maybe Phleg type II?)

Thor- Sanguine

Bruce/ Hulk- Melancholic

I think it would work quite well just for the front end of things but I again I'd rather not jump the gun as of yet.
05:15:50 PM Oct 3rd 2011
I have to add, this page just got me bonus points on a history test where we had to list these :) "Yellow bile? Tsundere."
05:25:27 AM May 6th 2011
I take issue with the Mass Effect example. Shepherd's personality is dependant on the player and, while it may not be possible to play as any of the four temperaments, you could definitely go Sanguine instead of Choleric
06:24:38 PM Jan 10th 2011
I feel like there is a lot of Square Peg Round Trope happening on this page - ensembles with only three characters and ensembles whose personalities do not fit the temperaments as delineated in the description. Would there be a crazy amount of backlash if the examples that don't fit are removed?
08:18:42 PM Jan 10th 2011
edited by Westrim

No, go ahead. If someone disagrees with an entry deletion we can deal with that later, but it shouldn't be a big deal.
03:22:40 PM Feb 18th 2011
edited by
I know what these "temperaments" are but I'm trying to understand how they apply to characters. I think there's still a lot that don't fit. What is the best example?
09:58:11 PM Mar 13th 2011
edited by NoirGrimoir
I kind of agree, I don't think the problem is the trope though, I just think the site is missing alternate versions of a group of four ensemble. For instance we have tons of versions of Power Trios but we somehow only have one for a group of four?

EDIT: just created the Four Philosophical Ensemble, a new group of four trope that may fit some groups better, in the YKTTW here:

Check it out

11:26:32 AM Jun 25th 2011
Seeing as the Four Humors-type is just a graph with extroversion-vs-introversion on the y-axis and goal-oriented-vs-people-oriented on the x-axis, it's almost omni-present as a characterization trope. In my experience, a character designed simply to seem real can often be fit into this chart after the fact. A character would have to be flat (which falls in the expanded chart anyway) or completely alien to avoid falling somewhere on the chart.

I propose that this page be exclusively for cast of four-to-five, designed to fill one type each. But that works with well-defined character personalities could link back to this page from their character sheet.

tl;dr — This page, just for groups designed to fit this. Large casts link to this as a Useful Notes page from character page.
02:34:46 PM Sep 10th 2011
edited by atheywa
I'm not sure that the four humors apply to characters at all. The one used for the quote, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles works well for two or three out of the four of them as there's The Hero Leonardo (Choleric), The Smart Guy Donatello (Melancholic), the good side of Sanguine is Michelangelo and the flip side of it is Raphael (The Big Guy), but no one is the calm and compassionate Phlegmatic. Am I missing something or is there an example that works better?
09:38:42 PM Nov 3rd 2013
Well, the one thing the Five-Temperament theory and my color-wheel theory (two Power Trio sets; see top of page) is that Phlegmatic alternates between neutral and eclectic — "middle-of-the-road." There are two theories that fit, if we use my color-wheel, depending on which Power Trio we rely on (again, see top of page). Either...
"Middle-of-the-road" phlegmatic Donnie, choleric Raph, melancholic Leo, and sanguine Mike.
"Middle-of-the-road" phlegmatic Leo, melan-choleric Raph, melan-guine Donnie, and sang-oleric Mike.
Also, the famous singing chipmunks fit a Power Trio in temperament, but I'm not sure what I think of Simon in blue and Theodore in green, as vice-versa might be better fitting in their temperaments.
10:51:51 AM Aug 30th 2014
Yeah, there definitely is. There are also many examples on this page where some temperaments have more than one character listed. If those count as four temperament ensembles, then what doesn't? Pretty much any large ensemble would have at least one representative of each temperament.
12:35:57 PM Aug 30th 2014
These look like misuse to me - you ought to ask here.
03:25:10 AM May 8th 2010
edited by Fool
Is it okay if I add a trivia page explaining more about the temperaments and how they apply in real life?

Edit: Actually, nevermind. There's already an article linked about them.
01:29:15 PM Mar 4th 2010
Okay,what temperaments would the main charcters from Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann have?
Collapse/Expand Topics