Main Four Temperament Ensemble Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics
 

ANTMuddle
Topic
06:23:23 PM Sep 13th 2016
Not so big a mess now.

If anyone is wondering about "response's delay / duration," it was originally called "responsive delay / duration." In personality profiling, this corresponds to how an impression is answered. The delay refers to how long it takes to set in; the impression refers to how long it holds. The subpages on the Fish-Eaters site expound on this a bit.
LordGro
Topic
09:11:58 AM Nov 2nd 2015
This is ridiculous. This page is unreadable.

Four-Temperament Ensemble is about a type of character ensemble. Anything which does not contribute to describing this ensemble trope does not belong here.

DISC, Myers-Briggs, "Dere Types", Yin-Yang, "Expressive high, responsive low; response's delay short, duration long", "Corresponding element, season, and division of a day", "Archetypal Color" ... you got to be kidding. All this pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo needs to go.
lexicon
08:42:49 PM Nov 2nd 2015
Some of that looks good. The Dere Types sound relevant.
ANTMuddle
06:35:33 PM Nov 27th 2015
edited by ANTMuddle
Maybe consider having them broken off into their own pages. One for each temperament. We're reading too blasted far into this whole thing.

Oh, and most of us are perfectly aware of the idea that it's based on pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo; the damn description very clearly indicates that almost right away!
Tefmon
Topic
05:18:54 PM Nov 1st 2015
edited by Tefmon
I have a question about how the Myers-Briggs types are associated with the temperaments. Specifically, I was wondering about the rationale for grouping the IxxJs with Phlegmatic and the IxxPs with Melancholic. Based on what I've read about the Myers-Briggs types, I think that these should be flipped (i.e. IxxPs with Phlegmatic and IxxJs with Melancholic). Is it OK if I switch them, or is there a reason I'm unaware of for their current groupings?
lexicon
08:25:11 PM Nov 1st 2015
Can you explain what Ixx Js and Ixx Ps mean?
Tefmon
08:54:00 AM Nov 2nd 2015
edited by Tefmon
IxxJs are all Introverted Judgers, so INTJs , INFJs , ISTJs , and ISFJs . Likewise, IxxPs are all Introverted Perceivers, so INTPs , INFPs , ISTPs , and ISFPs . The 'x' is just a variable placeholder.
lexicon
08:45:59 PM Nov 2nd 2015
You should have a better reason than "Based on what I've read about the Myers-Briggs types, I think that these should be flipped." If it isn't clear then that part should probably be removed altogether.
ANTMuddle
03:46:54 PM Dec 2nd 2015
It's perfect now. What we have here is: Introvert (I), Extrovert (E), Task-oriented (J), and Relationship-oriented (P). In this example, ENFP, ESFP, ENTP, and ESTP all qualify for the EP classification.
nat122
Topic
07:59:37 AM Oct 14th 2015
Forgive the change I made, but is it alright putting the brackets beside the "Dere" section on the main page to make it more easier to understand?

If not? then sorry.
SeptimusHeap
01:31:19 AM Oct 15th 2015
Not a problem IMO.
Grei
Topic
07:57:40 AM Sep 8th 2015
edited by Grei
"A Five-Man Band cannot itself be a Four-Temperament Ensemble, as the two are mutually exclusive."

I'm sorry, but this makes no sense. Am I reading this correctly? 1. Two things can be mutually exclusive yet still overlap. 2. The Five-Man Band is a set of roles reinforced by personality, and the Four Temperaments are personality archetypes. The Five-Man Band could very easily contain the Four Temperaments and still be a Five-Man Band, with one member (likely The Hero or The Chick) being Leukine or some other "fifth" type. I believe this should be changed; stating an absolute anywhere on this site really can only happen in very special circumstances, as a writer could easily create a five-person cast that fulfills both tropes, thus rendering that sentence false.
ANTMuddle
06:39:20 AM Nov 28th 2015
Probably because one has five and the other has four.
nickelparklavigne
Topic
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.
SeptimusHeap
11:49:17 AM Jun 2nd 2015
Oh dear Pele. That's a sinkhole-sea if I ever saw one.
AwSamWeston
Topic
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?
SeptimusHeap
11:45:15 PM Apr 15th 2015
Yes.
Sabyk
Topic
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?
SeptimusHeap
10:58:13 PM Apr 13th 2015
It's a very problematic page. I'd throw it into the Trope Repair Shop.
MarqFJA
Topic
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).
SeptimusHeap
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.
shimaspawn
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.
CleverCorvid
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.
nickelparklavigne
Topic
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.
shonengirl
Topic
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...
shonengirl
Topic
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?
Bassball_Batman
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. Orchid (magenta) is a fairly bright color too, and can as well represent positivity, power and passion (esp. on a Planet Fitness logo). I know orchid is feminine to Americans, but I won't go into that.

I agree, though, that between chol and mel is weird for regular yellow; I'd use darker shades of yellow, as in a desert motif.

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.
Bassball_Batman
Topic
12:44:48 AM Oct 30th 2014
edited by Bassball_Batman
My mind has made its adjustment back to the 2-factor, 4-direction model since it's popular. I don't see my 6-direction "color wheel" catching on anytime soon; and I honestly could go either way.

Plus, 4 directions to make an ensemble of five gives me an opportunity to use my newest-coined word galeucic (etymology: gala as "milk" or galanos as "cyan-blue", + leukos as "white") named for the plasm that is found in blood and in milk. Plus, galeucic is similar in sound to glucose, which is very telling of how this temperament is. Breast milk is easily a symbol of motherhood — and galeucic so naturally being a motherly temperament, this makes perfect sense.

As I've said in previous comments, phlegmatic as the neutral-position temperament.
poeticnight
Topic
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?
Bassball_Batman
Topic
06:49:27 PM Nov 8th 2013
edited by Bassball_Batman
The color-wheel system would mean the following adjustments: 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 a phlegmatic character.
  • 6-Temp Ensemble: 2 triads — all 6 temperaments in the color-wheel
  • 7-Temp Ensemble: The above + phlegmatic = 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.

So what does everyone think of this?
HienFan
Topic
02:11:45 AM Sep 24th 2013
Not sure what high/low response actually means could anyone clarify that a bit?
Bassball_Batman
09:57:21 PM Oct 8th 2013
edited by 75.64.107.211
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.
HienFan
Topic
02:11:43 AM Sep 24th 2013
Not sure what high/low response actually means could anyone clarify that a bit?
Bassball_Batman
Topic
12:03:06 PM Sep 7th 2013
edited by Bassball_Batman
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 = rational; melancholic + sanguine = idealist; and choleric + sanguine = artisan. 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:
Artisan element: lightning; artisan color: fuchsia. Choleric element: oil smoke/metal wire; choleric color: red.
Sanguine element: air/mist; sanguine color: blue. Rational element: acid/volcano; rational color: yellow.
Idealist element: water or ice; idealist color: cyan. Melancholic element: earth/soil; melancholic color: green.
The phlegmatic element can be wood/plant.
The color-wheel system sets up quite a symmetry system:
  • Symmetry A — melancholic, phlegmatic, and Artisan (damp elements earth/soil, wood/plant, and lightning) are all three balanced of the following:
    • The two unchanging-mind confrontational temps: choleric and rational (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 — rational, phlegmatic, and sanguine (cooled-or-hot elements acid/volcano, wood/plant, and air/mist) are all three balanced of the following:
  • Symmetry C — choleric, phlegmatic, 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: rational and melancholic (earth-oriented elements acid/volcano and earth/soil)
    • The two "social butterfly" temps: sanguine and Artisan (vapor/energy elements air/mist and lightning)
      Would that work?
GranChi
11:13:16 PM Oct 29th 2013
edited by 129.64.203.137
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.)
Bassball_Batman
12:30:00 PM Nov 8th 2013
edited by Bassball_Batman
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 the 2nd-type phlegmatic; keeping choleric the same, plus some things from the sanguine/choleric blend; keeping cholermel and melancholic the same; mixing in old phlegmatic and the melancholic/phlegmatic blend into melsang; adjusting sanguine to where the phlegmatic/sanguine blend are; and the artisan spot as cholersang, and minus a few things and plus a number of things from pure sanguine.
Resulting in the pragmatic/purposeful choleric, political/pious cholermel, perfect/proper melancholic, peaceful/patient melsang, pleasant/popular sanguine, powerful/persuasive cholersang, and paced/practical phlegmatic. These temperaments would correspond each to a pair of months: choleric to the apex of summer, cholermel to autumn, melancholic to the winter solstice, melsang to the dead of winter, sanguine to spring, and cholersang to the summer solstice.
Bassball_Batman
01:23:03 PM Nov 6th 2014
edited by Bassball_Batman
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 sometimes phleg = SJ. I've seen most often by theorists SJ equal everything but sang. Chol and phleg, otherwise, have traded back-and-forth between NT and NF. It may be that chol has been made NF due, at least in part, to the process of elimination. Mel made into SJ maybe likewise, although from what I've found on MBTI, mel SJ is not impossible. It seems you and I are the only two making any link between mel and NT.

I personally would have called SP another name like Sportisan or whatever, while SJ is Artisan, as the loaded word Guardian can throw ppl off a bit.
Scandia
Topic
07:37:30 PM Aug 16th 2013
edited by 216.99.32.44
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.
BassballBatman
Topic
07:28:16 PM May 2nd 2013
edited by 216.99.32.45
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 Wordpress.com, 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.
GranChi
Topic
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.
nathanclay123
Topic
11:05:47 AM Mar 23rd 2013
What about the Furious Five (even though theres five) from Kung Fu Panda?
Telcontar
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.
BassballBatman
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.
IDoStuffWithThings113
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.
BassballBatman
Topic
01:26:05 AM Feb 28th 2013
edited by 216.99.32.45
"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?
DevonKennedy2
Topic
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?
AceDetective
07:15:03 PM Sep 6th 2013
edited by AceDetective
John Lennon was Supine because of his shy and moody behavior. He's selfish, naive, temperamental and has a chip on his shoulder due partly to his upbringing. He hides behind an overly snarky and insensitive facade in order to hide his insecurities. Deep down, he can be a generous person.

Paul McCartney is Melancholic because of his hard-working and strong-willed nature yet moody and domineering personality. He hates being told what to do, yet is inclined to be bossy and sometimes condescending towards his bandmates. He especially is very sensitive to criticism and can come off as an egomaniac.

George Harrison was Melancholic because of his stern and sarcastic attitude. He's very temperamental, but nonetheless considered to be a gentleman. He's just as demanding and uptight as Paul and a major perfectionist. He can also be very cynical and a grudge-bearer.

Ringo Starr is Choleric because of his sociable and compassionate personality though he's prone to mood swings, being temperamental and sensitive to criticism. He is typically the mediator in the band when creative differences were to arise between his bandmates.

So altogether, I see John as the shy, insecure and moody leader. Paul being second-in-command who aimed to take control of the band and is very task-oriented. George being the stern and rebellious pessimist. Lastly, Ringo being the easy-going yet moody realist.
Bassball_Batman
09:12:38 PM Nov 3rd 2013
edited by 75.64.107.211
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=].
AceDetective
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 was Supine because of his passive-aggressive and moody nature along with his tendency to be cynical and insensitive at sporadic moments. He was especially very witty and had his moments of having his head in the clouds. Although he's considered to be very shy and quiet, he could be a loudmouth and say things he never meant to say. He was once considered by a reporter as “the laziest man of England”. He also had moments where he would have random anger outbursts, but was able to forgive and forget. He was a selfish, naive, and highly insecure man of extremes who would hide behind an overly sarcastic and cruel facade in front of others (mostly people he's familiar with), then privately be very sweet and friendly. He had a habit of exaggerating his own accomplishments and being a bit vain, arrogant, and a narcissist. He seemed to have a strong need to fit in with trends despite trying to come off as rebellious and constantly changed outlooks on life, along with his appearance, like a chameleon (Teddy boy, hippie culture, antiwar activism, etc...). He was classified as the agitator in the band since he could sometimes overdo it with his facade and be a total asshole to a lot of people (including his family and friends). After he made the "Bigger than Jesus" remark and received a lot of backlash, he became increasingly neurotic and apathetic about almost everything. He, with the help of Yoko, played a big part in trying to sabotage the band (much to Paul's dismay).

  • Paul is Melancholic because of his hard-working and strong-willed nature yet moody and domineering personality. According to traveling journalists, Paul and George were known as the pranksters of the band, as well as the most pro-active out of the four. Although John was considered the "leader" of the band, Paul was the domineering member who made most of the creative decisions. He's an 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 his way. He especially has moments of being condescending towards his bandmates and a major show off. He is the only ex-Beatle who hardly ever collaborated with the others (if he did, it's mostly with Ringo) and it's generally because of his own self-absorbed and arrogant attitude. He further has a habit of being thin-skinned or sensitive to criticism, as well as having a vicious temper when he doesn't get what he wants. Despite his flaws though, he can be very charming, friendly, and helpful. He was classified as the 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 was Melancholic because of his stern, sarcastic and brooding nature, along with an indifference towards fame. He was considered by many who knew him as a gentleman. On the other hand, 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. Despite his (supposed) indifference towards materialism, he was the most business (money) minded member of the band and wore the trendiest clothes compared to the others. According to a biography by Bob Spitz, George was very stubborn and despised authority figures. He was the one who argued a lot (especially with Paul) during numerous sessions like the Revolver, The White Album, and Let It Be sessions. He's just as moody and uncompromising as Paul (hence the two barely ever getting along). He had a nearly life-long resentment towards not only Paul for "ruining him as a guitarist" and John for constantly being condescending towards him, but his overall experience as a Beatle almost to the point that arguably he must've 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 because of his independent and rebellious behavior.

  • Ringo is Choleric because of his sociable and compassionate 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 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. As a result, he can be very sensitive, distrustful and temperamental if criticized and/or insulted. On the flip side, he’s generally happy-go-lucky and 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 also the biggest party animal out of the four. 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.

So, what do you guys think?
shonengirl
01:33:58 AM Dec 12th 2014
Wouldn't Harrison be Choleric-Sanguine, by the sound of things?
AceDetective
09:52:22 AM Apr 15th 2015
edited by AceDetective
Nah, he's more of a Melancholic since he's not that much of a extrovert, just an outgoing introvert. He has a lot of traits of a melancholic. He's judgmental, stern, pessimistic and very sarcastic. His rebellious attitude and loner tendencies pretty much lend to his temperament.
maxxgrimm
Topic
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?
IDoStuffWithThings113
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".
Tsura
Topic
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: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humours , claims that Phlegmatic is one of the original four humours, and makes absolutely no mention of Leukine at all, not even as Supine.
player2start
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.
Bassball_Batman
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.
romxxii
Topic
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.

ANTMuddle
06:43:53 AM Nov 28th 2015
This post is even more relevant today than ever.

On the other hand, without the trope page, how many of us would even know that the Four Temperaments existed?
clovely
Topic
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
SirOrion
Topic
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.
SenoritaTacoMal
Topic
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."
KainLupus
Topic
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
MollyWalker
Topic
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?
Westrim
08:18:42 PM Jan 10th 2011
edited by Westrim
HEATHEN! WAAAAAAAGH!

No, go ahead. If someone disagrees with an entry deletion we can deal with that later, but it shouldn't be a big deal.
199.250.57.231
03:22:40 PM Feb 18th 2011
edited by 199.250.57.231
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?
NoirGrimoir
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: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/discussion.php?id=oenebf5w9rj3cqqw1dl5kvgo

Check it out

Thebes
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.
atheywa
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?
Bassball_Batman
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.
Or...
"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.
FriedrichsTeeth
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.
SeptimusHeap
12:35:57 PM Aug 30th 2014
These look like misuse to me - you ought to ask here.
Fool
Topic
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.
R.G.
Topic
01:29:15 PM Mar 4th 2010
Okay,what temperaments would the main charcters from Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann have?
Collapse/Expand Topics
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/remarks.php?trope=Main.FourTemperamentEnsemble&id=72798