Skip to content

Temperament blends

September 27, 2012

In Tim LaHaye’s temperament system, you also had 12 blends of the temperaments: San-Mel, San-Chlor, San-Phleg, Mel-San, Mel-Chlor, Mel-Phleg, Chlor-San, Chlor-Mel, Chlor-Phleg, PhlegMel, PhlegSan, PhlegChlor; in addition to the four “pure” types. (Descriptions:
The first one in the list is said to be the “dominant” one, with the ratio usually something like 40/60%. Larger ratios would indicate a larger leaning towards one temperament. The posibility of three-way blends are also mentioned (and one of them is included in the second link)

In the APS, you also have blends between temperaments, but these are a bit more structured, with specific meanings. Like the rest of the matrix, this was inherited from FIRO: the three areas of interaction, which behavior and personality are divided into:

Inclusion (How much you generally include other people in your life and how much attention, contact, and recognition you want from others)
Control (How much influence and responsibility you need, and how much you want others to lead and establish procedures and policies), and
Affection; (How close and warm you are with others and to what extent you want others to show warmth and support to you).

Dr. Arno framed it in terms of a hypothetical interchange between two people, where one “approaches” another for some form of interaction in a relationship (including whether to have a relationship to begin with). You can either approach people or not approach many people, and you can want or not want many people to approach you. The three areas determine “Who is IN or OUT of the relationship” (meaning how many people, generally); “Who maintains the POWER and makes the DECISIONS for the relationship”; and “How emotionally CLOSE or FAR the relationship”. (Temperament Theory p.43)

So you can approach a person to include them in your presence or activities, you can approach them to control them, and you can approach them for a deeper relationship, such as to give affection. You can also tend to not approach people for these reasons, and you can either want or not want people to approach you for these interactions.
The Wanted scales will indicate the strictness of criteria for accepting social inclusion, submitting to someone else’s control, or deep personal interaction and affection.

A person can be one temperament in Inclusion, another one in Control, and yet another in Affection. The different temperaments will modify each other. Like someone with low expressed Inclusion and a high expressed Control will normally be very reserved, but will at times be quick to approach others, for some course of action or leadership! A person could also be the same temperament in all three, in which we would say they were a “pure” temperament.

There is also another kind of blend, WITHIN each of the areas, of the Phlegmatic with the other four temperaments. These are people EITHER whose expressive OR responsive needs are moderate. The blends lie in pairs midway along the edges of the matrix.

The blends are:
Phlegmatic Melancholy (express as a Phlegmatic; respond as a Melancholy)
Phlegmatic Choleric (express as a Phlegmatic; respond as a Choleric)
Choleric Phlegmatic (express as a Choleric; respond as a Phlegmatic)
Sanguine Phlegmatic (express as a Sanguine; respond as a Phlegmatic)
Phlegmatic Sanguine (express as a Phlegmatic; respond as a Sanguine)
Phlegmatic Supine (express as a Phlegmatic; respond as a Supine)
Supine Phlegmatic (express as a Supine; respond as a Phlegmatic)
Melancholy Phlegmatic (express as a Melancholy; respond as a Phlegmatic)

There are also “compulsive” variations, which combine the highest or lowest expressed and wanted scores. these are the more energized versions of the four temperaments besides Phlegmatic (which is in dead center), and are thus in the extreme corners of the matrix.
While temperament theory has sometimes been criticized for “pigeonholing” people into such a limited number of types, not only do you have the 125 basic combinations of five in three areas, or 2197 when the eight Phlegmatic blends are divided, but up to 4913 when the four additional compulsives are divided.

The blends are what I have found correlate with the popular 16 type theory

Full article:

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: