David Keirsey’s Temperaments and Interaction Roles.

11. David Keirsey’s Temperaments and Interaction Roles.

In this chapter, I would like to show the “Temperaments” and “Interaction Roles” by American psychologist David Keirsey. He was the author of several books. The most popular are:
— Please Understand me (1978). David Keirsey wrote this book with Marilyn Bates.
— Please Undertand me II (1998)

Keirsey is the creator of the famous questionnaire known as—Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS). This sorter and Keirsey’s work, in general, is based mainly on the work of Carl Gustav Jung, Katharine Cook Briggs, and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers.

Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers are the creators of one on the most popular typologies—Myers–Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®). I have mentioned MBTI® many times when describing the Mandala of Characters. Among others, I wrote about MBTI® in the chapter “6. MBTI®—Myers-Briggs Type Indicator®”, in which I placed this typology on the Mandala.

Currently, besides the abbreviation MBTI®, we can also come across the acronym—Myers-Briggs. These abbreviations can lead us to the foundation and company. On their websites, we can learn a lot about the MBTI® indicator:
—MBTI®—The Myers & Briggs Foundation—https://www.myersbriggs.org
—Myers-Briggs—The Myers-Briggs Company—https://www.themyersbriggs.com

Coming back to Keirsey, his works are gaining more and more popularity. Among other things, thanks to the use of his ideas in practice. We can learn about it, for example, on the website.
https://keirsey.com

Besides, he has many continuators who modify and develop his ideas. They have a great impact to make Keirsey’s work increasingly popular. These are, among others:
— Linda Barens (creator of the Linda Barens Institute—https://lindaberens.com)
— Susan Nash (founder of the Type Academy—https://type-academy.co.uk)
— Catherine Stothart (author of the book—“How to Get On with Anyone”. For example, we can buy this book here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Get-Anyone-communicate-personality/dp/1292207868)
— Rob and Carly Toomey (founders of the Type Coach—https://type-coach.com)
— and many others.

So, let us go back to Keirsey and his typology.

As I mentioned above, one of the pillars of Keirsey’s typology is Myers–Briggs Type Indicator® (MBTI®). We can read about it, for example, on the Wikipedia website.

Here, for me, Keirsey’s references to ancient Greek philosophers are very interesting because ancient typology is the foundation of the Mandala of Characters. It presents Aristotle’s diagram with arranged Classical Elements on it. That is, Air, Earth, Fire, and Water. Besides, this diagram shows the concepts taken from, among others, Hippocrates and Galen. We can see this diagram below.

In the diagram above, we can also see the four ancient temperaments.

Besides, I added the Myers-Briggs® types that I have matched the Mandala of Characters.

Thanks to putting MBTI® types on the diagram above, we can see which MBTI® types relate to each ancient temperament. It means:

• Sanguine—ENTP, INTJ, ENFP, INFJ
• Phlegmatic—ENFJ, INFP, ESFJ, ISFJ
• Melancholic—ISFJ, ESFP, ISTJ, ESTP
• Choleric—ISTP, ESTJ, INTP, ENTJ

I included the MBTI® type in the diagram above because Keirsey uses them in this work. Then, I will also refer to these types later in this chapter.

Here, too, I would like to point out that Keirsey’s references to ancient philosophers are different from those in Mandala of Characters.

Where do these differences come from?

To answer this, I will use a quote.

So, we can assume that Keirsey was mainly inspired by Plato and Hippocrates. In turn, I was inspired by Aristotle, Hippocrates, and Galen.

Keirsey, therefore, focused more on Plato's ideas than Aristotle's. Personally, actually, I do not know much about both Plato and Aristotle. However, I know that these philosophers differed in many ways, even though Aristotle was Plato's pupil.

So, I would like to point out here that I have not personally studied Keirsey’s work in relation to Plato’s philosophy. I think it is very interesting how Keirsey’s thoughts on this subject look? I hope to study it someday.

Keirsey also referred to Carl Gustav Jung’s ideas. And here, unfortunately, Keirsey’s interpretations are debatable. One of the very interesting analyses regarding this controversy is the article “Keirsey Temperament And Myers Briggs”. This article is on this website:
https://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/keirsey-analysis.html

The author of this article is Steve Myers, among others, author of MTR-i™ (Management Team Roles Indicator™). I have mentioned this indicator few times when describing the Mandala of Characters.

The following quote comes from this article:

Personally, I am a fan of Steve Myers’ deep and insightful considerations. His works were, for me, one of the first inspirations while creating the Mandala of Characters.

In the article mentioned above, Steve Myers also talks about his MTR-i™ (Management Team Roles Indicator™), one of the main pillars of which is Jung’s typology. Keirsey was also inspired by Jung’s typology. And Steve Myers draws attention to the differences between his indicator and Keirsey’s temperaments.

Steve Myers’ MTR-i™ I also placed on the Mandala of Characters. I am talking about it in one of the previous chapters—„7. MTR-i™—Management Team Roles Indicator™”.

I think it is worth recalling now how the MTR-i™ looks like on Mandala. Because we will be able to compare it with Keirsey’s temperaments that I will show later in this chapter.

I think what I wrote above about temperaments shows this is an ambiguous concept. This is because, among other things, we have such kinds of temperaments:

1. We have the concept of temperament derived, among others, from Hippocrates and Galen. They believed that temperament has a biological basis. It means that our temperaments largely depend on so-called humors or bodily fluids (Blood, Phlegm, Black Bile, and Yellow Bile). According to the ancients, humors formed a chemical system that regulates human behavior. Different proportions of humors create differences in the temperaments of individual people. Humors also impact our health. Too much or too little one or more humors caused health problems.
2. We have temperament as scientific concepts. Among other things, we have here definitions like these:
   • Temperament is a set of genetically determined traits, or in other words, a set of inherited personality traits.
   • The psychological and biologic organization peculiar to the individual, specifically, an individual's pervasive and characteristic manner of perceiving, thinking, and acting. It represents one component of personality, the other is character.
     Source: The Free Dictionary https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/temperament
   Scientific approaches to temperament, in a sense, are related to the above ancient understanding of this term. It means, in the modern scientific and ancient understanding, temperament has a biological basis.
3. We have the temperaments mentioned above with symbolic figures. That is, so to speak, the temperaments of the ancient culture, or mythological temperaments. I think we could also use Jung’s term “archetype” and say that we have archetypal temperaments. So, the temperaments mentioned above are::
   • Dionysian temperament
   • Epimethean temperament
   • Promethean temperament
   • Apollonian temperament.
   And now, as we can see in the Steve Myers article, we have two variants:
   a) according to Jung’s assumptions, that is:
   — Dionysian and Epimethean temperaments are associated with Extraversion,
   — Promethean and Apollonian temperaments are associated with Introversion.
   b) according to Keirsey:
   — Dionysian temperament is associated with—Sensing and Perceiving
   — Epimethean temperament is associated with—Sensing and Judging
   — Promethean temperament is associated with—Intuition and Thinking
   — Apollonian temperament is associated with—Intuition and Feeling.
   
4. Besides, we have other temperaments, such as:
   • Musical temperament, as adjustment made to frequency differences.
   • As vivid, rapid, sudden etc., disposition typical for the energetic, dynamic person, for example, moodiness, being in a gloomy mood, anger, excitability, etc.
   • A set of specific permanent mental characteristics of a human, especially in terms of strength and speed of reacting to external stimuli and these reactions’ duration.
   • In English—the manner of thinking, behaving, or reacting characteristic of a specific person.
   • In English—temperament is also synonyms with the word “temper”, which we can find in phrases, such as:
     — “I lost my temper”,
     — “good-tempered”,
     — “incompatibility of temper”.
     — etc.
5. We also have Socionics temperaments. I found them in Victor Gulenko’s book. He is one of the most famous Socionics experts currently.
   In one of the earlier chapters, I described Victor Gulenko’s model-G, which complements most known Model-A made by creator of Socionics—Aušra Augustinavičiūtė.
   I match Socionics temperaments to the Mandala of Characters. We can see it below.
   In the dark speech bubbles below MBTI® types, I put three-letter abbreviations of Socionics’ types.

The examples of different kinds of temperaments I have presented above show that this concept is broad and ambiguous.

How can we deal with it?

I think the way out of this is that we will simply remember that temperament is a broad, ambiguous, symbolic, mythological concept and is interpreted in various ways.

As for the temperaments in Keirsey's interpretation, I think we need to remember that these are the specific temperaments in Keirsey's interpretation.

Moreover, as we read in Steve Myers’ article, Linda Barens has modified Keirsey’s temperaments definitions. So we can assume that the problem has been noticed and fixed.

Then I will go to the main subject of this chapter, that is, Keirsey's temperaments. To present these temperaments, I will use a table, which we can find on the Wikipedia page.

Below I will arrange Keirsey's temperament on the Mandala of Characters.

In the diagram above we can see which of MBTI® types relate to each of Keirsey's temperaments.

Among Keirsey's ideas, popular are also so-called Interaction Roles.

I will also use a quote to present these roles:

On the Mandala, the above “interaction roles” look as follows:

I think it is worth remembering the great Keirsey's contribution to the popularization of the personality topic. Especially the ideas of Carl Gustav Jung, Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. For that, we should be grateful to Keirsey.

Above, I wrote a lot about the controversy surrounding Keirsey's temperaments. But it is worth bearing in mind that his ideas and thoughts are relatively easy to understand. This is probably a great advantage of his work.

I had the opportunity to be a participant in a workshop led by Catherine Stothart. She developed her modified version of Keirsey’s and Linda Barens’ ideas. And I have to admit that I was impressed with how the knowledge conveyed by Catherine is accessible and convincing.

Besides, I also had the opportunity to see the training provided by:
— Susan Nash, and
— Rob and Carly Toomey.

They also work on their modified and developed versions of Keirsey’s ideas. And I must also say that I was impressed with the accessibility of this knowledge.

So, Keirsey definitely knew what he was doing when he was creating what he created. Indeed, Keirsey took advantage of working with delinquent boys, troubled and troublesome children for many years. For many years he also worked as trained corrective counselors. This probably had a great impact on the theories he created.

Personally, I worked as a Support Worker with people with learning difficulties. When I found out that Keirsey for many years:
— worked with difficult children and youth,
— he was a trainer of trainers working with difficult children young people,
— and at the same time, he studied personalities,
it automatically appeared in me a great liking for Keirsey. Keirsey is then a kind of soul mate for me.

So, in general, I think Keirsey's ideas will probably find many followers and fans in the future.

Admittedly, on the Mandala of Characters, Keirsey’s Temperaments and Interaction Roles are a bit confusing. However, in the original version, they are presented in a simple, clear, and transparent way. Like, for example, a table with Keirsey’s Temperaments and Roles, which I have used earlier.

Personally, I think that it makes no sense to value personality theories because, in each of them, we can find many valuable ideas.

Knowledge of personality is actually complicated and very complex. Therefore, any contribution to promoting personality knowledge is precious. Each of the personality theories will find its way to a different group of people. And each personality theory will work better or worse under certain conditions and circumstances. Some of Keirsey's ideas described above will probably be useful for various types of trainers or coaches, for whom the knowledge they convey must be as accessible and concise as possible.

In general, I also think that personality researches can be divided into two groups:
— those who believe that knowledge about personalities is not for everyone, and we have to accept it,
— and those who believe that knowledge about personalities can be for everyone, and we need to do whatever we can to make it happen.

Keirsey probably belonged to the above second group of researches.

In the end, I will present one more diagram. This diagram shows Keirsey’s Role Variants on the Mandala. These Roles are not so famous as his Temperament’s and Interaction Roles. But that is what I like the most in Keirsey’s theory. It is because now the Role Variants additionally describe the particular places of the Mandala of Characters.

References: