Chapter 1: Weird People. Weird Things
Chapter 2: “I’m Better Than You”
Chapter 3: A Peek Under the Hood
Chapter 4: Temperament Prep
Chapter 5: Temperament SJ: The Guardians
Chapter 6: Temperament SP: The Artisans
Chapter 7: Temperament NF: The Idealists
Chapter 8: Temperament NT: The Rationals
Chapter 9: The Whole Person
Chapter 10: Getting Better
Dumb Questions
Chapter 3 - A Peek Under the Hood
Before we dive into the four Temperaments, I should probably explain where all this stuff came from.
Because sooner or later somebody is going to ask:
“Who came up with this shit?”
It’s a fair question. Usually, it comes up at the end of the workshop. But it belongs right here.
The story starts with a Swiss psychiatrist named Carl Jung.
Back in the early 1900s, most psychologists were trying to understand why there were so many weird people walking around. Freaks. Mentally unstable. Sexual miscreants. There had to be a reason for the dysfunction. Psychiatrists made a living from that research. Deviance has a root cause that must be identified and eliminated.
Jung took a different approach.
He wanted to understand why perfectly normal people could be so wildly different from one another.
Why does one person walk into a room full of strangers and immediately start talking while another quietly scans the room and looks for the nearest exit?
Why does one person trust facts and evidence while another seems to operate on instinct?
Why does one person make decisions with their head while another follows their heart?
After years of observation, Jung reached a conclusion that seems obvious today but was revolutionary at the time.
Maybe people aren’t weird or broken.
Maybe they’re just different. Different from those who consider themselves “normal.”
In 1921, he published a book called Psychological Types. It was his magnum opus. He couldn’t wait to share it with the world.
It was also about as easy to read as the instructions for setting up your granddaughter’s play kitchen, not to mention when you’re competing against people like Freud who write about sexual deviance, you’re not going to do well. Not much has changed since then, has it?
At least one person read it. Thankfully.
Her name was Katharine Briggs.
Katharine was already fascinated by personality and human behavior. In fact, she’d been studying people long before she discovered Jung’s work. When she finally read Psychological Types, she felt like she’d found the missing puzzle piece.
Then she handed the book to her daughter, Isabel Briggs Myers, a home-schooled prodigy who shared her mother’s love of research.
And that’s where things started getting interesting.
World War II was underway. Millions of people were moving into jobs they’d never held before. Factories were booming. Women were entering the workforce in huge numbers. Organizations were trying to figure out where people would fit best.
Briggs and Myers believed understanding personality could help.
Their goal wasn’t to diagnose mental illness. It wasn’t to put people in boxes. And it certainly wasn’t to tell you who you should marry.
Their goal was much simpler.
Help people understand themselves so they could make better decisions about work, relationships, and life.
Over many years, they developed what eventually became known as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, or MBTI.
The MBTI expanded on Jung’s ideas and organized them into sixteen personality Types.
That part is important. Not four.
Sixteen.
We’ll get to those in a moment.
First, though, we need to talk about a woman you’ve probably never heard of.
Her name was Mary McCaulley.
If Briggs and Myers built the car, McCaulley spent decades testing the engine.
The early findings in Briggs and Myers research were embraced by some and maligned by others, particularly academics who immediately grow a stick in their ass when someone breaks in with new research they haven’t heard of.
McCaulley helped bring research, credibility, and scientific rigor to the MBTI. Through her work at the University of Florida and the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, she studied how personality Type influenced learning, leadership, communication, healthcare, education, and career development.
Much of the research that supports the modern use of Type exists because of her efforts.
I’ve seen the research. Frankly, I don’t understand much of it. That doesn’t bother me. Administering 4,000 MBTIs is all the research I need. I see the predictable patterns. I’ve seen people flourish when they embrace it. I’m a believer. I don’t need Mary McCaulley’s validation. But some of you might.
Today, the MBTI is one of the most widely used personality assessments in the world. More than fifty million people have reportedly taken it, and millions continue to take it every year in organizations, universities, coaching programs, and leadership workshops.
That’s a lot of people looking under the hood.
Now let’s address the elephant in the room.
Does this stuff actually work?
The answer depends on what you expect it to do.
The MBTI was never designed to predict job performance.
It wasn’t created to tell you who to hire.
It wasn’t intended to diagnose mental illness.
And despite what your Aunt Linda might think, it won’t tell you whether your future spouse is “the one.”
What it was designed to do is help people understand differences in normal human behavior.
And in that regard, it has proven remarkably useful.
Research shows that most people recognize themselves in their reported Type at very high rates. More importantly, millions of people report that Type helped them better understand themselves, communicate more effectively, appreciate differences, and improve relationships.
Does that mean the MBTI explains everything about you?
Not even close. You’re far more complicated than four letters. But useful isn’t the same thing as perfect.
Think back to our four vehicles from the last chapter. Imagine you wanted to understand how a vehicle operates.
One way would be to look at the outside.
Sports car. Minivan. Pickup truck. Luxury sedan.
That’s useful information.
But if you really wanted to understand why the vehicle behaves the way it does, you’d need to pop the hood. You’d want to see the engine. The wiring. The transmission. The suspension. The guts.
That’s what the MBTI does.
Temperament tells us what kind of vehicle we’re driving.
The MBTI helps us understand what’s happening underneath the hood.
Ok, let’s get our hands dirty.
Jung believed that each of us comes into the world pre-wired with certain personality preferences. I’m inclined to agree. But having a preference doesn’t mean we’re incapable of doing the opposite. It simply means one approach feels more natural and comfortable than another.
Think about breakfast.
Would you rather have a donut or an apple?
If you prefer donuts, you’ll probably eat an apple if that’s all that’s available. You won’t starve to death while waiting for a bakery to open. Given the choice, though, you’re probably reaching for the donut.
Personality works the same way.
You can do either. You simply prefer one.
Clarity
It’s important to note, before we go on, that it’s rare for a person to be full force in any of the preferences. Just like it’s difficult to find a human that is 100% one race. We are all blends. Personality preferences are like that too. I may identify as a Thinker, but if my clarity is slight, I’d be quite comfortable in the company of Feelers.
On the other hand, if my preference is very clear, then I’ll feel very uncomfortable and awkward with a group of Feelers.
Your Type will never change. What will change over time, with work, is the clarity of your preference.
In a perfect world, we would be a blend of all. The world is far from perfect, but we can work towards comfort in our opposite preference. It’s good for us.
The Four Dichotomies
According to Jung, there are four major areas where those preferences tend to show up. He referred them as dichotomies. They prompt four important questions.
#1: What Activities Energize Me?
Take a moment and think about the following questions:
In a large group, are you the one making introductions, or would you rather be introduced?
When you’re with a group of people, would you rather address the entire group or have one-on-one conversations with people you know?
Can you comfortably talk with almost anyone for as long as necessary, or do you find you have a lot to say only to certain people under certain conditions?
Your answers help determine whether you lean toward Extraversion or Introversion.
Notice I said, “lean toward.”
I wouldn’t call you a donut simply because you prefer donuts at breakfast.
People who prefer Extraversion tend to enjoy verbalizing their thoughts, interacting with groups, and maintaining a wide network of relationships. They often seek the company of others and may find extended periods of isolation draining. Being around people gives them energy.
People who prefer Introversion are different. They often seek depth over breadth and tend to appear quiet, reflective, and thoughtful. They’re frequently found working independently behind closed doors, and large groups can wear them out. Solitude gives them energy.
A word of caution, though.
This preference is often harder to spot than people think.
You might be surprised by the number of energetic, outgoing speakers, performers, trainers, teachers, and leaders who are Introverts.
I know.
I’m one of them.
I’ve spent decades standing in front of audiences and facilitating workshops. Most people naturally assume I’m an Extravert.
They’re wrong.
I’ve simply learned how to operate outside my comfort zone when the situation demands it. Then, at the end of the day, I retreat to a quiet room and stare at a wall until my batteries recharge.
Sometimes I hate people. I wish I were kidding. I’m not. Well, maybe I am. I hate that people exhaust me. Anyone with a preference for introversion would likely agree.
#2: How Do I Gather Information?
Now consider these questions:
Would you rather spend time with someone who’s constantly generating new ideas or someone who focuses on practical realities?
When you read, do you enjoy unusual and creative ways of expressing ideas, or do you wish writers would simply say what they mean?
Are you more interested in theories and possibilities, or facts and evidence?
Do you trust your five senses more than your instincts?
Your answers help determine whether you prefer Sensing or iNtuition.
People who prefer Sensing tend to gather information literally and directly. They focus on what’s real, observable, and happening right now.
If you hand a Sensor an orange and ask them to describe it, they’ll likely examine that specific orange. They’ll notice its color, texture, weight, smell, and taste. Their description stays focused on the object itself.
People who prefer iNtuition gather information differently. They often look beyond the immediate object to relationships, possibilities, and meanings.
Hand an Intuitive that same orange and you may get a completely different conversation.
The orange reminds them of Florida. Florida reminds them of Disney World. Disney World reminds them of a family vacation. The family vacation reminds them of a funny story about their kids.
Five minutes later, you’re discussing parenting and wondering what happened to the orange.
Neither approach is wrong.
They’re simply different ways of processing information.
#3: Which Part of Me Makes Decisions?
Think about these questions:
Do you generally trust logic more than sentiment, or sentiment more than logic?
Do you find it easy to separate your emotions from a difficult decision?
When making an important choice, do you focus more on objective facts or the people affected by the outcome?
Your answers help determine whether you prefer Thinking or Feeling.
If you prefer Thinking, it doesn’t mean you’re smarter than everyone else. It simply means you tend to make decisions based on objective analysis. Fairness, clarity, consistency, and logic are important parts of your decision-making process.
Thinkers often ask:
“What makes the most sense?”
People who prefer Feeling approach decisions differently. They’re more likely to consider values, relationships, and the human impact of a decision.
Feelers often ask:
“How will this affect the people involved?”
At first glance, some people assume Thinkers are logical and Feelers are emotional.
That’s not true. Thinkers have feelings. Feelers use logic.
The difference isn’t whether they have emotions. The difference is which tool they naturally reach for first.
And once either group makes up its mind, both can be remarkably stubborn.
Trust me on that one.
#4: How Do I Prefer to Structure My Life?
Now consider these questions:
Do you plan events weeks in advance, or decide what sounds fun when the day arrives?
When facing an important project, do you organize everything before you begin, or figure it out as you go?
Do you prefer schedules and plans, or flexibility and spontaneity?
Your answers help determine whether you prefer Judging or Perceiving.
People who prefer Judging like structure, closure, and clearly defined plans. They enjoy making decisions, checking items off lists, and moving toward completion. These are often the folks with organized calendars, detailed plans, and a strong desire to know what’s happening next.
People who prefer Perceiving tend to favor flexibility and adaptability. They prefer keeping options open and responding to situations as they unfold.
Give a Judger a planner and they’ll probably use every page.
Give a Perceiver the same planner and it will become a coaster.
For the Judger, a deadline is a target.
For the Perceiver, a deadline is valuable information. A wall to break against.
Particularly when it’s tomorrow.
Perceivers absolutely have structure. They simply prefer their structure. They like the freedom to adjust, revise, and respond to new information as it appears.
Many of them also do some of their finest work at the last possible moment.
I know several Perceivers who insist they don’t procrastinate.
They’re just waiting for all the data to arrive.
Conveniently, the data seems to arrive about fifteen minutes before the deadline.
At this point, you may be wondering why any of these matters. It’s a fair question.
You now know there are four major personality preferences. We gain energy differently. We gather information differently. We make decisions differently. We prefer different levels of structure in our lives.
Interesting. So what?
The value isn’t in memorizing four sets of letters. The value is realizing that not everybody is approaching life the same way you are.
The Extravert isn’t necessarily trying to dominate the conversation. Often, they’re simply thinking out loud. The Introvert isn’t being antisocial. They’re thinking before they speak.
The Sensor isn’t trying to kill your creativity. They’re trying to make sure the idea works in the real world. The Intuitive isn’t avoiding reality. They’re exploring possibilities that others might miss.
The Thinker isn’t trying to be insensitive. They’re trying to be objective. The Feeler isn’t being overly emotional. They’re trying to protect relationships and consider the impact on the people involved.
The Judger isn’t trying to control everyone. They’re trying to create order. The Perceiver isn’t trying to create chaos. They’re trying to remain flexible and adapt as circumstances change.
Most conflict begins when we assume other people should see the world the way we do. Most relationships improve when we realize they never will.
And that’s okay. It’s better than okay. It’s necessary.
Imagine a world populated entirely by Sensors. Or entirely by Intuitives. Imagine a world made up only of Thinkers or only of Feelers. We’d be incredibly effective in some areas and completely dysfunctional in others.
We need each other.
The challenge isn’t learning how to change people into our image. The challenge is learning to appreciate differences instead of fighting them.
David Keirsey understood this. One of the things that fascinated him was that human beings have been wrestling with this same problem for thousands of years.
More than 2,000 years ago, the ancient Greeks believed personality was influenced by four bodily fluids called humors. According to them, too much blood, bile, or phlegm floating around in your body affected your temperament.
As it turns out, they were completely wrong about the biology.
But they may have been onto something else.
They noticed that people seemed to cluster into predictable patterns. Some people were outgoing and energetic. Some were serious and thoughtful. Some were calm and steady. Some were driven and intense.
The explanation was wrong, but the observation wasn’t bad.
Fast forward a couple thousand years and Carl Jung comes along. Jung wasn’t interested in bodily fluids. He was interested in preferences. He observed that people seemed to prefer different ways of gathering information, making decisions, and interacting with the world.
Then Briggs and Myers built an assessment around those observations and gave us sixteen personality Types.
Years later, Keirsey looked at those sixteen Types and noticed that the patterns were still there.
Keirsey assigned each Type a descriptive name. I like these because they’re easier to remember than a collection of letters. Think of them as nicknames that capture the essence of each Type.
Guardians (SJ)
ISTJ – The Inspector
Dependable, responsible, and duty oriented. Inspectors believe commitments matter and that people should do what they say they’ll do.
ISFJ – The Protector
Loyal, caring, and service-oriented. Protectors quietly look after people and preserve traditions, relationships, and stability.
ESTJ – The Supervisor
Practical, organized, and decisive. Supervisors naturally take charge and bring order to chaos.
ESFJ – The Provider
Warm, helpful, and relationship focused. Providers enjoy supporting others and keeping groups connected.
Artisans (SP)
ISTP – The Crafter
Independent and hands-on. Crafters love understanding how things work and fixing them when they don’t.
ISFP – The Composer
Creative, adaptable, and freedom-loving. Composers prefer expressing themselves through action rather than words.
ESTP – The Promoter
Energetic, persuasive, and action-oriented. Promoters thrive on excitement, challenge, and opportunity.
ESFP – The Performer
Fun-loving, enthusiastic, and spontaneous. Performers bring energy and enjoyment wherever they go.
Idealists (NF)
INFJ – The Counselor
Insightful, compassionate, and purposeful. Counselors are driven to help people grow and reach their potential.
INFP – The Healer
Authentic, reflective, and values driven. Healers seek meaning and often feel called to make the world a better place.
ENFJ – The Teacher
Encouraging, inspiring, and people focused. Teachers naturally help others learn, grow, and succeed.
ENFP – The Champion
Enthusiastic, imaginative, and optimistic. Champions see possibilities everywhere and encourage others to pursue them.
Rationals (NT)
INTJ – The Mastermind
Strategic, independent, and future-focused. Masterminds enjoy building systems and solving complex problems.
INTP – The Architect
Analytical, curious, and inventive. Architects are driven to understand how things work and why they work.
ENTJ – The Field Marshal
Confident, organized, and goal oriented. Field Marshals naturally develop plans and mobilize people to achieve them.
ENTP – The Inventor
Innovative, curious, and unconventional. Inventors challenge assumptions and constantly search for better ways of doing things.
As useful as these sixteen Types can be, I don’t want you to get too hung up on them.
Remember our vehicle analogy. This is the engine, transmission, wiring harness, and suspension.
Important? Absolutely.
But most people don’t identify themselves by the type of fuel injector they have.
They identify with the vehicle.
Ancient Greek physicians, Jung, Myers, Briggs, Keirsey, and Bates. All looking for the same thing. But coming up with different language. Different labels. Same basic idea. Different theories. Different centuries. Different explanations.
Yet they all seemed to arrive at a similar conclusion.
People aren’t all motivated by the same things.
Some people are looking for security.
Some are looking for freedom.
Some are searching for meaning.
Some are chasing mastery.
And that’s where so much of our conflict comes from. We assume everybody wants what we want.
The Guardian assumes everybody values responsibility. The Artisan assumes everybody values freedom. The Idealist assumes everybody values authenticity and personal growth. The Rational assumes everybody values competence and knowledge.
Then we get frustrated when they don’t.
The Guardian sees the Artisan as irresponsible. The Artisan sees the Guardian as controlling. The Idealist thinks the Rational is cold. The Rational thinks the Idealist is thin-skinned.
Nobody is trying to be difficult.
They’re simply pursuing different goals.
That’s one of the reasons I like Keirsey’s work so much. Most personality systems focus on traits. They ask, “What are you like?”
Keirsey asked a different question.
“What are you trying to accomplish?”
Once you understand what people are trying to accomplish, a lot of their behavior suddenly makes sense.
Not all of it. But enough of it to make life a little easier. And if we’re lucky, maybe a little less irritating.
The four preference dichotomies we’ve discussed in this chapter are the building blocks. The nuts and bolts. The engine components. They’re useful because they help explain what’s happening underneath the hood.
But most of us don’t walk around thinking in terms of Introversion, Sensing, Thinking, or Judging.
We experience life through larger patterns. Through our motivations, our values, our needs, and the things that seem to matter most to us.
In short, we experience life through our Temperament.
That’s where we’re headed next.
We’re about to leave the garage and take these vehicles out on the road. We’re going to spend some time getting to know the four Temperaments and explore what makes each one unique.
By the time we’re done, you’ll understand not only why you do what you do, but why the people around you do what they do.
And trust me, some of them are going to make a whole lot more sense.
Then again, you might discover that you’re the one who finally makes more sense.
That wouldn’t be a bad outcome either.
