Talk:Five temperaments

Continuing a discussion from the page Talk:Supine (temperament), as the original page author has suggested deleting Supine (temperament):

A promising article. Needs edits to cite sources and maintain NPOV. Chonak 05:15, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links

IMHO, one of the three links Quiddity removed could fairly considered informational and not mere advertising. Am I missing something?

Arno Profile System

The other two links were just uninformative promotional material, so I agree with Quiddity's action on those. Chonak 06:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it's not mere advertising on the linked "history" page. I was put off the site by the other 2 pages, [1] and [2], wherein they are trying to sell both certification to administer the test, and the test itself. Anything marketing itself as "creation therapy" is, IMO, just dripping with pseudo-science, and hence a non-legitimate external link (unless we add a strong disclaimer after the link). Not to be overly dramatic, but it's too close to Auditing (Scientology) for me to be comfortable with.

If someone does decide to add the link back, i'd request that they do add a strong disclaimer following it (along the lines of "Arno Profile System - history, and Creation Therapy marketing").

However I do remain against adding the link back, I'd prefer it if we just incorporate any pertinent info from the page, into our article. -Quiddity 18:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree about incorporating the information, but we really ought to cite sources, so it makes sense to include this source unless an alternative without the marketing material is found. Labelling it as Arno's site makes sense: e.g., "history of Arno Profile System; site also offers publications for sale". For better or worse, his approach does seem to be commonly used among Christian Counselors and in training programs in that field.

"Creation Therapy" is, no doubt, a marketing label for Arno's counseling approach, but unless there's some demonstrable parallel between the method's actual content and the controversial COS's "Auditing", it doesn't seem justified to say that one is "close to" the other. (And as you acknowledged, the comparison does sound dramatic.) If you have more info, feel free to share. For what it's worth, a sample report of a counseling trainee using Arno's temperament system is available on-line. Chonak 04:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, yes, linking it as a reference would be fine. That carries different connotations than an external link :) I'll replace in appropriate section, with ref tag. -Quiddity 04:12, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Creation Therapy" may sound strange, but it is just a course the Arnos (Christian psychologists) give for prospective counselors, and involved the Biblical worldview. It has nothing to do with Scientology, or any other such occult practice. In an age where theories have to basically pre-suppose atheism or agnosticism to be considereed true "science", that will still not be looked favorably on. But the Five-Temperament model they offer really is in itself independant of that course, and stands alone. Worley Profile (worleyid.com) uses the same basic system, and does not AFAIK use any such Christian premise, and it is all based on FIRO-B, which is not religious. I had included the other links, because that had more info than apsreport.com. I was not thinking in terms of the "advertising".

I have written the Arno's addressing the NPOV issue, and hope they will respond, and perhaps offer more sources. Eric B 02:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Arnos are not ideally situated to provide a neutral point of view. If I understand WP's guideline about conflicts of interest correctly, they shouldn't be involved in the writing of the article, although they certainly have a right to correct any errors of fact. Still, it seems fine IMHO to ask their help in locating independent sources that describe the theory.

If it's not possible to bring together enough information from independent sources to write this article, then the topic may not really be "notable" enough to need an article at this time. On the other hand, I must admit that course descriptions in several college catalogs online do mention the theory; this would seem to confirm its notability. Chonak 04:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correlations with Other Type Theories

I wanted to add this table of comparisons of the systems the article discussed, but I can't get it to fit any further. I'm wondering if it is worthy enough to make a template of it, to match the one done for Template:Temperament2. This highlights that fact that there are two "strains" of temperament theory prevalent today. Those based on the humor concept, (in which a normally peaceful person "becomes" that temperament under stress or illness) and embodied in David Keirsey's system (which he measures with the "Abstract/Concrete" and "Cooperative/Pragmatic" scales), and those who measure temperament by introversion/extroversion, and people/task orientation, as the Five Temperament system does. The template seems to highlight the one system, and this table is for the other system.

Eric B 18:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Merge

This page is mostly a rehash of The Four Temperaments, albeit a better written one. I think merging in the former would make the latter better since we could use the elaboration on the four temperaments (which is most of this current article on "the five temperaments") to buff up the article about four, making the new stuff about the fifth temperament in a separate paragraph or section at the end since it is a minor spinoff largely based on a previous thought. It just seems pointless for The Five Temperaments to have its own article, especially since most of the information is rehash which belongs elsewhere and there is little new to add.

I think a merge would be best for one overarching article, creating one -- The Four Temperaments -- with a section at the end about LaHaye's spinoff Fifth Temperament, supine. This being said, there are some complaints about The Four Temperaments article, namely writing complaints, and I think this page says a lot of its content better, and would probably be the one to draw from the most if there is a merge.Penguinwithin (talk) 18:42, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, that article is about ballet. I'm sure you meant Four Temperaments rather than The Four Temperaments. Yworo (talk) 05:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about no, four temperaments is an old and largely obsolete profiling system which CLASHES with the five temperaments model. Sounds like a recipe for confusion if you ask me, is it not logical to avoid merging... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.216.120.200 (talk) 18:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you have to refer to the Four Temperaments to get definitions of four original temperaments, and then EVERYTHING related to defining the fifth temperament in this article is a horrid hodgepodge and wet mess. In the sense that you have to refer back to the Four Temperament article, I think they should be merged together, and the new definitions of Phlegmatic and Supine need to be made CLEAR. As is, this article is in no way "well written." 67.79.195.131 (talk) 20:56, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]