The Four Temperaments

by Rev. Conrad Hock

"Know Yourself"How can we sanctify ourselves, if we do not know ourselves? Self-knowledge is an essential key to mastering the Science of the Saints. Philosophers outline four basic temperaments. Fr. Hock masterfully discusses the four temperaments and the spiritual challenges of each and how to apply the appropriate remedies. This book is written for the average layman and at the end has a test so you can determine what your temperament is and then study the work again to become a Saint.

Genres: Catholic, Nonfiction, Psychology, Parenting, Education, Religion, Faith

51 pages, Paperback

First published June 15, 1934

Reviews

[David Standeven · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the one everybody should read, not the long-winded and off-point "The Temperament God Gave You".

Skip the test entirely. If you read this book, one of the first three temperaments should grab you and make you realize, "That is me."

If that doesn't happen, then you're phlegmatic. :)

It's that simple and very concise.

[Jairo Fraga · Rating 4 out of 5]

Livrinho bem pequeno introdutório sobre os 4 temperamentos.

Tem como ponto forte, a orientação de práticas de santificação para 3 dos 4 temperamentos (o fleumático parece que houve algum problema na escrita e compõe um pedaço pequeno em comparação aos outros temperamentos), e também orientações para educação das crianças com cada temperamento.

Tem um pequeno questionário no final, para tentar identificar qual seu temperamento. Em outros questionários meu temperamento era dado como fleumático-colérico, já nesse, deu como melancólico-colérico. Não sei qual está certo.

Tempo estimado de leitura: 1h30m.

[Jennifer · Rating 1 out of 5]

I prefer books that present a more objective view of the world.

Conrad Hock writes as though people with a phlegmatic temperament are basically a waste of space and air. People with the sanguine temperament are sensory junkies who can’t control themselves, and cholerics are arrogant for the sake of being arrogant and are out to make everyone miserable (I suspect he might have known his “research,” such as it is, couldn’t stand up to their logical scrutiny). But OH!! If you’re a melancholic (like Hock), you’re a born saint. Therefore, everyone comes to the conclusion they’re a combination of sanguine-melancholic.

On top of a warped view of the temperaments, the book mentions very little about what the different types can and do contribute to the good of humanity, or how the temperaments need each other for a healthy, functioning society. Instead, it’s presented as though there are “good” and “bad” temperaments, instead of good and bad choices each individual makes.

There’s just better, more useful stuff on the temperaments out there to read. Plenty of books in the sea! Throw this one back.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was such a good, short overview of the temperaments. It provides great insight and motivates me to pick up a book that goes into more detail.

[Arshad Ali · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good book giving a nice overview of the four temperaments. I liked his method for determining your dominant temperament- very clear/quick and useful. Some good lines w/ piercing insights (e.g. the analogy of the melanocholic's response being like a peg driven into the Earth) but overall not a lot of depth of information- particularly on the phlegmatic

[Gregory · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best short explanation of the 4 temperaments that you'll ever find.

Fr Conrad Hock writes this from the perspective of somebody who wants as his main goal to get himself and others to heaven. Therefore, after each temperament explanation, there is a equaly long part on "self training" and then on apostolate with others.

Excellent swift read. I highly recommend!

[Renee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very helpful in understanding yourself and others.

[Jacob Strange · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting short little read. Though, I feel no closer to knowing which temperament I am. I resonate with all of them in different ways. I resonate with the faults of phlegmatic (lazy at times), sanguine (strive to be seen and seek approval), and choleric (anger). I tend to scruples and I’m really hard on myself like the melancholic. But I’m more on the outgoing side, generally friendly, and sometimes overshare like the sanguine as well. But I don’t particularly care to share my ideas and speak in large groups like a sanguine or choleric would. Though, my initial reaction to strong emotions is more like the sanguine because I don’t really have a problem letting go. If I’m making a decision, I do change my mind about things, which I often do, but it’s usually after compulsively thinking about nothing else for days, weeks, or months depending on the gravity of the decision. And sort of like the book alludes to, I wouldn’t say it’s because I’m shallow. I also get along with everyone like the sanguine. But I don’t think there’s anyone that I would strike as a shallow thinker. I don’t have any problem meditating on my faults and beliefs. I hardly think about anything else. I don’t mind talking to people about shallow things because I like to be approved of and enjoy getting along with people, but I intentionally push the conversation to the Faith or philosophy any chance I get. Like the choleric, though not in temporal matters, I don’t think I desire anything more than to be known and loved by God. But again, like the melancholic, I fear failure and that He hates me when I sin. I simultaneously have no problem going to confession and the most difficulty. I have no problem saying all my faults like the sanguine, but even after confession I fixate on past sins and try and do random penances so I can renew my relationship with God. The author says melancholic and choleric are full of passion, while sanguine and phlegmatic are passionless. And if there’s one word someone that knows me would describe me with, it would likely be passion. I get into arguments with people any chance I get. It’s usually not in a harsh way, though they can get that way with the right interlocutors. So in some ways I’m like the sanguine because I react quickly and quickly move on. But it also has nothing to do with indifference. It’s usually born out of recognition of my own faults in the conversation, which helps me understand why the person would do what they did. This, paired with the fact that I like the other person (I like most people). If I had to point to a mix, I’d say likely Sanguine and Melancholic, but those almost seem mutually exclusive. I say that now, but as I was reading I was thinking more Sanguine and Choleric. So I still have no idea. If anyone else does, I’m all ears.

[Matt Lewis · Rating 4 out of 5]

While I don't think anyone fits perfectly into any one of these, this was a very good explanation of the four temperaments. Rev. Hock breaks down each one into characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses. He also provides guidance and how to grow and overcome the weaknesses. Only issue is that the formatting was weird.

[Caleb Burdine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good brief overview of the four temperaments and their respective character traits. Helpful for parents to understand their children and what kind of discipline and education works best for them. There's also a quiz at the back to help you identify your own temperament. Not surprised to find that I'm a melancholic.

[Marie Trotter · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some generalizations, and assumption of the inquiring reader as male, but good as a brief introduction to the four temperaments and their applications to the spiritual life.

[Sara · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent review of the four temperaments- the four basic personalities which people have. A great subject to study for learning more about oneself and other people- how and why they act and think the way they do. It's much easier to put up with qualities you do not like in others when you consider them in light of their God-given temperament, each of which are endowed with certain strengths and weakness to be fortified and overcome. My only critique would be that the phlegmatic temperament is almost completely overlooked in this book in comparison to the other three. A quiz is included at the end for ascertaining one's own temperament (though the book explains them so well that it seems one would know it just by reading!)

[Ce · Rating 5 out of 5]

¿Colérico, sanguíneo, melancólico o flemático? ¿Un sólo temperamento o mixto?. Lectura rápida para evaluar y empezar a conocerse uno mismo, además de conocer a los que nos rodean, teniendo cuidado en cómo tratarlos, corregirlos y apoyarlos. Algo que no debe desanimarnos es que todos los temperamentos tienen su lado bueno y malo. Pero aprendiendo a manejar el mismo, también se puede llegar a la santidad, como lo fue San Pablo (colérico), sn. Pedro (sanguíneo), sn. Juan (melancólico) y sn. Marcos (flemático).

[ShepherdsDelight · Rating 5 out of 5]

85/100 (= 5.0/6) ≈ 5 Stars

-----------------------------------------
Excellent. Could be perhaps a bit more scientifically precise. But overall, super. To become a saint, to know and love God, one has to know one's self. The temperaments are essential for that. So here's a good place to start! Wonderful, in that it explains the temperaments in light of the spiritual life. See also articles by Fr. Antonio Royo Marin OP.

[Joyce · Rating 5 out of 5]

Short, concise, and systematically to the point. Fr. Hock even gets an Imprimatur for his work - bonus!

The four temperaments - nature, advantages, disadvantages, ways to teach, ways to self-train - are presented and applied to the spiritual life.

[Eric · Rating 5 out of 5]

Quick read. Clearly doesn't speak much of the phlegmatic temperament. Insightful and really hits the mark, especially as he speaks deeply on Melancholics.

Would recommend for an interesting third-party view of oneself.

[Nana · Rating 5 out of 5]

Helpful