Hi, recently I've been calculating the temperaments for people I know using Dorian Greenbaum's technique (I don't have the book but followed the method as found in the archives here) and I was really surprised to find that the people I am/have been closest to came out to have the same element dominating, which happens to be choleric. Regarding this, I'm wondering if/how I would be able to see through my chart why it happens that they (significant others and even my best friend) have the same main temperament? My main temperament came out to be sanguine with Dorian Greenbaum's method. Have you noticed this too in your personal relationships that you attract a certain temperament as well?

Hi Tom, thanks for sharing this. The two of you really balance each other out nicely.

I'm a strong phlegmatic. Moon in Cancer ASC; Sun in Pisces. I agree about the desire and instant gratification thing. for me it's food/binging. luckily, saturn in my natal chart is high dignified in aquarius so it's probably responsible for me also being hard working, disciplined (at my day job, at least).

Here's my data if someone wants to add their input:

female, born feb 22, 1964 @ 12:31pm Ottawa, Ontario CANADA.

if you want to delineate it, great, and in return, I'll answer any questions anyone has about my life which might help "prove" how a primarily phlegmatic person operates.

Hi folks I am a bit late to this one and did not read the whole thing so forgive me if I am touching on something that was already brought up. I first came into contact with temperament analysis through Frawley but I never had much luck applying his methods. After seeing how Zoller approached it in his DMA course I found that it was a much simpler thing to determine, especially when considering the almuten of the Asc (although I do this slightly differently than Zoller recommends in his course). Now I am taking Brennan's course in Hellenistic astrology and he brings up early on that the Stoic model of elements and qualities is slightly different than the aristotelian model that we've all come to know and love. It seems the Stoics assigned Hot to Fire, Cold to Air, Dry to Earth, and Moist to Water. This makes more sense to me philosophically and I have been experimenting with it a little and thus far I like it better because I don't think the four humors fit correspond exactly with the four elements, especially since I have studied some Ayurveda. In that system Vata is the dosha that corresponds to the humor called Melancholy in the Greek system and both are considered Cold and Dry, BUT, Vata is a mixture of Air and Ether, not at all of earth! So for me the humors are best kept separate from the 4 elements. Furthermore why should Hot/Dry be opposed by Hot/Moist and Cold/Dry be opposed by Cold/Moist when the humors themselves are not balanced/arranged in this manner?

Using this model the planets give us the primary aspects of the temperament while the signs just give us a background. The signs modify the testimony given by the planets. I also look at Mercury and the Moon as taking on the qualities of the planet most closely in aspect and if there is none or the Moon is stronger than the planets aspecting then it gives a strong phlegmatic effect. I don't agree that Mercury is cold/dry by nature. I think he represents the ether, the 5th element within the context of temperament. If you do it this way then Jupiter/Saturn oppose one another as Sanguine vs Melancholic, Sun/Mars oppose Moon/Venus as Choleric vs Phlegmatic. I like this symmetry quite a bit and it makes a good amount of sense and is useful in practice. I also consider the lord of the rising sign, with regard to temperament, to take on a slightly more passive quality so that the planet most closely in aspect modifies the temperament rather than the other way around.