[Annie S.]

Hello!
I heard that your Myers-Briggs type cannot change, but I wasn't quite sure about that. I used to act really introverted when I was younger, but I got to a three-year period of being extroverted.

I also heard that you can be multiple Myers-Briggs types, so maybe that's why I'm confused. Maybe I'm an INFJ, ENFP, ISTP, and during that three-year period, my dominant function became an ENFP instead of an INFJ.

... But I wasn't entirely sure about this...
... Does my Myers-Briggs type change? Or do I have multiple type functions?

 

[BlueViolet]

People get too locked into typology. Personality theory has evolved since Jung first invented the concept. By now, it is based on quizzes and has been modified by various methods. Sure, science is involved, but don't treat "personality type" like "zodiac sign." It's not a power that acts on you since birth. You create it, moment by moment.

You live, you learn, you (hopefully) make progress. In childhood, you might present as a certain type, but then you pick up skills as you mature. In my opinion, the goal is to use all your cognitive skills as they best serve you.

I can't say I really know or care what type I am anymore. Focus on using the cognitive functions rather than clumping them into an aggregate identity.

 

[HAL]

MBTI is a way of classifying and categorising psychological functions that some possesses.

Some argue that you can change your personality with training and 'thinking the correct way', but I think that's nonsense. The brain is hardwired from birth, just like your natural physique, intelligence, propensity for weight gain, etc.

Childhood personality is often very different from adult personality, but I think it's largely due to external factors. Personally I was a very boisterous and confident child, but now as an adult I'm a relatively introverted INTP. However, I don't think I was a different type when I was younger. I still had the curiosity, logical requirements, and social aloofness that are typical of an INTP.

You can get people with a matching MBTI type who appear to have very different personalities, but I think that's down to nurture/upbringing. For example, most INTPs seem to be able to detach themselves from the wider plight of others, but since I was bullied quite badly as a kid I have a serious moral stance on things like fairness, equality etc which pervade my thoughts so much that I might consider myself INFP if I take that aspect alone as a deciding factor.

Anyway, I don't think MBTI can change, not unless you suffer blunt force trauma to the head. There are real examples of that causing personality changes, e.g. the people who took a knock to the head and gained an addiction to sex, or were afflicted with lasting anger management issues. This just goes to show that the brain is a physical entity and it doesn't genetically change at all from the point you're born.

 

[impulsenine]

I don't know if it can change, I guess so.

But what is important to know is that: being "framed" in a personality type is not as limiting as we think.
You can take 1000 people with the same personality type and observe extremely different people.

A personality type is not a color. But a whole palette of shades of the same color. That must be understood.

Although I think that the color can change too if there is enough desire, motivation, energy, firmness.

 

[Allostasis]

Jung didn't claim that type is set in stone.
There were some indications that dominant attitude develops very early, though, but overall, psychological differentiation is an ongoing process that may never fully be "completed".

Hence it isn't terribly useful to be fixated on some particular label, that wasn't the goal.

My typology is far rather a critical apparatus serving to sort out and organize the welter of empirical material, but not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical. For this reason I have placed the general typology and the Definitions at the end of the book, after having described, in chapters I to IX, the processes in question with the help of various examples. I would therefore recommend the reader who really wants

to understand my book to immerse himself first of all in chapters II and V. He will gain more from them than from any typological terminology superficially picked up, since this serves no other purpose than a totally useless desire to stick on labels.

MBTI, on the other hand, is just a classification of behavioral traits/patterns that has little to do with how your psyche works. Just start exhibiting different traits and now you are new type.

 

[mia-me]

No, your type shouldn't change over time unless nurture forced you away from your type which can result in neuroticism. Where Jung's silent is if falsified type can revert to birth type but logically, once out of destructive formative environments, people can normalize.

The fact that often in their earliest years children display an unmistakable typical attitude forces us to assume that it cannot possibly be the struggle for existence, as it is generally understood, which constitutes the compelling factor in favour of a definite attitude. We might, however, demur, and indeed with cogency, that even the tiny infant, the very babe at the breast, has already an unconscious psychological adaptation to perform, inasmuch as the special character of the maternal influence leads to specific reactions in the child. This argument, though appealing to incontestable facts, has none the less to yield before the equally unarguable fact that two children of the same mother may at a very early age exhibit opposite types, without the smallest accompanying change in the attitude of the mother. Although nothing would induce me to underestimate the well-nigh incalculable importance of parental influence, this experience compels me to conclude that the decisive factor must be looked for in the disposition of the child. The fact that, in spite of the greatest possible similarity of external conditions, one child will assume this type while another that, must, of course, in the last resort he ascribed to individual disposition. Naturally in saying this I only refer to those cases which occur under normal conditions. Under abnormal conditions, i.e. when there is an extreme and, therefore, abnormal attitude in the mother, the children can also be coerced into a relatively similar attitude; but this entails a violation of their individual disposition, which quite possibly would have assumed another type if no abnormal and disturbing external influence had intervened. As a rule, whenever such a falsification of type takes place as a result of external [p. 416] influence, the individual becomes neurotic later, and a cur can successfully be sought only in a development of that attitude which corresponds with the individual's natural way.
- Jung, Carl G. (1971). Psychological Types. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

 

[tanstaafl28]

Hello!
I heard that your Myers-Briggs type cannot change, but I wasn't quite sure about that. I used to act really introverted when I was younger, but I got to a three-year period of being extroverted.

I also heard that you can be multiple Myers-Briggs types, so maybe that's why I'm confused. Maybe I'm an INFJ, ENFP, ISTP, and during that three-year period, my dominant function became an ENFP instead of an INFJ.

... But I wasn't entirely sure about this...
... Does my Myers-Briggs type change? Or do I have multiple type functions?

Yes and no. You grow and change.. Your MBTI does not so much as it expands as you do. For example, cognitive development continues for most people until about age 25, and your tertiary cognitive function often does not come into play until you're in your 30s.

Also, you have the ability to add other cognitive functions to the mix, however, your preferred functions will always remain your standard "go to" functions because they are the ones you found provided you with the best advantage from a very young age.

So with age comes experience and experience combined with knowledge produces wisdom. With wisdom, we become more than the sum of our parts, of which MBTI is only one. Therefore, there is no binary answer to your question.

 

[Electra]

I recon they can as our brain can.

 

[Joe Black]

Because of the Neuroplasticity phenomenon, the brain can change and rewire overtime. So theoretically, your personality can change with much intentional focus.

Introversion and Extroversion and much of personality traits is observable on a EEG brain scan. It can show that your brain is more active regarding the external outside world, or more active in dwelling on your thoughts. What you're more stimulated by.

Tastes and interests can also be acquired. What you were once bored by, you can learn to be interested, thus your brain is more stimulated by your interests. These interests can be internal or external.

Some say it's possible, but more difficult to change things that are closer to your "original" personality, than changing things that completely opposite.

Some argue that skills are different to inclinations. e.g. Introverts that are highly trained in public speaking, and customer service, charismatic qualities etc may develop the skills to behave like an extrovert, and thrive, but in essence, genuinely feel more recharged when alone as an introvert would. Or someone with low Te, learning systems, rules and operations to manage a business. Certainly possible.

MBTi is just one paradigm to view personality. There's actually many other traits that contribute to personality but MBTi/Jungian-typology attempts to simplify things. Traits like age, maturity, self-awareness, sex, knowledge, experience can make people of the same type seem like very different people.

Philosophically, why does it matter what personality we are if we can develop the skills, and develop our weaknesses to overcome or compensate for natural weaknesses.

Scientifically, the brain is complex - it seems theoretically possible, but with huge difficulty depending on what change is being attempted. It's actually so complex, that saying yes or no doesn't quite answer the question correctly.

 

[Rift]

Some argue

I find most of the originalists (in various systems) to be rather hippy dippy'ish to a nearly absurb degree. there's a hypocrisy within their criticisms, as often despite it, they tend to fall in post-modernist transcendantalism which inevitably breaks down to unlocking your third eye by relaxing your external and internal anal sphincters. . . it's very wrapped up in bourgeoisie rebellion and dime store meta-philosophies about the divine child, attaining perfection/purity while at the same time, arguing that whatever they were as children is redundant because everyone is born as a blank slate and then reprogrammed by a corrupt society. which makes sense if you're running a mlm scheme because without an origin you have no map, history. and of course, that's without getting into the hostility towards psychiatry, neuroscience, medicine... like the originalist in enneagram don't blame astrology, instead at their root they blame catholicalism for how the modern enneagram is perceived but they don't ever seem to get into a real argument of the how or why, just more the hostility that a couple of americans, theological students at that invaded their turf just when they were about to obtain enlightenment. it's really quite funny to look at the territorial pissing matches under the various philosophies, the old school (which isn't that old) vs the new schools, and both being blind to the philosophers, sociologists, scientists... people on the peripheral that only see it as a mere framework to more simply define characteristics within the human condition.. a paradigm that's easily shifted to a variety of formats and only as useful as to what patterns that can be observed, researched, studied lest all of it becomes more cult than framework. all these things, whether it's mbti or even astrology (yes, I know some butts puckered at the mention of that, still it provides a framework, guideline, of classical archetypal roles to examine their lives from, and ) provides a 'common' tongue, a language in which to communicate it.

but someone was at the door and I've lost place of my ramblings. . . still fun to explore the territorial pissing matches except I suppose it would alienate most everyone. funny, how these frameworks are supposed to remain unevolving, unchanging, immovable, unaffected by new information, varying cultures and the effects of time... no?

or perhaps more that the ones saying you can be anything, everything, magical and unique in every possible way, except you can't wear a name tag to differentiate yourself from the rest of humanity nor to group yourself in.

 

[mia-me]

Most people reside near the E/I divide so they can flex to some extent. But relative to entire 'type' changing, not convinced, especially since proof of neuroplasticity was in the form of chronic, traumatic brain injury. It's not often that people smash their heads in car accidents to the point where they lose chunks out of their brains. And as anecdotal evidence, how often have you seen people change, never mind change their minds on basic issues? Rhetorical question, of course.

Sure, it's possible but I'd say pretty uncommon, once their brains have concretized at around 25. Envision the brain where it's like an arterial network. From babyhood, the neural net hasn't developed or crystallized. As babies age to children, to teen, to adulthood, certain arterial branches expand and others, thin. From there, the least used pathways are organically snipped to improve efficiency.

 

[DOGSOUP]

My test result went from INTJ to ENFP as a result of me becoming more patient and flexible, people might not like it but that's just a sign that they are set in their ways in ways I no longer am

 

[Hexigoon]

With the dichotomies MBTI uses, sure.
I can shift from Feeling to Thinking or back again depending on the day I take the test on. I'm more introverted now than I used to be too, so in the past I might've got a score closer to E.

If we were talking about cognitive functions though, I honestly doubt one could escape their dominant. And even if they could, that seems like self-sabotage.

 

[impulsenine]

With the dichotomies MBTI uses, sure.
I can shift from Feeling to Thinking or back again depending on the day I take the test on. I'm more introverted now than I used to be too, so in the past I might've got a score closer to E.

If we were talking about cognitive functions though, I honestly doubt one could escape their dominant. And even if they could, that seems like self-sabotage.

Self-sabotaging could be useful sometimes.

 

[BlueViolet]

If we were talking about cognitive functions though, I honestly doubt one could escape their dominant. And even if they could, that seems like self-sabotage.

To the contrary: If a person has relied on the dominant function and ignored the inferior function -- that person will make the same kind of mistakes over and over. The dominant function has sabotaged the person -- not the other way around!

Case in point: Ni. Knowing what is happening, figuring out meaning, by making mental connections concerning observable phenomena. Without Se to check the actual, material, tangible evidence, errors will occur. Paying attention to signals from the physical senses balances intuition.

It is foolish to revere the dominant function. But what else do we have? The middle two functions are already busy balancing each other. The answer is: the inferior function, which is healthy to use. Do not fear weakening the dominant. It allows the inferior to assist the dominant, which runs unopposed if not balanced.

 

[Sparky]

Hello!
I heard that your Myers-Briggs type cannot change, but I wasn't quite sure about that. I used to act really introverted when I was younger, but I got to a three-year period of being extroverted.

I also heard that you can be multiple Myers-Briggs types, so maybe that's why I'm confused. Maybe I'm an INFJ, ENFP, ISTP, and during that three-year period, my dominant function became an ENFP instead of an INFJ.

... But I wasn't entirely sure about this...
... Does my Myers-Briggs type change? Or do I have multiple type functions?

You might be confused about what it means to be introverted or extroverted.

If you are suddenly given attention by 500 people, would you rather stand up, or sit down? If it's to sit down, then you are introverted. Extroversion and introversion is not about whether you prefer to go to a party or read a book at home.

With that cleared up, your answer to the question will remain consistent over your life-time, so in that respect, MBTI does not change. However, you might be confused about what each dichotomy means, and this lack of understanding makes you think it's changing, whereas it's only your definition that changes.

 

[DOGSOUP]

If you are suddenly given attention by 500 people, would you rather stand up, or sit down? If it's to sit down, then you are introverted. Extroversion and introversion is not about whether you prefer to go to a party or read a book at home.

lol what is the context of that situation

 

[Sparky]

lol what is the context of that situation

You can also imagine that there is a crowd of 500 people who you are attracted to, and they all want to shake your hand. Would you shake each on and move to the center of the crowd, or would you shake a few hands and stay at the edge, while having them come to you one-by-one? If it's the latter, then you are introverted.

 

[attic]

I thought about starting a thread on this topic today, and then I found this! Many interesting thoughts.

I don't know really. I think we can change to some extent, but how much? I wonder if some letters or functions are more changeable than others to possibly... Some cognitive functions seem to sort of take out each other, but other seem to be possible to develop in parallel, or even use together... These are just my own speculations though. I think Ne an Ni seems to have some aspects that go against each other for example, but often it seems you need both for some of the things they are used to handle, you expand, and synthesise, expand-synthesise...

I think a lot of people are a bit in the middle, but with a slight preference for, for example extroversion or introversion, and so they don't have to change all that much to change type, while someone who is superintroverted likely never will become an extrovert, without perhaps drugs/injury/disease.

This article I stumbled on last week is about the personality traits of big five, which is different, but has some overlap with mbti, and quite a lot with 16-personalities. It is about a study (link at the bottom to the study, I have not read it yet), where participants used a cbt-app to change those of the big-5 traits they wanted to, and the results pointed to that you can. I don't think that is some firm proof, just because it is a more sciency study, it is still just one, and one can ask a lot of questions about what it really says, but it was still interesting I think (I threw it in a translator, the video isn't in english, and there might be some oddities as it is translated automatically):

Google Translate

(Edit: just want to add that I am not a huge fan of big 5 and something about this article rub me the wrong way... I think that it makes the traits seem like some scale where you just are good or bad and can improve, where other personality theories tend to give more of an understanding for how the traits can be linked and some good might go with some bad, being more of one might come at the cost of being less of another...)

I have not been able to find it again, but I also read about some research that found indications of two areas of the brain inhibiting the other, sending inhibiting signals when used to the other area, that I think related to T and F to some extent. I don't remember the details, but it is an interesting thought. It was just an early, probing research, so more to open the questions than to confirm. If it is true, then perhaps an F-person might, if working with something that demands you to think much more about T-ish stuff, eventually develop that part and inhibit the other? it was unclear if it was temporary, or something that had lasting effect I think, at least I don't remember... If temporary, perhaps we could to some extent switch back and forth, depending on the project of the day.

I have only watched half yet, but the video Electra posted in the second post here is about political leanings and genetics, and the hormones dopamine and serotonin, where it is claimed few people change all that much in their political stance. It talks about liberal and conservative mainly, and about caution/fear in the conservative, and curiosity/risk it in the liberal. This seems to be largely inborn, though there are exceptions of course, and people change to some extent. I think this relates to some extent to personality type. I get it is a bit sensitive to say, and I don't think there are superclear lines where all of one type this or that. But there seems to be tendencies. I think there might is something inborn where people range from clear SJ to clear NP and all in between. Though that video and how people change little in political stance over their lives seems to point to unchanging personality, partly it also base it on hormones, and hormones change through stages in our lives and from how we live (food, exercise, sun, medicine...), so it seems likely some of that could also change to some extent.

There seems to be some correlation between eveningness and morningness as well (and again, not everyone, just tendencies) and personality type. Though one can adapt to some extent and learn to have different sleepschedules, it seems to be genetic which we prefer and that it is often good for us if we can follow that. So there seems to be something there which is also more or less set and which affect personality, or at least go together with personality (as a generalised tendency).