[magnus una]

Cant your type change over time?

can't experiences make you a different Myers Briggs status?

 

[Vaka]

Your results on the test may vary and I think that that's actually normal. But if you study cognitive functions, then you can find your true type. And I don't think that your true type can change.

 

[Ectoplasm]

It ultimately comes down to the cognitive functions as Lara said. No two types have the exact same functions and in the same order so they are unlikely to change at all (for it to change you would probably need extensive brain surgery.) It's possible you can develop the inferior functions to an extent over the course of your life, but I believe the auxillary function (second strongest) is merely used less efficently than the primary and so it can never be as good or better than the strongest function.

But the cognitive functions theory hasn't been proven (it does seem to make intuitive sense to me though) so if you dismiss it as hypothetical then possibly you can, as all bets are off.

 

[Stillwater]

I recall reading once that the only movement that sometimes occurs is a slight move for some towards introversion as we age.

 

[Vaka]

Technically, you can't really become more or less introverted. If your dominant function is focused inward, that's that. If it's focused outward, that's that.

 

[magnus una]

but what happens when people change personality through experience, like people who are predominatedly sad becoming positive outlookers, or people who where shy at school becoming the life of the party in later years, is it more of a show they are putting on, and really they are same person they have always been?

I remember i went through a quite loud stage in school, and quite sociable stage in university, but inside I was very insecure, and it wasn't really me, I hated it, it was just what I thought from a should have behaved like to be or look successful.

but I guess thats not really a transformation, really.

but really that would suggest that no one really changes? we have one personality and we just live our whole lives like that?

 

[Vaka]

but what happens when people change personality through experience, like people who are predominatedly sad becoming positive outlookers, or people who where shy at school becoming the life of the party in later years, is it more of a show they are putting on, and really they are same person they have always been?

I remember i went through a quite loud stage in school, and quite sociable stage in university, but inside I was very insecure, and it wasn't really me, I hated it, it was just what I thought from a should have behaved like to be or look successful.

but I guess thats not really a transformation, really.

but really that would suggest that no one really changes? we have one personality and we just live our whole lives like that?

People definitely change,--I don't know how anyone could argue that :tongue:-- but your type won't change.

 

[magnus una]

interesting, makes sense

 

[OmarFW]

I'll break this down for you

As an INFP your cognitive function order is Fi,Ne,Si,Te

When you take the MBTI it figures out what this order is and gives you your type accordingly.

If you wanted to develop yourself and get rid of your "weaknesses", you could develop the use of your Te and maybe your Si as well.

Doing so would definitely "change" you as a person because you would become far more logical and balanced but you would remain an INFP.

In order for your type to change you would have to actually re-order your cognitive function order.

So if you were to become say an ENFP, your function order would change to Ne,Fi,Te,Si.

This is what isn't possible without some kind of trauma or life changing experience. (i.e: fighting overseas, childbirth etc)

No matter how much you develop a function, it won't bump up higher on your function order and you can't change your function order through sheer will and behavior alone.

 

[Matchbook]

Yes, it does come down to the cognitive functions, but can we say that it is impossible for one's type to change? That's a difficult thing to verify empirically. I've been INFP all of my life, but through different experiences and choices, my Ni and Fe (INFJ functions) have increased a lot, and according to testing are just barely behind the Fi and Ne functions. What if they were to become more dominant than the Fi and Ne? One could then say, "Well, you may be using Ni and Fe more regularly than Fi and Ne because you have adopted their use over time, but in your core instincts, in moments of pressure, fear, elation, reflection, and other emotions, you will revert back to dominant Fi and Ne. The MBTI system still has some loose ends, and not everything is proven perfectly.

I myself AM very curious about whether it is a possible thing to have one's type change over time. I don't know the answer, but I am going to guess no, because one will maintain their core functions as dominant for life as far as their raw instincts go. Thoughts?

 

[Vaka]

I don't even think that cognitive function tests are accurate. Independent study is best. And MBTI/typology is not based on empirical evidence. It's theoretical.
The different types work in certain ways and their minds view/approach things in certain ways. For instance, I don't think it's possible for me to change to an INTP because having Ne as a dominant function is not just about 'using it more than I do Ti'. Its place in my cognitive function order describes how it effects my outlook on life which is very different than that of an INTP. I don't think it'll ever change either. I don't really know how to explain this better. I'm not very good with words...
Beyond generalized personality traits for types, the cognitive functions and their place in your function order determine how you view things. And you can try to change your type, but that basic part of you may always be there.

 

[Hammerhand]

A question then, I identify far more with the Infp archetype then f.ex Infj/Enjf. Still i do test as those when it comes to cognitive functions (sorry, cannot link yet :crying, am i truly a Infp, to whom i feel a connection of sorts, or am i one of the others, who seem alien to me?

I certaintly haven't had a merry childhood, or prosperous young adulthood, but really, that much?

 

[Oliver]

(because it took me a while to write this, I might just be reiterating what others said. Oh well.)

You might also be at a different stage in your development of your cognitive functions. Depending on the context your spending most of your time in, some functions might have matured quicker (or slower) than others.

I doubted for a long time that I was an INFP, but it comes down to me having very developed Te (Extraverted thinking), which is our weakest function. I am actually perfectly comfortable with it, more so than with Fi which is supposed to be our most preferred role. However, I still prefer Fi since I can tell it is the role that requires the least kind of effort from me.

I do believe that the actual personality is set in stone quite early in childhood, and the later years are mostly for development of functions. But I was unlucky to end up in a world were I had to grow up extremely quickly, and since most people don't seem to have time with romantic daydreaming I had to suppress my most natural role for most of my life. What we demand ourselves that we should do and what we would actually prefer to do are two very different things.

EDIT - I test as an INFJ by the way, and sometimes even ISTJ. However, with a little reading and some help from initiated people, I know that I am an INFP.

 

[Matchbook]

I don't even think that cognitive function tests are accurate. Independent study is best. And MBTI/typology is not based on empirical evidence. It's theoretical.
The different types work in certain ways and their minds view/approach things in certain ways. For instance, I don't think it's possible for me to change to an INTP because having Ne as a dominant function is not just about 'using it more than I do Ti'. Its place in my cognitive function order describes how it effects my outlook on life which is very different than that of an INTP. I don't think it'll ever change either. I don't really know how to explain this better. I'm not very good with words...
Beyond generalize personality traits for types, the cognitive functions and their place in your function order determine how you view things. And you can try to change your type, but that basic part of you may always be there.

Right, well I might as well have worded what I said that it is simply not possible to verify it empirically, which is why I have a hard time understanding how one can be sure either way. And as we both seem to agree that it doesn't matter whether other of the cognitive functions are used more frequently than the dominant and auxiliary, I lean toward the assertion that the primary personality instincts remain the same and reassert their dominance in key situations.

 

[Vaka]

Right, well I might as well have worded what I said that it is simply not possible to verify it empirically, which is why I have a hard time understanding how one can be sure either way.

That's a Te-ish way of looking at it. I'm just pointing that out teehee.

And as we both seem to agree that it doesn't matter whether other of the cognitive functions are used more frequently than the dominant and auxiliary, I lean toward the assertion that the primary personality instincts remain the same and reassert their dominance in key situations.

I don't believe that you can, theoretically, use any of the functions more...just differently. I'm not sure how dom-Fi-ers look at things. But it could manifest itself differently in different situations. And Ne>Si>Te definitely play a part, I think.

 

[Matchbook]

A question then, I identify far more with the Infp archetype then f.ex Infj/Enjf. Still i do test as those when it comes to cognitive functions (sorry, cannot link yet :crying, am i truly a Infp, to whom i feel a connection of sorts, or am i one of the others, who seem alien to me?

I certaintly haven't had a merry childhood, or prosperous young adulthood, but really, that much?

As Lara said, the cognitive function tests are not as reliable as the standard MBTI test. If you identify with the INFP and you identify with Fi as your dominant function, you shouldn't let a cognitive function test confuse you

 

[Gwenspirit]

Let me see if I understand this.

I think what is being said here is that the position of the function is supposed to determine how it interacts with all the others around it...not how strong it is...so numbering 1._2._3._4._ etc. down to 8 in terms of strength is misleading. From what I understand, just #1 is reliably the strongest throughout life.

So getting a very high score on a function down the list probably just means that you have just developed it very well, because if it changed position the whole combination's interactions would change. Is that it?

And if so, when do the experts think permanent MBTI Type comes into being? Present at birth? Developed in childhood? Matured in adulthood?

 

[Matchbook]

That's a Te-ish way of looking at it. I'm just pointing that out teehee.



I don't believe that you can, theoretically, use any of the functions more...just differently. I'm not sure how dom-Fi-ers look at things. But it could manifest itself differently in different situations. And Ne>Si>Te definitely play a part, I think.

Well I can see how it wouldn't make sense for an INFP to use their Ne more than their Fi, because they serve different purposes, and it comes down to which has the ultimate dominance. But what about Ni or Ne? Theoretically, couldn't a person who's Ne is used more frequently as their form of information assimilation over time develop more Ni so that information is more frequently done through Ni? For such to happen it would be like saying, "I used to look at things and see a whole host of possibilities to consider and choose from, but over time I've noticed that instead, I find that the input from a situation tends to narrow down into one strong gut instinct and comprehension." Is that not feasible? For myself, I still use Ne more, but over the past 5 years, my Ni has increased dramatically to where it seems to be used almost as frequently. What if it became more frequent, what would that mean?

 

[Vaka]

I think what is being said here is that the position of the function is supposed to determine how it interacts with all the others around it...not how strong it is...so numbering 1._2._3._4._ in terms of strength is misleading. From what I understand, just #1 is reliably the strongest throughout life.

In the very basic, the cognitive functions will manifest themselves in different types in different ways.
It doesn't make sense to me that Ne would be the same in INFPs as it is in ENFPs. It would be closer to the way INTPs use it, though.
I haven't thought this through completely, but I'm not sure I would say that there's anything incorrect about, for instance, saying you're an INFP who uses Ne a lot. But using that to describe that you're both an INFP and an ENFP or that you changed types or that you otherwise can't definitely determine your type seems like it would be incorrect. Because no matter what you still have one true type.

 

[Vaka]

But what about Ni or Ne? Theoretically, couldn't a person who's Ne is used more frequently as their form of information assimilation over time develop more Ni so that information is more frequently done through Ni? For such to happen it would be like saying, "I used to look at things and see a whole host of possibilities to consider and choose from, but over time I've noticed that instead, I find that the input from a situation tends to narrow down into one strong gut instinct and comprehension." Is that not feasible? For myself, I still use Ne more, but over the past 5 years, my Ni has increased dramatically to where it seems to be used almost as frequently. What if it became more frequent, what would that mean?

It's more likely that it'd be a conscious process in a person's mind than Ni. I don't understand Ni completely, but I don't think that's necessarily indicative of Ni from my basic understanding.