Since preference =/= skill when using functions, is it possible to be terrible in the functions you prefer to use but good in functions you don't really like or prefer using? To the point that your less preferred functions are better than your preferred, then end up looking like a type that you aren't, and not at all like your type (or at the very least, quite different)?
My hypothetical example would be an INTP who loves using Ne (but not as much as Ti). However, things usually go wrong when he/she uses it and it seems to generate undesired results. Or maybe it was other factors such as an education system or culture which did not allow much room for Ne usage. Or he/she isn't skilled enough in Ne to draw enough connections to fully support Ti. He/she starts to fall back on Si which happens to be pretty decent, resulting in Ti/Si loops similar to an INFP's Fi/Si loops. (Unhealthy INTP?) When that happens too often, does that end up making an unhealthy INTP who tests as S more than N?
To take this scenario further, what if the INTP in question is pretty skilled in Te but may not naturally prefer, or even dislike using it (at first)? Wouldn't the person come across as an xSTJ but somehow with rather developed Ti and maybe Fe? Would they end up reading the xSTJ profiles and INTP profile, then go "Hey, all those sound like me, but there are some parts that don't too!"
Also, what happens if he/she uses Se or Ni to replace Ne instead?
There's also the question of adaptation, whether the person can cope with and get used to using functions he/she does not prefer, and end up having them come naturally to them with time. Is that remotely possible?
I have no idea if that example above is possible or BS, but that's the best I could think up for the questions I want to ask.
In the case that it is BS, I'm boiling it down to these couple of questions:
Is there such a thing as someone 'learning' to prefer a function over another since it makes sense that someone can end up liking a function he/she can use well, even though he/she may not have liked it at the start? (Circular logic much? lol) Or vice versa when they start to dislike and downplay on a function that they used to like using (maybe partially because it betrayed them too? ), causing it to degenerate from lack of use? Is this the reason why people go through changes in personality? Is it also a nature vs. nuture thing? And if so, is it possible that there could have been more N type people than S in this world if society supported more N type behaviors? (This is not an argument about Ns being oppressed by Ss irl, I only think that S oriented people seem to survive better and I do not wish to start a debate about this. )
And the questions in the first paragraph.
Also, from some of the posts I read from this thread,
it seems like people are already arguing about people who do not fit in to those 16 arrangements for 8 functions, whether orders in the 8 functions which are different than those stated in MBTI should even exist or make sense. If that's the case, what happens to people do not have the first 4 functions as any of those 16 types? Are they considered unhealthy versions of the 'best fit type'?