Woah, what if...

[Pionart]

What if the reason y'all seem like INFJs is because:

- INFJ is the archetypal typologist type
- whilst typology draws in all kinds of types, when a person adopts the typologist persona, they are simultaneously adopting an INFJ persona
- so by being typologists, people show the markings of an INFJ without actually being an INFJ

And what if - generalising - a person changes their type depending on their career, or partner, to fit their circumstances the best. And what if there's nothing unhealthy about that. What if that's all type is, a way that the brain adopts a certain formation to adapt to its circumstances. So we don't "have" a type, we chose it (without realising it) to fit into the world.

So that means we can change our type at will, although of course there are circumstances affecting this.

 

[staticundertones]

I was thinking about this today in a lot of ways. I've been delving so much into reading about the cognitive functions in depth that so much of it has started to just blur together. Either people have brains that are wired to 'function' a certain way, even if generating same resulting behaviors, or people use functions based on choices that generate resulting behaviors.

Really I did think, yes, it's a tool for self-improvement. Maybe for some people, improving for them is to emulate these certain functions. Maybe it depends on the person's frame of mind and how it effects them to emulate something else? On the other hand, maybe if they feel so positively about it, those are the functions they are meant to be using. So I can't make up my mind on this idea. It's been popping up in the back of my mind all day, but I usually just ignore these kind of thoughts.

It doesn't seem like there is any clear defining way to state what is true, if it's unhealthy to emulate a type that you admire perhaps? Even subconsciously, I don't know. I guess the system doesn't really define 'self', just the way that a person might process different types of information. Even though we want to cling to a very personal view of the system, it's actually very impersonal, but when you're dealing with people, everything is personified in a way. The way people type themselves, even the most objective people are still basing the typing off of reactions that they're having to reading information that has to do with their inner workings. There is no way to be completely unbiased. I think everything I said was basically pointless, haha.. but I agree with you on some levels in theory!

 

[Pionart]

One thing worth noting about typology is that it actually plays off of a lot of the biases that have been present in society for a long time. Like there are "memes" or whatever that cause people to see themselves in certain ways, for society to be organised in certain ways, and that sort of thing, and typology is a really concise way of referencing a lot of that. So when you look at typology one reason it seems to be so accurate is that it is built on themes that have been built into society as a whole and hence it seems to have some huge backing behind it.

But the problem is that all of that stuff is invalid. It's not the best way to do things, so with typology we have... a perfected way of doing nothing. It comes across as a massive failure in my eyes.

(just a speculation, I'm flailing around in the waters that are "the validity of typology")

 

[I Tonya]

How about no.

 

[Lady Lazarus]

You said I was INFP. Am I not correctly adopting the persona of a Typologist?

 

[Pionart]

How about no.

Very informative.

 

[Non_xsense]

How about that people is more balance than The Mbti theory said and you can reach other types conclusions too But that doesn't mean that you have the same wires than them just a different route ( In almost any internet test i took i get Higher Ni Than Ne ).

Typing using internet is not easy , people can think they are one type 'cause that is how they want to be after so many thinking about themself and they agree to other types way of seeing life.
Again people are lazy ... they want the easy route , being something without working . One easy example is being a pianist Science Says Piano Player's Brain Is More Powerful .

You can find pianists in any type but they share some abilities that people without training simple doesn't have , Funny enough there activities that use almost any way of thinking if you get the awareness about those variables your brain wires can change.

 

[Pionart]

This thread probably seems kinda weird,
The point I am getting at is that we really need
To determine what uses typology has
And whether it should be used at all
Because in the future
It may become very prevalent.

 

[Non_xsense]

Man , we need to understand that mbti is one theory that can explain simples phycological problems , just like newton theories can explain physic in a small cage .
There is no one that can understand how people think... is more like a ladder of people that adquire knowledge to create a theory that every step get closer to the real truth .

Of course Mbti is usefull , can you understand people better ? can you understand your weakess points? can you understand people that think totally different than you?.
Our time is just a ladder in the human race , we are always growing ... the world isn't perfect but it is alot better than it was.

Understanding problems that are beyond us is our grandson and beyond problem. We are just a ladder.

 

[Forever]

If the actual answer was yes, you’re absolutely correct. Would you be satisfied?

 

[Pionart]

If the actual answer was yes, you’re absolutely correct. Would you be satisfied?

The point of this thread is to discuss the changeability of type.

 

[Pionart]

Though I think the thread was a failure from the start so maybe I should make a different thread clearly expressing the point of all this.

Well, aspects of the point.