Why do most people believe you can't change your type?

[Zeego]

The general consensus in the Jungian typing community is that a person is born as one type, and this type never changes. However, this contradicts Jung himself, who believed that a person's type can change over the course of their lifetime. V.W. Odajnyk also believed this and talked about it in his book Archetype and Character. The idea that a person's type is "set in stone" seems to have originated with Myers and Briggs. What I'm wondering is, why has this become the default belief in the Jungian community? Most of the people online who say you can't change your type seem to be blindly parroting it without considering why they think it's true in the first place. There's no empirical evidence that proves a person's cognitive functions can't change over time (in fact, Dario Nardi's research arguably proves that they do). Any theories on why this belief has become so widespread?

 

[Norrsken]

It isn't so much about someone's type changing as much as other areas of their lives changing that may have made some dramatic changes in their overall behavior. Someone who used to be so outgoing but is now depressed, may think they are an introvert because they have zero interest in maintaining personal relationships, for example. Some other reasons for mistypings may be due to a person's:

1. Age.
2. Life experiences, both negative and positive.
3. Overall maturity.
4. Psychological health.
5. Environment.
6. Home cultures and societal expectations.

 

[ZNP-TBA]

The general consensus in the Jungian typing community is that a person is born as one type, and this type never changes. However, this contradicts Jung himself, who believed that a person's type can change over the course of their lifetime. V.W. Odajnyk also believed this and talked about it in his book Archetype and Character. The idea that a person's type is "set in stone" seems to have originated with Myers and Briggs. What I'm wondering is, why has this become the default belief in the Jungian community? Most of the people online who say you can't change your type seem to be blindly parroting it without considering why they think it's true in the first place. There's no empirical evidence that proves a person's cognitive functions can't change over time (in fact, Dario Nardi's research arguably proves that they do). Any theories on why this belief has become so widespread?

A lot people have personalized their 'type' and have incorporated that into their identity almost with a religious zeal. Thus, changing would be analogous to converting a life long believer in something to something else.

 

[Madisonclark]

If you look at it terms of the cognitive functions, you change based on how your functions are developing. For example, growing up I identified as an INTJ because my introverted thinking was my most strongly developed function. Then as I matured, my Ne developed over that Ti. It makes sense that you could change as you experience different situations in life and are forced to develop different cognitive functions based on what you face. So I would say that this widespread belief is a result of an incorrect understanding of how cognitive functions work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Madisonclark]

growing up I identified as an INTJ

Correction: INTP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Merced]

I don't think you are born as a type, but that you grow up using all functions and you grow a preference for an order. To type a child would be highly inaccurate and unfair because they aren't developed enough to have a valid, definable personality. I'll use myself as an example:

As a child, I had an identifiable preference for Extroverted Intuition. As I grew up, the direction I took my preference for Ne went towards Fi instead of Ti. The blocks fall into place after that and ta-da! An ENFP is born into society.

It's really hard to think that someone would grow up living and thinking and functioning one way for the first decades of their life and then suddenly changing. But I guess it's possible. I think it would be more plausible to be able to change your enneagram.

 

[Verona]

I think brains are pretty amazing and flexible so I'm not always convinced of a strict cognitive development schedule as the types can sometimes be presented to be following.

I do think that as you are developing various functions in your stack you can come across as other types. I also think that trauma can have a dramatic influence on the brain and your cognitive development. I think an unhealthy functions in your stack can make you come across completely different than the stereotype of your type. Unhealthy functions can also present in many different ways.

There isn't a lot of research on type in children so I think it is possible they experiment with many of the functions and may not be any type then. I think your type solidifies closer to your late teens so it can be hard to make any predictions before that. I know that is tough because a lot of teens are very interested in MBTI typology but they may need another 5 or 10 years to really settle into a functional pattern. I would be interested in some research on seniors and how their types have developed and manifested for them throughout their lives.

 

[Coriolis]

The general consensus in the Jungian typing community is that a person is born as one type, and this type never changes. However, this contradicts Jung himself, who believed that a person's type can change over the course of their lifetime. V.W. Odajnyk also believed this and talked about it in his book Archetype and Character. The idea that a person's type is "set in stone" seems to have originated with Myers and Briggs. What I'm wondering is, why has this become the default belief in the Jungian community? Most of the people online who say you can't change your type seem to be blindly parroting it without considering why they think it's true in the first place. There's no empirical evidence that proves a person's cognitive functions can't change over time (in fact, Dario Nardi's research arguably proves that they do). Any theories on why this belief has become so widespread?

I cannot speak of others' opinions, or the Jungian community as a whole. I accept the idea that type is innate and unchanging based on what has been learned about the way our brains work. Evidence to date indicates that introversion and extraversion are "hard wired", as are certain traits associated with the "conscientiousness" factor in Big Five. These form only part of the picture of an MBTI type, so the jury is still out on a complete determination, but that is my working hypothesis for now.

The only individual I know who claims to have had a substantive change in type is a friend who suffered traumatic brain injury.

I don't think you are born as a type, but that you grow up using all functions and you grow a preference for an order. To type a child would be highly inaccurate and unfair because they aren't developed enough to have a valid, definable personality. I'll use myself as an example:

I have heard from many parents that they were able to type their children correctly when still very young - some even too young to talk. You are right, though, about having and using all the functions. Our type specifies our relative preferences for the various functions, not which ones we have to the exclusion of the others. Children raised in an environment that forces them to use less-preferred functions will indeed become more proficient with those functions and can look like a different type. It can be very freeing for such people when they move to an environment where those constraints are removed and they can give rein to their real preferences.

 

[Virtual ghost]

It isn't so much about someone's type changing as much as other areas of their lives changing that may have made some dramatic changes in their overall behavior. Someone who used to be so outgoing but is now depressed, may think they are an introvert because they have zero interest in maintaining personal relationships, for example. Some other reasons for mistypings may be due to a person's:

1. Age.
2. Life experiences, both negative and positive.
3. Overall maturity.
4. Psychological health.
5. Environment.
6. Home cultures and societal expectations.

Yes, but if those changes make enough change in life of a person to act like some similar types for decades then this is indeed type change. It has to be radical change but if environemnt is unstatic enough there can be changes.

 

[Norrsken]

To be honest, I don't think young people should be too concerned about finding their type until they've hit at least 25 or over, since that is when their frontal lobe closes and they are psychologically more developed as the years go by. This is just my opinion, of course.

 

[Jaguar]

The idea that a person's type is "set in stone" seems to have originated with Myers and Briggs.

How else do you expect them to make money?

 

[Forever]

The general consensus in the Jungian typing community is that a person is born as one type, and this type never changes. However, this contradicts Jung himself, who believed that a person's type can change over the course of their lifetime. V.W. Odajnyk also believed this and talked about it in his book Archetype and Character. The idea that a person's type is "set in stone" seems to have originated with Myers and Briggs. What I'm wondering is, why has this become the default belief in the Jungian community? Most of the people online who say you can't change your type seem to be blindly parroting it without considering why they think it's true in the first place. There's no empirical evidence that proves a person's cognitive functions can't change over time (in fact, Dario Nardi's research arguably proves that they do). Any theories on why this belief has become so widespread?

I think you may are misquoting Jung getting the wrong intention. In his book psychological types that he is actually saying people can grow but their functions and whether they are at base an introvert/extrovert are still the same. If you can find an exact quote let me know.

 

[Virtual ghost]

What about radical changes of political system in your country ?

(not everyone here is stereotypical 1th worlder)

 

[Nico_D]

I personally don't believe people change. They can learn new habits and behavior to hide sides of themselves but those are just superficial. Person beneath stays the same.

 

[Smilephantomhive]

Here's one person's explanation for why type can't change Exploring MBTI & The INTP Mind - eilamona — Why can’t your MBTI type change: a scientific...

 

[LovecraftianMonstrosity]

Because they can't?

 

[Blackout]

Well I think generally the whole point is to gain self awareness and honesty in understanding and perceiving your true self.


Supposedly, you can learn coping strategies or learn to compensate for a weakness but it will never be as comfortable as being or doing what comes naturally to you. Once you are more aware of your natural temperament and self it is a bit easier to find fulfillment and gratification because you will be able to make or find more authentic life options or goals, instead of trying to work against who you are and perhaps maybe more sincere desires.

 

[wolfnara]

I also believe that cognition doesn't change in people overtime. Based on research there has been claims that the weaker functions begin to develop overtime, but I can't confirm the truth of that of course. Whether or not we are born with a cognitive function that naturally takes the dominant place in the pscyhe is a philosophical nature vs nurture argument, therefore it can't be deemed as a fact without uncertainty. I believe personality develops during the childhood upbringing, based on what values our parents and other authoritative figures impose on us, as well as our general lifestyle and activities.

 

[Zeego]

I think you may are misquoting Jung getting the wrong intention. In his book psychological types that he is actually saying people can grow but their functions and whether they are at base an introvert/extrovert are still the same. If you can find an exact quote let me know.

Jung identified Nietzsche as both INTJ and I-TP | CelebrityTypes

 

[Blackout]

When I was really young and not all together very worldly or had really attempted to overcome and compensate for any of my perceived weaknesses, I surely would always test as an INFP; but as I have changed and worked on self improvement I have found that when I take tests I sometimes get ENFJ and sometimes even really close to getting INTJ---because my Judging function has become so much more developed and my T has become a lot stronger and I become close to the middle all of the time. But yet, I cannot really fathom being an ENFJ, or even all together an extrovert.



I almost wonder if the MBTI just doesn't fit certain people all together very well.

Oh, but recently I took a "strongest function" test for fun and I got like 99% Fi-dom, so that is obviously really apparently and (and gratingly) flippantly strong, lol.

I almost feel like I've broken through the test her or something, lol.