Why is there this belief that Ps are open to change and Js are structured?

[Hitta]

I really don't understand why people think this. J and P is function sets. J is T/F P is N/S. Just think about it, that P and Js are like that is to say that mirror types are different.

[aestrivex]

there is no such belief.

[Jonathan]

there is no such belief.

Well, actually, there is such a belief, but it's not phrased exactly as hitta put it. There's an introductory article by Dmitri that relates to the "rational" types to the psychological concept of "lability." Ganin's site has or had definitions posted on it that could also lead one to the same conclusion. Rick's has a page as well defining characteristics of rational and irrational types, although it's a bit more nuanced.

This was a big topic awhile ago, maybe the biggest topic on the forum once, before people got really tired of it. The reality of the situation is that in Socionics, there are a number of different factors that may influence whether some is seen as "flexible" or "rigid," and irrationality/rationality is just one of them.

Of course, hitta's phrasing..."open to change"...may be confusing here, because the big question is, what kind of change are we talking about?

[aestrivex]

as hitta phrased it, there is no such belief. end of story.

[Iconoclast IX]

I really don't understand why people think this. J and P is function sets. J is T/F P is N/S. Just think about it, that P and Js are like that is to say that mirror types are different.

From MBTI characterizations that somehow end up spilling over into the realm of socionics.

[strrrng]

well, it's not as if the temperaments are bullshit. There is some general correlation, but I agree, there are other specific things related to function usage/order, etc. that contribute to someone being structured, etc. however, structured, organized are not good words because they are just behavioral traits, which can be learned. to me, it is about a state of mind, a frame of reference.

hitta, are you going to start proposing various types being more open than others based on your +/- theory?

[Jonathan]

hitta, are you going to start proposing various types being more open than others based on your +/- theory?

He already did. He proposed awhile back a dichotomy equivalent to merry (subjectivist) vs. serious (objectivist). If I understood correctly, he thought the merry/subjectivist quadras (Alpha and Beta) were the ones open to change.

[marooned]

You (Hitta) said in your recent 'why the ILIs here aren't ILIs' topic that liking routines and not liking change was a defining characteristic of what it means to be ILI. I simply said that can't be so, because it doesn't work with an irrational type. That doesn't mean that all people of an irrational type are open to change and avoid structures. For one, I don't think you can define *any* type on it liking routines and not liking change, but to make that a defining quality of an irrational type seems even more absurd than if you were to attach that quality to a rational type (like LII or LSI). The problem is, the things you say, can often be applied to anyone... because it's so general that many meanings can be interpretted from it... it just turns into a lot of meaningless mush in some ways... I don't know.

In general I suppose I do think of irrationality as involving a changeable inner state moreso than rationality... And I could be wrong about this. I mean, to make matters worse, my own understanding is amorphous.

[strrrng]

In general I suppose I do think of irrationality as involving a changeable inner state moreso than rationality... And I could be wrong about this. I mean, to make matters worse, my own understanding is amorphous.

you're not wrong. irrationality is a free-flowing state of mind, so to speak. It is about reaction, not control. rationality is more rigid in the sense that it strives for control and/or rules, to some degree.

rick has a very good, short article on this at his blog.

[Ezra]

The reason is that people are fundamentally influenced by MBTT.

[redbaron]

The reason is that people are fundamentally influenced by MBTT.

That was my first reaction to this question also.

[krieger]

Tempted to conjecture that it might actually work the expected way under dual-type theory; the thing obfuscating matters being that most people live with a combination of judging and perceiving in their psyches...

Would tcaudilllg describe himself as a 'structured' person?

[redbaron]

Tempted to conjecture that it might actually work the expected way under dual-type theory; the thing obfuscating matters being that most people live with a combination of judging and perceiving in their psyches...

Would tcaudilllg describe himself as a 'structured' person?

Or you. Would you describe yourself as structured?