Psychology As A Tool - Not a Fact
It's come to my attention that this distinction is not made clear in this forum. Instead there is often a clash of unrealistic beliefs about what socionics entails - type being innate, information metabolism as the only (or perhaps most) accurate way of modeling human behavior, the idea that people typically converge to certain types that remain statistically or predictably stable, that typing people is always inherently useful or overall the best method for understanding all situations and circumstances between two people in relationships and improving them, and believing that certain types should be avoided or given more attention because of the type they might have been assigned.
But all of this is not an absolute truth, but only a relative truth to your experience, depending on how devote you are in believing these. Consider the following analogy. Imagine you are a mechanic working on a car or some type of electrical/mechanical/aerospace machine. The frame of this machine can handle any of the technology you have at the given moment and this machine will go through phases of wear and tear and you will have to fix or repair this machine. Sometimes the machine will experience problems that you will have to diagnose and fix using the tools at your disposal. At other times it might be more beneficial to scrap parts of this machine in favor of new parts that will be more capable and allow the machine to function without any of its past mechanical problems and limitations; this allows the machine to throw away what isn't working well and become more capable and adaptable. The mechanic has this most interesting role to play since he has at his disposal an array of different tools to accomplish this and ultimately he must decide when a new design is better than a repair. Now if we consider that frame as the atomic makeup of a human being and the mechanic as the mind's consciousness, socionics becomes a tool for our mechanic, just as all other areas of analytical and empirical psychology.
Why is this important? Because ultimately, it comes down to making a choice. All of those beliefs I outlined as unrealistic (in the sense of absolute truths that exist outside personal experience) can become an effect of a pattern of beliefs predicated by what tools the mechanic uses to aid the machine. For example, a person that has never had to make the decision to scrap parts of themselves and build new psychological boundaries of ability will have a harder time accepting that type might not be innate since they will be more accustomed to repairing. As another example, where one has been accustomed to using particular tools to maintain their machine to great success, they will also be more accustomed to the idea that a particular tool will become a somewhat predictable aspect of their thought process and might even reach the assumption that such a tool is the best aid to use apart from all the rest. Another person might see that many tools are needed depending on the wear and tear done; the harder the wear and tear, the more nuanced work that needs to be done, and tools that might be vastly generally applied will only be semi-useful here.
Philosophy and the Power of Belief
If one were to question all the philosophies that mankind has come up with there will be one theme that is irrefutable that comes with being alive - that we all have a choice. Because without being able to choose, our existence is pointless: "we do not live". Thus one can use the intertype relations to close themselves off to other people or avoid other people and converge on others, to do so means socionics no longer becomes a matter of using a tool; instead one will have formed a belief about how that tool should be used. Now one has to question whether making a choice is any different than a belief because to act is to believe in the outcome - to apply a tool is to belief it can achieve a specific purpose or goal.
When a belief becomes a problem however (and when it becomes unrealistic) is when it can neither be proven wrong or right. Religions are based on such beliefs and the only resolution for conflicting views of such beliefs is to either have one concede their belief in favor of another or fight and the victor sustains their belief as truth. I'm positing all of this now because I've witnessed a lot of the arguments on this forum coming from such irreconcilable beliefs. I would like to propose that people with questions about what beliefs socionics contains remember this and not focus on such beliefs that can not be proven wrong or right. I hope to help keep things in a more reasonable perspective by posting this.