Type doesn't change, but Subtype can

[pianosinger]

Agree? Disagree? Somewhat? Discuss. And please vote

When I was a youth, I think I fell more into the D/N (Rational) subtypes; as an adult, I've become more C/H (Irrational). Probably had to do with my ubringing.

The environment I grew up in...My parents were both Gamma Rationals, emphasizing the Fi and Te in my psyche. I didn't have a whole lot of freedom to "explore" as a kid, to just wander around and be carefree. Well, I did all that still, but within limits, and I always had responsibilities, which I was expected to do on certain days at certain times.

Now as an adult, I am free to run my life the way I want it. Chores are never regulated, and can always be put off or rearranged to fit my mood. My house is mine. I can make a mess working on a particular project, and leave it out without fear of someone yelling at me to clean it up (though I do have to be careful about what I leave out around my toddler).

Even my clothing has changed. I used to have a much more subtle and modest wardrobe; I wore mostly prints that looked like my mom picked them out (oh wait, she did, kind of). When I started expressing my own style more, I found myself choosing brighter, more noticeable attire. Though, I still like to keep it practical.

After much deliberation, I think I am finally convinced that I am C-subtype. But I never would have thought of myself as such ten years ago.

[Jenna]

hmm.. maybe you were c subtype all along but because of your parents you repressed it a bit?

[Crispy]

No, if we bother to define subtypes at all they are permanent. Other wise they wouldn't "exist".
Socionics strictly deals with aspects of the personality that stay constant throughout life.

[Begoner]

I believe that both type and subtype can change, although the former is more stable than the latter. After all, personality is far too fluid and malleable a concept to submit itself to strict confines. If you are put in an environment that rewards and encourages the use of a particular function, you will become more adept at using that function and will consequently regard it as more valuable. Most tests of psychological variation over time reveal that the younger an individual is, the more volatile his personality; as he ages, however, he becomes more set in his ways. However (if I remember correctly), since correlations of people's personalities over time rarely exceed 0.85, change is possible at all ages. Insofar as subtypes are concerned, this represents merely a small shift and can easily occur; insofar as types are concerned, this represents a more fundamental change, and it is not easy to effect.

[tcaudilllg]

The subconscious has a different subtype than the dominant... very possibly, each of the four archetypes (self, shadow, anima, and synnex) has a different subtype.

A little bit of deliberation... it's not too difficult to figure out where they stand.

[tcaudilllg]

I believe that both type and subtype can change, although the former is more stable than the latter. After all, personality is far too fluid and malleable a concept to submit itself to strict confines. If you are put in an environment that rewards and encourages the use of a particular function, you will become more adept at using that function and will consequently regard it as more valuable. Most tests of psychological variation over time reveal that the younger an individual is, the more volatile his personality; as he ages, however, he becomes more set in his ways. However (if I remember correctly), since correlations of people's personalities over time rarely exceed 0.85, change is possible at all ages. Insofar as subtypes are concerned, this represents merely a small shift and can easily occur; insofar as types are concerned, this represents a more fundamental change, and it is not easy to effect.

Uh think about this a little harder...

[Begoner]

Uh think about this a little harder...

After giving the matter some more thought, I have concluded that the Gospel of Apostle Augustinavičiūtė is completely correct. You have saved me from my errant ways of employing common sense and heeding empirical evidence, and I repent for these egregious sins. Hallelujah, praise Jung!

[Crispy]

You have empirical evidence of people altering the structure of their brain without them opening up the skull?

[Galen]

Haven't we had this thread before a bajillion times?

[pianosinger]

Haven't we had this thread before a bajillion times?

Yeah, probably. Where was I?

[pianosinger]

Most tests of psychological variation over time reveal that the younger an individual is, the more volatile his personality; as he ages, however, he becomes more set in his ways.

Perhaps. But I've also observed that younger people are often easier to type, having not yet had time to develop and "strengthen" their weaker valued functions. As people age, they actually become harder to type, IMO, not easier.

The one exception being, perhaps, the teenage years. We're all so confused and confusing at that age. I have a hard time typing any of my high school friends for just this reason.

[Begoner]

You have empirical evidence of people altering the structure of their brain without them opening up the skull?

No, the empirical evidence consisted of many people's self-reported psychological characteristics changing over time. Moreover, I doubt such psychological changes would necessitate a more substantial change in physical brain structure than other changes in preference would (such as starting to prefer corn flakes over Lucky Charms as you age, say).

[Begoner]

Perhaps. But I've also observed that younger people are often easier to type, having not yet had time to develop and "strengthen" their weaker valued functions. As people age, they actually become harder to type, IMO, not easier.

The one exception being, perhaps, the teenage years. We're all so confused and confusing at that age. I have a hard time typing any of my high school friends for just this reason.

Well, the two statements are not necessarily contradictory. I do think you're right in that older people tend to "mellow out", eschewing the extremes of personality and converging towards the average. However, this process need not be linear: the average 40-year-old might be 20% more mellow than the average 30-year-old while the average 50-year-old might only be 10% more mellow than the average 40-year-old. In other words, because there is more variability among younger people, there is more scope for change as they age; but once they get older, they begin to seem more alike, and the scope for change begins to diminish. The reason that younger people are easier to type is because many of them lie closer to the extremes, but that doesn't mean that they aren't capable of changing their attitudes substantially.

Of course, this is just one theory that can explain how your observation can accord with the empirical evidence I cited. It isn't necessarily true, but it at least shows that the two can be simultaneously accurate.

[tcaudilllg]

Nah they become easier. Older people use their suggestive functions more, and very narcissisticly at that.

[woofwoofl]

I believe that both type and subtype can change, although the former is more stable than the latter. After all, personality is far too fluid and malleable a concept to submit itself to strict confines. If you are put in an environment that rewards and encourages the use of a particular function, you will become more adept at using that function and will consequently regard it as more valuable. Most tests of psychological variation over time reveal that the younger an individual is, the more volatile his personality; as he ages, however, he becomes more set in his ways. However (if I remember correctly), since correlations of people's personalities over time rarely exceed 0.85, change is possible at all ages. Insofar as subtypes are concerned, this represents merely a small shift and can easily occur; insofar as types are concerned, this represents a more fundamental change, and it is not easy to effect.

After giving the matter some more thought, I have concluded that the Gospel of Apostle Augustinavičiūtė is completely correct. You have saved me from my errant ways of employing common sense and heeding empirical evidence, and I repent for these egregious sins. Hallelujah, praise Jung!

No, the empirical evidence consisted of many people's self-reported psychological characteristics changing over time. Moreover, I doubt such psychological changes would necessitate a more substantial change in physical brain structure than other changes in preference would (such as starting to prefer corn flakes over Lucky Charms as you age, say).

thumbs up to the sky on all of the above

The most difficult thing for me to envision is a human being staying precisely the same as time moves forward; as they learn about, adapt to, and change the environment they're in, as their environment does to them as well... the closest thing to a stable and static person is a dead one, and even they have a way of decomposing eventually...

[FDG]

If subtype can change, there is no reason why type shouldn't change, too - along the temperament continuum ofc.

[Absurd]

It doesn't change.

[Jarno]

subtype doesn't change.

argument 1: the two subtype system is easely recognizable. accepting subtypes talk for themselves and let others listen along, producing subtypes are more focussed on convincing others when they talk. If subtype changes, this whole basic behaviour would need to change too. Never seen it happen.

argument 2: sometimes you can see that subtypes have different VI. Since there are probably more than two subtypes it's a bit hard to understand, but after a while you'll notice it. If subtype changes than their faces would have to change too.

[silke]

I don't know about DCNH subtypes, but the accepting/producing subtypes seem to get set at very early age. If I remember myself and my cousins back when we were kids, the main types and acc/prod subtypes were already evident at 5-7 years of age and have not changed since then.

The main type seems to get more differentiated as the person matures. Around early teens creative function establishes itself. The period of life between 10-to-25 years of age is thus influenced by the person seeking fulfillment of creative function. Early-to-mid 20s the mobilizing elements lets itself be known. The person starts giving more attention to fulfilling their hidden agenda. Some of your attitudes and interests may change as a result, but the core type doesn't really change.

[Jarno]

I don't know about DCNH subtypes, but the accepting/producing subtypes seem to get set at very early age. If I remember myself and my cousins back when we were kids, the main types and acc/prod subtypes were already evident at 5-7 years of age and have not changed since then.

The main type seems to get more differentiated as the person matures. Around early teens creative function establishes itself. The period of life between 10-to-25 years of age is thus influenced by the person seeking fulfillment of creative function. Early-to-mid 20s the mobilizing elements lets itself be known. The person starts giving more attention to fulfilling their hidden agenda. Some of your attitudes and interests may change as a result, but the core type doesn't really change.

yesterday I saw a program on t.v. with an interview of a brain researcher / neurologists. He said in the first 9 months when you're still inside your mother, the general function of the brain and personality is being decided/created. It's way more complete than we used to think.

[FDG]

Well I personally can see in myself a certain swing between typical behaviors of EJ-Ni and EJ-Te, mostly depending on the amount of work I force myself into and/or life necessities.

Around early teens creative function establishes itself.

No way. I'd say at 4 the creative function is very clearly differentiated. Hidden Agenda - around 12-13. Past adolescence, people are socionically complete.

[Creepy-]

Type doesn't change?! Who the hell said type doesn't change? First of all, I know from experience that type sure as hell can change. It's not something that happens overnight, and it certainly isn't something that happens in any ordinary life, but it sure as hell does happen, morons. Let me be clear though, before I bash your asses out my theoretical window and into a vat of boiling horse shit: type change is something that happens when either, A - serious shit goes down in your life, or B - you try so fucking hard to change that God rolls his eyes and says, "alright I'll change your type you little dick, just shut the fuck up already or I'll make you an NiFe. And you know you don't want to be an NiFe. Unless you live in Jerusalem, you'd be poor your whole damn life, you hear me? Of course you could decide to be a prostitute but you know where you're going if you do."

[bionic]

Type doesn't change?! Who the hell said type doesn't change? First of all, I know from experience that type sure as hell can change. It's not something that happens overnight, and it certainly isn't something that happens in any ordinary life, but it sure as hell does happen, morons. Let me be clear though, before I bash your asses out my theoretical window and into a vat of boiling horse shit: type change is something that happens when either, A - serious shit goes down in your life, or B - you try so fucking hard to change that God rolls his eyes and says, "alright I'll change your type you little dick, just shut the fuck up already or I'll make you an NiFe. And you know you don't want to be an NiFe. Unless you live in Jerusalem, you'd be poor your whole damn life, you hear me? Of course you could decide to be a prostitute but you know where you're going if you do."

TYPE CHANGES EVRRRRYYYDAY....

Well it certainly seems to for people on here.

[mimisor]

Type or subtype or whatnot doesn't change per se, what changes is our ways, whatever ways we find to adapt to the environment and make it easier for us or feel better about ourselves, isn't it?