This topic is about dichotomies and whether they come from the type (nature) or from how the person behaves (nurture).
There are plenty of people who act like another type due to environment. This should be most frequent when switching the program with role function. The 4 conscious functions are all strong in their own way due to the natural type. The PoLR is very hard to control, therefore it shouldn't be the kind of function that starts acting like an ego-block function. The role is strong. People should use it in certain situations, but I when the environment calls for it, I think the role could start acting like program function. This will not change the type.
I don't think that unconscious functions (5th to 8th) could easily become conscious. Therefore it shouldn't happen very often that one of those functions starts acting like an ego-block function.
Each row of the A model can be viewed individually and they all consist of a program and a creative. 1 and 3 are programs, 2 and 4 are creatives. For reasons I already discussed, I think that people might switch their program, but the creative will stay the same. This would make people act like their look-a-like.
The dichotomies are different for look-a-likes, but the person will still be able to choose one (e.g. strategist over tactic, static over dynamic, taciturn over narrator, etc). If the person has spent their childhood (when the brain develops) acting like their look-a-like, will s/he choose the ones that are correct for the native type or will s/he choose those of the look-a-like.
In short, are dichotomies concurrent with the natural type or the behavioral type?