This is a thread for the discussion of cognitive mechanics between Point and chemical, please do not flame or insert a unrelated tangent into this thread. Please pose questions in a clear manner, some questions may be moved or removed from this thread and address in this opening post due to some reference knowledge necessity. Any reference knowledge or necessary knowledge will be linked in this thread along with the question which prompted it.
 


Quote Originally Posted by chemical View Post
Exactly; my view is that it's possible that this assumption is a product of the need for maintaining a study of a system of typology at all. After all, you can't describe the infinitely many ways development can happen, but you can try to describe and build on the likely foundations/innateness behind that development. Jung's type diagnosis was subjective enough and allowing enough for changes of type pattern that he probably never was motivated to write down a full on static classification system (nor was that his kind of thing).

Unfortunately I think it's hardly reality that there's a clear, obvious reason why someone's IE remain solely explainable from the standpoint of one block or function. You can argue it and argue it and spin it so it works, but I happen to think with development comes not just more nuance and more experience, but also a potential opening up of the person to employ functions from the mindset of a different block, i.e. develop new fundamental patterns resembling other TIM. It's possible some of this is speculated about in the Gulenko multiple types theory, which never seems to have been resolved entirely (?!). As the persona type represents the individual's concrete adaptations to reality's conditions, and as in the original Jungian standpoint, the ego would likely identify at least in part with a healthy persona, with the difference not being between persona=mask and ego=real but rather ego=conscious sense of self vs Self=full sense of self, including the iceberg beneath the ego, it's actually quite likely one develops pretty clear, well-defined type patterns over time.
I think Gulenko's multiple types theory is ok, but what's happens is a terminological mess which can confuse people.

As far as why someone's IE remain solely predictable from just one block, it's quite simple. Think of human cognition as a very complex wave, where as if you know one point of the wave you can predict another point. If you think of it that way, you can see personality as a very complex signal which we express thru time.

The various blocks are just different points on the wave. This is the same reason we can predict the helical form of DNA and various other natural phenomena. I'm not a physicist or a mathematician, I simply assume that the mind behaves the same way as the rest of the universe. I leave the details of this to scientists, but I assume truth here since I have no choice but to.