Human Personality Is Not Static

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

My main issue with socionics is that it seems to view people as statical. I believe I'm not the person I was 5 years ago and I believe this applies to more people than not. A person does not end their growth when their reach adulthood, we grow, learn and develop until death. Our experiences shape us equally in childhood and adulthood. Perhaps a child's mind is more innocent and open, prone to suck the new information in like a sponge, and adult's mind is a little harder to change since we evaluate information with more past data, but we still do change. Even a weakness can become your strength if you work really hard on it. So that's why I wonder, what is the value of static personality theory?

[Tallmo]

My main issue with socionics is that it seems to view people as statical. I believe I'm not the person I was 5 years ago and I believe this applies to more people than not. A person does not end their growth when their reach adulthood, we grow, learn and develop until death. Our experiences shape us equally in childhood and adulthood. Perhaps a child's mind is more innocent and open, prone to suck the new information in like a sponge, and adult's mind is a little harder to change since we evaluate information with more past data, but we still do change. Even a weakness can become your strength if you work really hard on it. So that's why I wonder, what is the value of static personality theory?

Socionics doesn't say that people are static. Where did you get that from?? But the type is pretty static. The type is not the whole personality, hasn't this been discussed before a million times?

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

Socionics doesn't say that people are static. Where did you get that from?? But the type is pretty static. The type is not the whole personality, hasn't this been discussed before a million times?

The type pretty much captures the whole personality. I have met people who seemed deepy logical at one point of their life but after reaching some level of maturity and emotional security they actually became much aware of theirs and other people's emotion. How do you, with socionics, explain that a person can seem Fi PoLR at one point of their life and strongly aware of their Fi at another?

[Tarnished]

I'm not sure if a person can be good at their polr, but I'm pretty sure you can use your strong function to simulate it.

Fe polr - As I can use the all the power of my 4D Ni Ti to learn and understand all about social interactions and manage to be somehow good at it - Yes, maybe I can - But one thing that would never changes: I hate it, hate it so much, and I lost my energy quickly whenever I try to use it.

You could become good at something if you try hard enough, but the real question is: would you? Doing something you hate over and over again?

[huiheiwufhawriuhg]

I'm not sure if a person can be good at their polr, but I'm pretty sure you can use your strong function to simulate it.

Fe polr - As I can use the all the power of my 4D Ni Ti to learn and understand all about social interactions and manage to be somehow good at it - Yes, maybe I can - But one thing that would never changes: I hate it, hate it so much, and I lost my energy quickly whenever I try to use it.

You could become good at something if you try hard enough, but the real question is: would you? Doing something you hate over and over again?

That is not my point, for example, I know a guy who was crazy in his early 20's. He used to hook up with a different girl every day, rid a motorcycle, plaid in a band, couldn't keep a job, because traditional work was too boring for him. Now, in his early 30's, he's nothing like that person anymore. He's got two kids, a stable office job, hates motorcycles, because he became an environmental activist and the only thing that resambles his old self is the fact that he listetns to heavy metal once a week.

Another example, I know a girl who was extremelly introverted as a teen, she would blush and lose her voice everytime she had to speak in front of more than 2-3 people. She's in her late 20's now, lost tons of weight, got some therapy and now she's a team leader at an international company who leads a team of about 40 people and gives speaches at least once a week while enjoying that.

Another example... A guy who used to listen to black metal when he was in his late teens/early 20's, a satanist who made fun and ridiciuled every positive emotional expression that ever crossed his way. Now in his late 20's turned to church and works for a non profit organization helping the homeless...

How do you explain this with socionics?

[persimmonism]

That is not my point, for example, I know a guy who was crazy in his early 20's. He used to hook up with a different girl every day, rid a motorcycle, plaid in a band, couldn't keep a job, because traditional work was too boring for him. Now, in his early 30's, he's nothing like that person anymore. He's got two kids, a stable office job, hates motorcycles, because he became an environmental activist and the only thing that resambles his old self is the fact that he listetns to heavy metal once a week.

Another example, I know a girl who was extremelly introverted as a teen, she would blush and lose her voice everytime she had to speak in front of more than 2-3 people. She's in her late 20's now, lost tons of weight, got some therapy and now she's a team leader at an international company who leads a team of about 40 people and gives speaches at least once a week while enjoying that.

Another example... A guy who used to listen to black metal when he was in his late teens/early 20's, a satanist who made fun and ridiciuled every positive emotional expression that ever crossed his way. Now in his late 20's turned to church and works for a non profit organization helping the homeless...

How do you explain this with socionics?

It's called "information elements"
not "personality elements" or "maturity elements" or "morality elements" ...

[Tallmo]

The type pretty much captures the whole personality.

No, it doesn't. Far from it. The type only captures certain central cognitive processes that have been identified to be typical. People of the same type can be very different as individuals. This is obvious to anybody who knows what a type is.

I have met people who seemed deepy logical at one point of their life but after reaching some level of maturity and emotional security they actually became much aware of theirs and other people's emotion. How do you, with socionics, explain that a person can seem Fi PoLR at one point of their life and strongly aware of their Fi at another?

People can learn to cope with things and subtype also matters. This is nothing new.

[EUDAEMONIUM]

I don't want to say that socionics is useless, because I don't believe that is true. But we need to be aware of its limits. The fact of the matter is that socionics has a rather flat view of personality and the things Fay is bringing up point to that.

According to the theory, a mature Fi PoLR will still be Fi PoLR, this is indeed a static view of a person. So there's no point in pretending not to know what Fay is saying when she brings this up.

I think the best explanation I can come up with for people changing is that a person's ability to engage with the information element may become easier but it doesn't necessarily mean that it will affect the placement or the dimensionality of the element itself in socionics.

A Fi polr could learn to deal with people and become quite sensitive but I don't think he will grow to become an EII for example, I think he would just have a more developed PoLR.

[roger557]

My theory here explains those things: New personality theory based on genders that I invented (the16types.info)

Also, in socionics, you might develop a particular function and become more proficient at it over time. And don't forget we have enneagram and integration/disintegration lines and health levels (socionics also shows behavior patterns when unhealthy).

[Dreymagine]

@roger557 Out of curiosity, do you have any socionics sources that you could share which discuss behavioral patterns when unhealthy? Pretty new to the system and haven't come across anything regarding that topic yet.

[persimmonism]

I don't want to say that socionics is useless, because I don't believe that is true. But we need to be aware of its limits. The fact of the matter is that socionics has a rather flat view of personality and the things Fay is bringing up point to that.

According to the theory, a mature Fi PoLR will still be Fi PoLR, this is indeed a static view of a person. So there's no point in pretending not to know what Fay is saying when she brings this up.

I think the best explanation I can come up with for people changing is that a person's ability to engage with the information element may become easier but it doesn't necessarily mean that it will affect the placement or the dimensionality of the element itself in socionics.

A Fi polr could learn to deal with people and become quite sensitive but I don't think he will grow to become an EII for example, I think he would just have a more developed PoLR.

Personality is made up of partially static and partially dynamic elements (somewhat analogous to nature vs nurture/environment). Socionics addresses the static elements of a personality.
Deep down two people can function very similarly, but this can be expressed in very different ways. Like how we share the same DNA, but gene expression may differ wildly (epigenetics)
I think what some of us believe is that Fay is misattributing NTR elements to be type-related elements. So yeah, as you said, it's important to be aware of the line separating Socionics territory with.. the Great Unknown :0


(haha jk, the seasoned socionist must have some grasp of NTR personality and social dynamics in order to be well-versed in Socionics (it's like how the reason why we're no good at the hidden agenda is because we disregard the other side of the coin which is the PoLR))

[RBRS]

I'm going to C&P and if anyone is unable to get what I'm referring to he or she will have to deal with it, I don't want to do a step-by-step guide for essential concepts I think are easy to understand.

Let's define the main adjetives we have to use to create an information element;

[E]xternal/Explicit = Extrinsic, Exogenous, Explicit, Ostension, Denotation, Export, Tangible, Apparent, Empirical, Direct, Salient, Overt, Literal, Manifest, Patent, Evident, Exterior
[I]nterna/Implicit = Intrinsic, Endogenous, Implicit, Intension, Signification, Import, Intangible, Inherent, Inferential, Indirect, Latent, Covert, Suggestive, Dormant, Suspect, Ulterior, Interior, Potential, Underlying, Subtextual

[O]bject = Objective, Variant, Distinct, Discrete, Linear, Reductionistic, Particulate, Quantitative, Elemental, Content
[F]ield = Subjective, Covariant, Inseparable, Continuous, Nonlinear, Holistic, Fluid, Qualitative, Relational, Context

[S]tatic = Spatial, Scalar, Magnitude, Extent, Degree, Constant
[D]ynamic = Temporal, Vector, Flux, Duration, Span, Variable

Now let's define the IMs;

[EOS] External Object Statics (Se ) = Phenonema (Experiential, Scalar, Absolute, Emphasis, Contrast, Threshold, Values, Texture, Magnitude, Divergence, Span, Extent, Ambit, Scope)

[EOD] External Object Dynamics (Te ) = Evolution (Variance, Variation, Propensity, Vergence, Refluence, Occurrence, Operance, Procession, Modulation, Reactance, Incumbence, Incurrence, Incidence, Transcaction, Translation, Consequence, Etiology, Determinance)

[EFS] External Field Statics (Ti ) = Colligation (Coherence, Predication, Postulation, Contingence, Cogency, Abduction, Casuistical, Accordance, Consistency, Conditions, Parameterization, Correspondence, Commensurability, Cohesion, Mapping, Axiomatization, Dependence, Adherence)

[EFD] External Field Dynamics (Si ) = Homeostasis

[IOS] Internal Object Statics (Ne ) = Modularization (Perspectival, Polygonization, Schematization, Parameterization, Transposition, Component, Partitions, Contours, Lineaments, Delimitants, Iteration, Recursion, Permutation, Conformation, Isomorphism, Semblance, Equivalence, Differentia, Instantia, Indices, Atomistic)

[IOD] Internal Object Dynamics (Fe ) = Induction (Involution)

[IFS] Internal Field Statics (Fi ) = Resonance (Essence, Valence, Synthesis, Consilience, Complexity, Negative Space, Potentiality)

[IFD] Internal Field Dynamics (Ni ) = Essentiation (Consilience, Emergence, Apperception, Integration, Gestalt, Cynosure, Focal Point, Nucleus, Coalescence, Distillation, Subtilization)

All of these are combined in different levels of strenght and value within model A for every sociotype, and although it wouldn't be a crazy thought to correlate proper personality traits with these, the correlations we could derive from it would not be trustable enough and would probably lead to error.

I'm gonna exemplify it with one of the things listed in this thread, the case of a cold person that turns emotional with time.
Could it be the case that this person understands the emotional world better albeit his primary information filter centers around Schematization, Parameterization, Transposition, Component, Partitions, Contours, Lineaments, Delimitants, Iteration...? What if this person didn't understand emotions despite of the fact that his primary information filter was centered around Essence, Valence, Synthesis, Consilience, Complexity...?
I cannot find a direct correlation between cognition and personality proper really.

For me it seems like proper personality and information metabolism should not be interrelated, first for factual reasons (there's no way of proving one correlation or the opposite) second for practical reasons (personality is changeable and the perception we have of it is usually flawed) and third because it limits the proper application of socionics ("Social positive qualificatives" paired with stereotypes, fictional archetypes... getting in the way of properly learning about what is a certain sociotype, it's ITRs...).

[Tarnished]

That is not my point, for example, I know a guy who was crazy in his early 20's. He used to hook up with a different girl every day, rid a motorcycle, plaid in a band, couldn't keep a job, because traditional work was too boring for him. Now, in his early 30's, he's nothing like that person anymore. He's got two kids, a stable office job, hates motorcycles, because he became an environmental activist and the only thing that resambles his old self is the fact that he listetns to heavy metal once a week.

Another example, I know a girl who was extremelly introverted as a teen, she would blush and lose her voice everytime she had to speak in front of more than 2-3 people. She's in her late 20's now, lost tons of weight, got some therapy and now she's a team leader at an international company who leads a team of about 40 people and gives speaches at least once a week while enjoying that.

Another example... A guy who used to listen to black metal when he was in his late teens/early 20's, a satanist who made fun and ridiciuled every positive emotional expression that ever crossed his way. Now in his late 20's turned to church and works for a non profit organization helping the homeless...

How do you explain this with socionics?

Functions are not only things that decide a person's behaviour. People can do the same thing and it look similar from the outside, but their motives could be different. And in your exambles, those people are just... grow up, There's no evidence that they act again their function.

Don't mistake Functions with their stereotype, for exp: Fi polr are fucking immoral ruthless psychopath...

I know an ILE, his Fi polr is like this: He's very naive about how differen people can't get along well with each other. With his Fe, he just think that everyone can easily get along, despite having different opinions when they debating somethings. He underestimate that the differences between people can make their relationship become harsh and dislike each other.

Does he's has good relationship? Yes he does (with the right person). He's a likable guy, despite his personal issues.

May be when he get more information, he'll get better understanding about that. But in the end, it's not his focus, he's just a guy who want everyone get along with each other in a fucking Alpha enviroment.

The amount of information an person have increases overtime, so of course the behaviour and mindset changes overtime. But there's something that not likely change: their DNA, and socionics is more close to that (I don't say socionics is at the same level, just an example). Just like a computer, you could download and setup manything as posible, but in the end, the hardware is still the same, and it can't do anything beyound it's limit. (Even the operating system doesn't change much, it just get small updates, unless you reinstall everything from scratch)

[roger557]

@roger557 Out of curiosity, do you have any socionics sources that you could share which discuss behavioral patterns when unhealthy? Pretty new to the system and haven't come across anything regarding that topic yet.

It's something I know. I can tell you; accepting subtype when unhealthy tends to become obsessed with their PoLR, they might appear similar to conflictor (sort of a negative conflictor). Producing subtype becomes obsessed with their HA, sort of they dont use anything else.

[AWellArmedCat]

@RBRS Thanks for sharing the foundations and basic structure of IMs. I'd never seen that before, and will definitely be using it as reference. I am a bit disappointed at the lack of clarity with respect to Internal Object Dynamics (Fe) and the seeming oversimplification of External Field Dynamics (Si) though. Not your fault, I'm sure, since you said you copy/pasted it from somewhere, but if you could speak more to these two or direct me to a good source, I'd really appreciate it!

[AWellArmedCat]

My theory here explains those things

It does? I thought you told me you have to have "true sight" to even use it and said your method for self-typing was "just figure it out". I don't remember you explaining anything

[roger557]

It does? I thought you told me you have to have "true sight" to even use it and said your method for self-typing was "just figure it out". I don't remember you explaining anything

So much anger. So much envy. So much hate...

That is the path of Dark Side, padawan.

[inaLim]

@RBRS Thanks for sharing the foundations and basic structure of IMs. I'd never seen that before, and will definitely be using it as reference. I am a bit disappointed at the lack of clarity with respect to Internal Object Dynamics (Fe) and the seeming oversimplification of External Field Dynamics (Si) though. Not your fault, I'm sure, since you said you copy/pasted it from somewhere, but if you could speak more to these two or direct me to a good source, I'd really appreciate it!

"Shorthand Information Element Descriptors" at the bottom
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...s-by-Functions

It comes from forum members
https://web.archive.org/web/20140611...mation-aspects

[AWellArmedCat]

"Shorthand Information Element Descriptors" at the bottom
https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...s-by-Functions

It comes from forum members
https://web.archive.org/web/20140611...mation-aspects

Thank youuuu

[AWellArmedCat]

So much anger. So much envy. So much hate...

That is the path of Dark Side, padawan.

Lol I'm not angry. I'm just very confused by your explanations of things and seeking clarification

[inaLim]

Thank youuuu

Can I talk you out of using that...

[Metaphor]

It's not static by the way, I believe this has been a million times already I've heard the same wording on this occasion. And if you were to understand the definition of PoLR, it's a function that is moved by the vulnerability that is meant to be, "I don't like it, neither do I want it or need it, I just hate it and I really don't want to encounter this in every matter unless when it really matters." kind of element in general.

The point of least resistance is the physical or metaphorical point that provides the least resistance to forward motion by a given object or entity, among a set of alternative points.

[Metaphor]

I don't think those examples you've mentioned really related to functions directly. Anyone can be like those. And as for the question of PoLR, it's either 0-100, but the applicability here is that, they are either very aware (sensitive) or unaware at all (insensitive).

[AWellArmedCat]

Can I talk you out of using that...

Uh I mean, I guess. Why?

[adage]

I have times where I feel something like this, any typology can give an impression of personality being static, closed, finished, unescapable.

I used to like coming up on here to read what people say on functions and all, even share my own perceptions, but after a while I tend to feel clautrophobic, as if stuck in a small box where I can't breath very well. It drives me nuts and it shows, I end being erratic and finding faults in people in order to allow myself to escape the place as if it was the box. "This place is a mad house" kind of things, it gets much uglier than that tho, and I never posted a single comment about it.
It's a problem that lies with me more so than socionics.

It gets to a point where I both see too many things at once and not enough, too many walls, too many paths, which ends up making me feel I cannot be who I am. Both because who I am seems impossible and because to claim a type, it can be easier to not get battle typed by playing it up. I hate arguing, such a waste of time.

Stereotypes do exist, on here and everywhere else, and they make this internal conflict I have worse. Do I just not care? How much can I not care? How honest can I be? Can I be honest and not care? Do I have to prove anything to people? Do I have to answer to people who are questioning, and sometimes just insulting me to set things right? Where do I stop? How much is enough? Where do I draw the line between answering people honestly and not troubling myself with opinions that I don't care much about in the end? How do these opinions affect uninvolved people in their vision of socionics and of me? Does it matter? What matters? What am I doing here?
I don't know if anyone else has gone through the above, but I wish that no one has.

What makes socionics seem static, to me, are feelings. Not the kind of things that can be logicaly reasoned with, they aren't objective and that's okay. They come from somewhere, they mean something, they have their place. There's not much anyone can do about them, beside the one feeling them. They should be respected yet not allowed to take control, there's too many sides to a person to allow one to take over all others.

No one is their feelings, their intuition, their logic, their sensation. Those are our tools to face world.

[inaLim]

Uh I mean, I guess. Why?

fucking with you

reminded me of the quadra ideology thread

Ni/Se types will avoid expressing their opinion on the matter, and rather use some sort of "power" to change the other person's mind or avoid the whole situation

(but looking at it closer now, that Fe, Si, & Se are iffy...)

[Sol]

Jung's type is doubtful to be changed during the life, at least for very majority of people.
Same as people do not change leading hand (right or left) during the life, in common.

What people do noticably - they try to accept (in too strong degree) what is harder for them. As to copy psyche and behavior traits of those having as ego functions their superego (weak, nonvalued) functions. Also then (due to functional opposing) they reduce the care about and usage of their strong and valued functions. Besides lesser efficiency, this may overload the psyche and develop neurotic protections, even lead to psychiatric disorders (especially for people having predispositions for such or worse life environments). The easiest way to understand this problem on practice is to tune to psyche of someone with superego/conflictors types. To deal more and informally with them. Among common results is to feel strangely tired and feeling higher anxiety. Now imagine how someone for years does alike with own psyche, as when ENFP would work as an accountant or was in a marraige with ISTJ/LSI. The more expressed Jung's type is - the higher this problem will be, while the more equal functional balance is - the lesser.

Among neurotic symptoms is worse emotions. Hence worse acceptance of Self and reality, worse feelings to them, worse contact and understanding of them, including intentional by rejection and distraction from them - to protect from the pain of undersanding. When a human insists on what is wrong or "too hard" for him - he supports neurotic dissatisfaction. Also the situation may lead to more often changes in thoughts about own Self, life views, interests, relations and feelings to people - as what a human has gives lesser satisfaction and so a human tries to find better. The problem will be when new "different" is not better, so keeps the state same bad or makes it worse. As neurotic state often means worse understanding - mistakes in choices such people do more often, and more often repeat same mistakes.
Sometimes the neurotic state's problem of bad Self acceptance, Self rejection leads to opposite of what human's needs and interests are - to perverted interests, when people are attracted to harmful or risky behavior. Alcohol, drugs - have both neurotic problems - reduce the perception and make a harm to Self. Hooliganism - has among reasons the neurotic inacceptance of other people, of the reality, of own interests by risky and harmful behavior.

Resume

To understand own correct(!) Jung type helps to reduce a neurotisation. To pay more attention on own valued regions, to trust more to own strong functions, to reduce redundant usage of weak nonvalued functions, meanwhile to do not reject the life imprortance of weak and nonvalued functions (it's objective part of the reality and of your mind), to find more support for own weak functions (through valued variants) by closer relations with good IR people (which fit your interests by other traits too) and developing your skills there.
This should make the opinion about own personality as more stable.

Also. As a neurotisation arises higher anxiety, so leads to lesser trust to reality and to other people. This predisposes to choose for relations people who are more similar to you - with same strong functions. It's common to choose such ones for surface cooperations (more common for people of same sex), but for more whole and closer relations as a friendship and romances people differing from you are more appropriate, being more useful to help you in the life. Neurotisation is an obstacle to allow closer (with higher compation, mind joining, life cooperations) relations itself and when a human tries to establish such relations - it becomes an obstacle to choose more differing people. Though, in some situations neurotisation may predispose to this but among bad IR people as a part of rejection of own Self and its real interests. The late may be among reasons to assign yourself wrong type - with opposite values, to think your IR better with the ones to who you was attracted.