Is It Possible to Alter Your Type Based on Necessity?

Maybe a little, but only for types that share the same functions in close proximity (for instance INFJ can rev up and adequately mimic an ENFJ for an hour or two, INTP can appear similar to ENTP under the right conditions). But an INFJ trying to roleplay as an INTJ or ESTJ or ENFP will be putting on a staged performance, and nothing more.

Honestly if the above isn't true, then function theory is meaningless.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that's the nature of stressors, both good and bad. You will change to adapt to your environment. That's why I've always stressed the idea of a natural self. I will literally start to become another type in different circumstances but when in a stress free environment I return to infj. If I suffered something horribly traumatic I'd probably remain another type for a while even when removed from the trauma.
 
Wyote said:
Yes, that's the nature of stressors, both good and bad. You will change to adapt to your environment. That's why I've always stressed the idea of a natural self. I will literally start to become another type in different circumstances but when in a stress free environment I return to infj. If I suffered something horribly traumatic I'd probably remain another type for a while even when removed from the trauma.
Click to expand...

I do subscribe to "shadow type" theory, but that is an unconscious overlay of cognition, not a conscious personality alteration as I presumed HP meant in her post.

For the shadow type to take hold, you have to...lose yourself.

tenor.gif
 
infinite dreams said:
I do subscribe to "shadow type" theory, but that is an unconscious overlay of cognition, not a conscious personality alteration as I presumed HP meant in her post.

For the shadow type to take hold, you have to...lose yourself.

tenor.gif
Click to expand...

I think losing one's self is something that happens both consciously and unconsciously, and it is something that occurs in small doses more frequently than people are willing to admit to themselves.
 
Wyote said:
I think losing one's self is something that happens both consciously and unconsciously, and it is something that occurs in small doses more frequently than people are willing to admit to themselves.
Click to expand...

And that's even assuming you know who you are in the first place. Can you really lose something that you can't describe or define?

:thinkinghard:
 
infinite dreams said:
And that's even assuming you know who you are in the first place. Can you really lose something that you can't describe or define?

:thinkinghard:
Click to expand...

Not being able to clearly define one's self is a marker of a lack of maturity. As we grow we become more aware of the things that define us. Denying this is a form of depersonalization. Philosophically speaking, yeah on some levels we are undefinable. But through comparison we learn about ourselves so that we can grow from knowing that information.
 
Some thoughts …..

Perhaps it's useful to distinguish between our native preferences in contrast to technical proficiency in non-preferred functions. I'm good enough at Thinking and like it well enough to have a good maths degree and to have worked as a computing professional for 40 years, but it's not native to me and isn't the way my mind works on its own without some specific purpose. If I push things too far with Thinking I get stressed and lose it - but on the other hand one of my favourite ways of relaxing is with Sudoku which is so Thinking focused that it completely takes me out of myself.

Wyote said:
Yes, that's the nature of stressors, both good and bad. You will change to adapt to your environment. That's why I've always stressed the idea of a natural self. I will literally start to become another type in different circumstances but when in a stress free environment I return to infj. If I suffered something horribly traumatic I'd probably remain another type for a while even when removed from the trauma.
Click to expand...

I'm with this from @Wyote . It seems to me that the sort of work we do can act a bit like a magnetic field, and our personalities can shift to mimic it. The maths is one example, but another is that I created and ran a help desk for the first ever personal computers we installed at the place I worked - it was a very reactive sort of job and I needed to "do SP" for several years, though the fact I was creating the service used N, and of course there is plenty of F in any user service too. We were pretty successful, looking back at the results. Again, the price paid is considerable stress - though there is good kick back too in that kind of job from grateful customers (if you do it well!) who feed your need to be appreciated!
My poor family probably paid the daily price for these out-of-type roles when I got home and unwound. :zombie:

Another angle - looks like proficiency in non-preferred functions can be age-related. I have a quote in front of me from Katherine Myers, the daughter-in-law of Elizabeth Myers:
"After reaching the middle of life with a reliable dominant and auxiliary function, a person's focus of attention and energy naturally shifts to the less preferred functions. This is a process of moving toward one's unexplored potential."
" In the first half of life, people specialise, establishing a firm sense of identity. They take their place in the world by making choices that develop some parts of themselves at the expenses of others. As individuals move towards completeness in the second half of life, they become generalists This transition does not change one's psychological type preferences, nor does it mean that all the mental functions become equally developed. Instead, it leads to an increasingly skilful use of previously undeveloped functions and the ability to call upon them to accomplish the purposes of the dominant function as assisted by the auxiliary function."​
This too could explain why some people appear to be acting away from their base type. What do you think?
 
Last edited:
John K said:
"This transition does not change one's psychological type preferences, nor does it mean that all the mental functions become equally developed. Instead, it leads to an increasingly skilful use of previously undeveloped functions and the ability to call upon them to accomplish the purposes of the dominant function as assisted by the auxiliary function."
Click to expand...

Just makes me visualize Green Lantern, manifesting all kinds of cool stuff with his powers.

HeavenlyDependableHarrier-size_restricted.gif
 
I agree with everything said here. When I was living with my ESTP roommate, I was doing more ESTP-like things, though not nearly enough to confuse me with one. And, it’s really hard to fake certain things, like having Ne for instance, or Si. I mean, I don’t remember 99% of what I did last week. Extraversion is something I can force though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top