# Personality types - Genetic or enviromental ?



## SilverScorpio17 (Nov 13, 2009)

Alchemical Romance said:


> What I don't understand is how your INFJ mom in interested in such things, what type are your grandparents SF or ST?
> 
> But seriously now, the environment isn't only family, it's the whole world,also it's a well known psychological fact, that children as a rule try to make up for the "mistakes" of they're parents. For example you can have this possible system which I observed:
> 
> Let's take an ST drunk father that acts violently towards SF mom and child(i'm not implying that all ST males are drunk women beaters but just this case) This kind of behaviour has a very strong impact on the child, so the child if a boy will naturally try to become everything his father wasn't, so he will probbably evolve into SF or NF because he will unconciously associate the T detached behaviour with violence so he'll naturally go the opposite. His unconcious thoughts will be something like "well, if my father loved my mother more(F) he wouldn't have beaten her"...so he'll take up the opposite. Also let's say two NT parents, let's say two NT parents very involved in their work and they neglect the child. As you may know every person has both a feeling and a thinking function, a child usually "feels" neglected...he doesn't "Think" himself neglected, therefore in his mind the subject associates T with his childhood neglect and as stated before he will try to compensate this misgiving, usually by developing a strong F. As for the S..well the Ns have always been associated with absent mindness so it's easy to see how a neglected child would react opposite. These of course are the good case scenarios. The bad case scenarios are more ugly in both cases, if you want i'll elaborate. You see, I stated this before and I will always do. When analyzing psychologically one should have in mind Newton's "For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction", this usually happens when such differences between child and parent occur. Actually when the types of the parents coincide with the types of the child it's pretty rare and requiers an almost utopian setup I balanced with E, S with N, T with F and P with J, of course this if you assume there no other people on the planet to make their own influence. Hope I answered satisfactory, If you have anymore questions I would gladly answer them.


She's not really interested in those things herself, but I think she's "competing" with her friend's daughters. I don't really know about my maternal grandparents, but from what I've heard my grandmother seemed like an NF, and my grandfather seemed like an ST.

I know the environment isn't just family, but I think that people might be equipped with different genes that influence how they react to everything.

It makes sense for a child to make up for mistakes of their parents, but what if they don't view something as a mistake? Maybe the child just looks up to their parent. I understand your example, but I think it's harder to figure out nature vs nurture when there are two parents with different personality types. For example, my mom's an INFJ and my dad's an ISTP so I feel like I just inherited traits from both of them. If I was trying to make up for their mistakes, I really would have been an extrovert. But yeah, I might be looking up to certain traits of one parent and doing the opposite of what the other is doing, but it's hard to know because I could have just inherited those traits from the first one. Does that kind of make sense? 

So in your example, what if the boy saw his mother as weak and unable to take control of situations, so he decided to not be like her either? Or, what if the boy was an SF from birth? Would he react differently to the situation if he was just born with T characteristics inherited from his father? Would an IxT just try to detach themselves from the situation? I never thought about Newton's laws applying to personality types though, that's interesting. Your examples make sense though, they helped me see some things from a different perspective. The two NT parents one made a lot of sense too, but I wonder if an NT child would feel so bad if his/her parents weren't around as much.

Anyway, I just did some research and I'm willing to accept that the environment plays a larger role. Maybe a 75-25 split. Here's the article: Twin Studies, Genes, and Parenting
Apparently, genetic variations are correlated with changes in the environment, but I still think genes play a somewhat larger role.


----------



## Alchemical Romance (Nov 26, 2009)

SilverScorpio17 said:


> what if the boy saw his mother as weak and unable to take control of situations, so he decided to not be like her either


You don't seem to get this, it's an unconscious process,you have no control over it, no one actually "decides", well except professionals, but even that is pretending.

I can't see what kind of person would accept to see his/her mother beaten to a pulp daily and support the father, however this can be possible but some prior cause for ailement must be there, for example some behaviour of the mother towards the child that the child interprets as mistreatment therefore when the child sees his father beat up the mother, the child actually enjoys because he feels avenged.



SilverScorpio17 said:


> I think she's "competing" with her friend's daughters


Interesting, usually INFJ's pride on originality not mimmicking



SilverScorpio17 said:


> If I was trying to make up for their mistakes, I really would have been an extrovert


No one tries to "make up" unless they view that particular characteristic damaging, like the examples i posed.



SilverScorpio17 said:


> But yeah, I might be looking up to certain traits of one parent and doing the opposite of what the other is doing, but it's hard to know because I could have just inherited those traits from the first one. Does that kind of make sense?


Well the saying that "the girl usually takes up to the father" seems to hold some value although far from a law. Therefore in such cases the psychologist must see first, is it a reaction against the mother, pro father or otherwise. (there's a biig difference ib being against the mother or simply pro father)



SilverScorpio17 said:


> Or, what if the boy was an SF from birth? Would he react differently to the situation if he was just born with T characteristics inherited from his father? Would an IxT just try to detach themselves from the situation?


Well, I kinda told that I don't think so much as "from birth". But T's tend to detach emotionally from the situation...and it's quite a sad story because without a loving and caring family their secondary F remains undeveloped and that will forever put a print on their future interprsonal relationships.

As for the genes...well they may have an impact but psychology is famous for what it discovered "the talking cure" . Here's the first chapter of this The Talking Cure: A Descriptive ... - Google C?r?i

So yeah genes may alter behaviour but don't think as much as you say. If it were as much as you said then you'd probbably have to admit that talking to a guy alters his DNA :crazy:

ISTP and INFJ parents...interesting


----------



## SilverScorpio17 (Nov 13, 2009)

Alchemical Romance said:


> You don't seem to get this, it's an unconscious process,you have no control over it, no one actually "decides", well except professionals, but even that is pretending.


Well, I guess I really don't get it then. You're saying you have absolutely no control over what kind of person you want to be? If you had a bad habit, you can't change it no matter what you do? I think it's possible, but the dedication required to do that may be rare.



Alchemical Romance said:


> I can't see what kind of person would accept to see his/her mother beaten to a pulp daily and support the father, however this can be possible but some prior cause for ailement must be there, for example some behaviour of the mother towards the child that the child interprets as mistreatment therefore when the child sees his father beat up the mother, the child actually enjoys because he feels avenged.


I didn't really say "support" the father, but I can imagine it must get annoying to see the same bad things happen over and over again without the victim at least attempting to do something about it. The kid might really care at first, but stop bothering with it later. I have a friend with a dad who lives away from his family, rarely visits, and verbally harasses the mother whenever he does visit. At first I was sympathetic, but after the same thing keeps on happening and she refuses to divorce him, everyone (including her kids) just stopped caring about the situation. That didn't change their T or F at all in other situations, but their parents' arguments didn't affect them anymore.



Alchemical Romance said:


> Interesting, usually INFJ's pride on originality not mimmicking


So what type does like to mimic/compete? The rest of her habits seem to suggest that she's an INFJ though. Her I/E is pretty balanced too, I don't know if that makes a difference.



Alchemical Romance said:


> No one tries to "make up" unless they view that particular characteristic damaging, like the examples i posed.


Oh, okay. Well, I don't view being an introvert as damaging so I guess I can't say more on that topic. I understand what you mean though.



Alchemical Romance said:


> Well the saying that "the girl usually takes up to the father" seems to hold some value although far from a law. Therefore in such cases the psychologist must see first, is it a reaction against the mother, pro father or otherwise. (there's a biig difference ib being against the mother or simply pro father)


I have a better relationship with my mom and look up to her more though, so I don't think it's a reaction against my mom.



Alchemical Romance said:


> As for the genes...well they may have an impact but psychology is famous for what it discovered "the talking cure" . Here's the first chapter of this The Talking Cure: A Descriptive ... - Google C?r?i
> 
> So yeah genes may alter behaviour but don't think as much as you say. If it were as much as you said then you'd probbably have to admit that talking to a guy alters his DNA :crazy:


Isn't psychoanalysis (and a lot of other stuff that Freud said) outdated though? Does psychoanalysis really alter someone's personality though? I don't know too much about it in-depth.



Alchemical Romance said:


> ISTP and INFJ parents...interesting


Yep. I really don't know how that happened.


----------



## Alchemical Romance (Nov 26, 2009)

SilverScorpio17 said:


> Well, I guess I really don't get it then. You're saying you have absolutely no control over what kind of person you want to be? If you had a bad habit, you can't change it no matter what you do? I think it's possible, but the dedication required to do that may be rare.


Personality develops at a very early age, at that age you are lucky to know that picking your nose in public is unapropriate much less unconscious actions and reactions of the psyche. Sure you can change, but you can't change an unconscious behaviour without knowing of it's existance first, understand why it happens, how it manifests in the outside world. By the time the person understands you can't alter type, just help it grow. Nurture secondary function, advance with the primary one. And yes the process is hard.

You know that joke

How many psychologists are needed to change a light bulb.
Only one but the bulb must want to change




SilverScorpio17 said:


> I didn't really say "support" the father, but I can imagine it must get annoying to see the same bad things happen over and over again without the victim at least attempting to do something about it. The kid might really care at first, but stop bothering with it later. I have a friend with a dad who lives away from his family, rarely visits, and verbally harasses the mother whenever he does visit. At first I was sympathetic, but after the same thing keeps on happening and she refuses to divorce him, everyone (including her kids) just stopped caring about the situation. That didn't change their T or F at all in other situations, but their parents' arguments didn't affect them anymore.


I don't really know the case so i cannot be sure but I can assure you that some times, the victim likes being the victim and that is dangerous for a number of reasons, other times maybe the victim doesn't have a choice. I have seen very sad cases where mothers endured the beatings because divorce may become damaging to the child. It's a loose loose situation really. Divorce ends up bad for the child...seeing constant violence also is bad for the child. Also it depends on the type of the victim. Also the withdrawal process is pretty normal, since the pain of endlesly watching the behaviour becomes at some point too much, so the child gets an emotional shock. That's when feeling starts to numb and Thinking becomes forced as a counterweight. It's a defensive process really but one that can have both good and bad effects. I'd rather develop my thinking by talking to people on forums such as this, understand more about science, then see my parents fight...it's an unnatural growth process, one that may have numerous side effects like the grown up child fearing commitment for fear he/she does not become like the parents.




SilverScorpio17 said:


> I have a better relationship with my mom and look up to her more though, so I don't think it's a reaction against my mom.


By against I didn't necessarily mean hate her, just observing her and draw up conclusions why that behaviour is or is not appropriate, but the first one that will observe will be the unconscious, only then after a process called projection, that is, putting yourself in her shoes, you will develop conscious reasons pro and con.




SilverScorpio17 said:


> Isn't psychoanalysis (and a lot of other stuff that Freud said) outdated though? Does psychoanalysis really alter someone's personality though? I don't know too much about it in-depth.


Freud yes...at some issues he is outdated, but not everything...some things still hold. Freud was good at finding commonalities. Jung had a more individualistic approach, so type theory evolved. However this was not the point the point was "the talking cure". Talking to people and mend inapropriate behaviour. That is true for both Freuds psychoanalysis and Jungs analitical psychology. Actually that's what psychology is all about, talking...finding frustrations explain them to the patient and eventually cure them. But like I said, if you think DNA is a major factor then you would have to get comfortable with the insane idea that talking alters DNA. Cause psychology is a valid profession people go in get cured get out just like any other medical practice, the only difference is that the patient gets cured by talking.


----------



## djf863000 (Nov 7, 2009)

It be intersting to test any of those identical twins who been seperated in their infancy and lived in 2 different sets of parents, and only find out they had a twin later in their adult years. Than you can observe whether their personality are the similar or totally different.


----------



## Just_Some_Guy (Oct 8, 2009)

C. G. Jung states that we are predisposed to a particular personality type at birth, but elsewhere he states that children are a direct manifestation of the parents' psyche. Is Jung advocating the "both" perspective?


----------



## Iapetus (Dec 14, 2009)

It's popular to split the causes evenly between genetics and the environment. In reality genetics has the final say on how much the environment is going to affect the person. Humans vary on the trait of adaptability. When you say a person is "adaptable" it's the same as saying they are easily influenced by their environment. When you say a person is rigid you are saying that they resist environmental influences. Evolution favors adaptability so it is fairly widespread in the population. The illusion is that the genes aren't holding any cards when in reality they hold the deciding hand if not the winning hand. Your genes determine how much the environment is going to affect you.

I think it was Einstein who said a person can be anything they want to be. Want can't be explained is the "want".


----------



## Alchemical Romance (Nov 26, 2009)

EmotionallyTonedGeometry said:


> C. G. Jung states that we are predisposed to a particular personality type at birth, but elsewhere he states that children are a direct manifestation of the parents' psyche. Is Jung advocating the "both" perspective?


Well he may have had an intuition about the genetic component but in the sixties he would have had no way of proving that as we do not have ourselves today to prove to the end. What he had however is a large case history that point out links between abuse and future behaviour for example, the future behaviour of an abused woman, therefore a pattern within which the patient fits according to some rules. A large case history where actions acted upon the psyche produce similar reactions. Now you may say, different women react differently to it ,and this may indeed account to several factors, genes being one of them but this doesn't change the fact that a similar reaction is observable in anyone, so yes *genes* play a part if we are to judge *the particular* *strength of the reaction* but *the reaction* is *environmentally *triggered. Also everybody reacts differently but all react in a certain direction. I hope I made myself clear enough if not I can further clear up.


----------



## Iapetus (Dec 14, 2009)

Perhaps this could be tossed back and forth as a "chicken or egg first" problem. But which answer is going to be productive? Psychology lost its way with environmentalism/behaviorism. Educators like the environmental model because it gives them a sense of power - that they can make a big difference. Psychotherapy seems to like the enivronmental causes in the mix because its a convenient escape hatch. It also racks up a lot of 50 minute sessions digging up past traumas and events. We also have no problem conceiving of environmental causes. It's easy to get a person to believe the causes of their behavior is their environment because it immediately releases them from responsibility. You can't change the past. On the other hand, even though researchers accept a large biological role in behavior they haven't figured out how it works. Is it homonal? Is it brain structure? Is it somatotype? Is it neurochemicals? One thing is sure. More and more behaviors are being moved from the environmental column to the genetic column.


----------



## Alchemical Romance (Nov 26, 2009)

Iapetus said:


> Perhaps this could be tossed back and forth as a "chicken or egg first" problem. But which answer is going to be productive? Psychology lost its way with environmentalism/behaviorism. Educators like the environmental model because it gives them a sense of power - that they can make a big difference. Psychotherapy seems to like the enivronmental causes in the mix because its a convenient escape hatch. It also racks up a lot of 50 minute sessions digging up past traumas and events. We also have no problem conceiving of environmental causes. It's easy to get a person to believe the causes of their behavior is their environment because it immediately releases them from responsibility. You can't change the past. On the other hand, even though researchers accept a large biological role in behavior they haven't figured out how it works. Is it homonal? Is it brain structure? Is it somatotype? Is it neurochemicals? One thing is sure. More and more behaviors are being moved from the environmental column to the genetic column.


Say what you will when hundreds of cases trace a trauma to the same action that happened in the past resulting in behaviour x I really don't see what you don't understand. And another thing psychology is a medical profession and one that shows results. You are pretty ignorant to say otherwise. Also like i said before If you want to enable DNA as establishing behaviour 100% you have to account for the misterious porocess that causes talking to modify DNA because..when the patient goes out of therapy results can be seen.



Iapetus said:


> It's easy to get a person to believe the causes of their behavior is their environment because it immediately releases them from responsibility


Really? That's stupid. You know why? Because it implies that if the cause was DNA related, the person could be more responsible and not shrink from responsability, as if they choose what genes to have. Do you actually think that people would act differently if they saw DNA as the cause for their behaviour? They'd simply blame then the DNA and the process that lead to the DNA's presence, either way still the parents get the blame :laughing: No man, the psychiatrist blames the environment, not the patient. The patient isn't excused, he's getting treated.


----------



## Collossus (Dec 14, 2009)

DNA is completely dependent of the environment and even it is changing slightly because of it. But DNA makes what we are, and it has an obvious impact on who we are, but as the environment changes the DNA, it is also changing us, so we may not remove from the equation neither.

The medication that a psychiatrist is giving to his patience modifies his DNA, not on a large scale, but it does. The environment is used just as an excuse, but the actual change is happening in both sides (the man itself and the way it reacts to the environment). DNA is a response to the environment, but the environment is also a result of our DNA (the way we interact with it), life could not possible exist if one of them is missing (at least not in this world :laughing. Personality is just the way we react to the environment, even the insight thoughts are based on elements from the environment.


----------



## Alchemical Romance (Nov 26, 2009)

Collossus said:


> The medication that a psychiatrist is giving to his patience modifies his DNA, not on a large scale, but it does.


Medication isn't always required in treatmeant. I don't want to dismiss DNA's role, i just think that in the matter of personality it is overrated.


----------



## Iapetus (Dec 14, 2009)

Alchemical Romance said:


> Say what you will when hundreds of cases trace a trauma to the same action that happened in the past resulting in behaviour x I really don't see what you don't understand. And another thing psychology is a medical profession and one that shows results. You are pretty ignorant to say otherwise. Also like i said before If you want to enable DNA as establishing behaviour 100% you have to account for the misterious porocess that causes talking to modify DNA because..when the patient goes out of therapy results can be seen.[quote/]
> 
> Are you saying that a specific type of trauma ALWAYS results in a 100% predictable behavior? If that's what you are saying then you may be oversimplifying the causes. Of course you can't make that claim because there are usually a number of antecedent conditions that could work together to produce the resultant behavior. Genetic (temperament) factors are significant in the results. People vary in their reactions to traumatic situations.
> 
> ...


By discovering genetic causes of behavior it opens up the possibility of managing that behavior. Self management is one of the main objectives of therapy. Sometimes, its a matter of learning to take ones medications.


----------



## Alchemical Romance (Nov 26, 2009)

Iapetus said:


> By discovering genetic causes of behavior it opens up the possibility of managing that behavior. Self management is one of the main objectives of therapy. Sometimes, its a matter of learning to take ones medications.


Agreed, IF and WHEN that happens we should accept, until then nothing is really tight. What we can say now is...well maybe that or maybe that but there's no real proof. Environment studies are based on observed behaviour that point to environmental causes. About DNA we have still a lot more to learn, until then it's a hypothesis. Of course when substantial proof will be put forward I will accept. Alo what colossus said about environment influencing DNA might be true so both causes are linked. As for medications, many therapists argue that medication has become too used, it comes as an excuse for not doing your job correctly because it's easier to medicate than than the process of making patient x conscious of his own problem and help him cure it.


----------



## SilverScorpio17 (Nov 13, 2009)

djf863000 said:


> It be intersting to test any of those identical twins who been seperated in their infancy and lived in 2 different sets of parents, and only find out they had a twin later in their adult years. Than you can observe whether their personality are the similar or totally different.


There have been quite a few twin studies a few decades ago, but they have been declared inhumane/unethical, so researchers can't do them anymore. You could probably find results from some old ones though. I think there was one really famous one on the "Jim twins" (Jim Lewis and Jim Springer), the results were interesting.



Alchemical Romance said:


> Freud yes...at some issues he is outdated, but not everything...some things still hold. Freud was good at finding commonalities. Jung had a more individualistic approach, so type theory evolved. However this was not the point the point was "the talking cure". Talking to people and mend inapropriate behaviour. That is true for both Freuds psychoanalysis and Jungs analitical psychology. Actually that's what psychology is all about, talking...finding frustrations explain them to the patient and eventually cure them. But like I said, if you think DNA is a major factor then you would have to get comfortable with the insane idea that talking alters DNA. Cause psychology is a valid profession people go in get cured get out just like any other medical practice, the only difference is that the patient gets cured by talking.


But the "talking cure" seems more like "teaching." I doesn't really seem to alter their personality because anyone can learn. And I'm sure you know that many different people prefer different psychologists/psychiatrists based on their traits or personalities. What are the patients getting cured for? I don't think their personality changes after undergoing psychoanalysis for their problems. I know there are some treatments that use conditional learning, but that doesn't alter personality either, in my opinion.

Yes, psychology is a valid profession but I wouldn't call it a medical profession. Psychologists don't have to go to med school and don't have to learn half the stuff psychiatrists have to learn. Psychologists can't fix everything by talking. That's why there are psychiatrists. 



Alchemical Romance said:


> Agreed, IF and WHEN that happens we should accept, until then nothing is really tight. What we can say now is...well maybe that or maybe that but there's no real proof. Environment studies are based on observed behaviour that point to environmental causes. About DNA we have still a lot more to learn, until then it's a hypothesis. Of course when substantial proof will be put forward I will accept. Alo what colossus said about environment influencing DNA might be true so both causes are linked. As for medications, many therapists argue that medication has become too used, it comes as an excuse for not doing your job correctly because it's easier to medicate than than the process of making patient x conscious of his own problem and help him cure it.


There's a lot more that can be learned about DNA, but researchers are getting closer every day. This article is pretty good: The Personality Genes - TIME
It explains that different chemicals produced in the brain can affect a lot of traits, such as anxiety and novelty seeking. Genes don't directly dictate personality, but they affect how certain people react to their similar environments differently. 

If medications aren't used, treatment depends on the will-power of the patient, and if the patient was good at learning and/or had good self-control to begin with, he or she wouldn't be needing therapy. So what's your method of curing a schizophrenic, or someone with bipolar disorder?


----------



## Stars (Jul 23, 2009)

I think that someone's MBTI type is genetic (tabula rasa makes little sense to me) but their level of health within that personality type is largely environmental.


----------



## roxtehproxy (Sep 9, 2009)

From the teachings and solemn efforts spread throughout high school and through numerous science books (NCEA level 1,2) personalities are more or less genetic factors. You would have a natural inclination towards being an ESTP, for example, but the functions can fluctuate and redefine themselves after stressing shadow-functions through a collection of events. Se Ti Fe Ni, becomes, Si Te, Fi, Ne etc etc

I'm sure after altering yourself you would revert back to your natural, prefferable personality type, once you've stopped the desensitization, if you'd call it that..


----------



## Alchemical Romance (Nov 26, 2009)

SilverScorpio17 said:


> But the "talking cure" seems more like "teaching." I doesn't really seem to alter their personality because anyone can learn. And I'm sure you know that many different people prefer different psychologists/psychiatrists based on their traits or personalities. What are the patients getting cured for? I don't think their personality changes after undergoing psychoanalysis for their problems. I know there are some treatments that use conditional learning, but that doesn't alter personality either, in my opinion.



*The Talking Cure* was a term originally offered by Dr. Josef Breuer's patient Bertha Pappenheim (written about in Studies on Hysteria in 1893 as Anna O.) along with "chimney sweep" to describe the talking therapy that relieved her of her hysterical symptoms (symptoms which had no organic origin—currently referred to as somatoform disorders—and were found to ameliorate once repressed trauma and their related emotions were expressed, later called catharsis). The term "talking cure," as well as the Anna O. case study, were later adopted by Dr. Sigmund Freud to describe the fundamental work of psychoanalysis, and in fact he referred to them here in North America in his Lectures on Psychoanalysis at Clark University, Worcester, MA, in September 1909.


----------



## Mutatio NOmenis (Jun 22, 2009)

I think that MBTI types are environmental. I've never heard of someone becomming a ddeply-sensitive empath because their parents taught them to be like that. I think that your true personality never changes; it always remains, and no matter what happens to you, no matter what psychological bullets impact your kevlar persona, your personality is never truly altered or erased.


----------



## Darner (Apr 20, 2010)

It's difficult to say, if you're born and raised with the same people and you remind on of them - I am a copy of my father but it is impossible to say whether is it because he was raising me or because I'm made of his sperm. But I guess - because there are many people who are not like their parents at all but they have their personality traits already since birth - that there is a huge impact of dominant and recessive genes; some traits can jump over a generation or two and therefore you really can be like for example your grandmother.


----------



## bendomolena (Dec 30, 2009)

I think 99% environment just merely based on interactions between parents and people in one's early stages. I do not think it's genetic because if that were the case, I would most definitely be an E because both of my parents are E.

I have so many questions to ask people who think of the latter. It honestly is not provable unless you question that theory.

If personality type/personality were genetic and had the ability to be passed down from generation to generation, what is the determining factor of what personality traits will be passed down? What personality traits do you think are dominant and recessive? Do all type variants just get passed down and if one parent has something different from the other, would that person just magically and randomly become one of the two different types?


----------



## Tatl33 (Apr 26, 2010)

I believe it is completely based on your enviroment. I don't think you are born with a personality, you develop your personality over time based on your childhood and friendships.


----------

