I've never understood people outside of a work context. They're just balls of emotion that to me appear to do illogical things for random reasons. In an effort to understand, about 10 years back I dove heavily into the traits of the individual "letters" and the types from MBTI.
Even if it isn't perfect, it is a framework for me to arrive at a consistent typing systems for anyone. I can now accurately predict people, what they'll do in most circumstances, and then their likes/dislikes. 16 buckets gives you a small group of permutations to start with - and then to whittle a person into for refinement.
The fallacy is to approach the test as an absolute, rather than for proclivities. Each person of a "type" will still have unique differences. Humans really aren't that unique, bell curve and all.... x of 100 groupings helped me understand that.
Even if it isn't perfect, it is a framework for me to arrive at a consistent typing systems for anyone. I can now accurately predict people, what they'll do in most circumstances, and then their likes/dislikes. 16 buckets gives you a small group of permutations to start with - and then to whittle a person into for refinement.
The fallacy is to approach the test as an absolute, rather than for proclivities. Each person of a "type" will still have unique differences. Humans really aren't that unique, bell curve and all.... x of 100 groupings helped me understand that.