The whole point of the article was to show that MBTI has faults that make it less of a scientific method and more akin to a horoscope. I agree that it's possible to organize people into 16 broad categories that share some common traits, even if they're unique in other aspects, but as the article stated MBTI's categories aren't very good, as they do not meet the criteria you would expect of a scientific test, as such it becomes a lot less meaningful to divide people into those particular categories.

More Posts