Everyone is a bit uncomfortable with the notion of type. Is MBTI just like Astrology? Does it try to put people into "16 neat little boxes" (sorry for the quote, it was well put) and is the number 16 just random? Why not 32 or 12'347? Is it really still about jungian types?
Modern research holds not well known answers. A friend of mine has studied the subject for almost 15 years now. He's a biologist and sports trainer, now trainer of the olympic trainers of Switzerland. He tells the trainers how to handle their charges by learning and conforming to what MBTI tells us about them.
He did a PhD work on how to teach mathematics based on type. The not at all surprising observation is that people from different types learn differently.
Basic observation:
- Type is very real, since it influences our way of thinking, of acting and even the way we move.
First important statement in his paper:
- Type is NOT an excuse for not learning mathematics !
If the idea of type makes you uncomfortable, think of it as a natural parameter, just as height, eye or hair color etc. They are very real attributes, but they don't determine who we are or what we do with our lives. A short and a tall person most certainly don't go the same path through live, though they may arrive at similar destinations.
Type is like the wing span and engine power of our mind. Each is especially good under certain conditions.
The personal type is just the most NATURAL mode of operation, not the ONLY POSSIBLE mode. We CAN work in different modes, but we are not comfortable about it and probably not operating at our fullest potential. An ENFP can work as an accountant, but will be very unhappy.