<p>
[quote]
It's very unlikely that you can really categorize people in 16 different types. Some people find the MBTI to be amazingly accurate in describing themselves - whereas others do not find it so accurate. Personality tests have arbitrary distinctions (the Big 5 is used more for psychological research - that is the type I see when I read books on psychological research). But they certainly do correlate with a lot of factors - and hence this is where their value lies.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree. There's a risk of assuming these man-made, socially constructed categories somehow "exist" somewhere out there and have only been stumbled upon by diligent scientists. Psychology isn't a science, and despite its claim to be (in order to join in on the goldrush of modernity; both psychology and sociology have roots in positivism -- I hope people here are familiar with the terminology), when push comes to shove standardized tests of any kind only measure how well one does or fits in on the criteria of the test itself: not what naturally existent category the test purports to only identify you as belonging to.</p>
<p>IQ tests are a sham. I can't believe people actually believed they could objectively measure something as vague as "intelligence". Like you said, being a "type" doesn't cause behavior to happen. Also, do we really want to go around claiming "personality" is an innate and fixed thing? </p>
<p>That being said... It's very fun to have a category to identify with, haha.</p>