> 2b. The other adjustment I have made is that I consider each scale to be a measure of how much ABILITY a person has developed and PRACTICING that trait. In ot

> 2b. The other adjustment I have made is that I consider each scale to be a measure of how much ABILITY a person has developed and PRACTICING that trait. In other words, beyond natural predisposition, each person can grow considerably in any of these traits, provided they practice and apply it regularly. I do think, at its best, this is what MBTI aims to emphasize: each of us is capable of developing those areas where we are deficient, be it introversion/extraversion, thinking/feeling, etc. Problems only arise when people treat these factors as static binaries. I’m mostly an MBTI agnostic, but I have been surprised at how consistently I have been typed as an INTP across the various versions of the test I have taken (including the ‘official’ one). I view it as a rough indicator of where I am at a particular moment in time, and the domains I can seek to develop to become a more ‘well-rounded’ person. I agree completely with you that, understood correctly, it can be a useful model when people view it as a means of growth. Not, I guess, to get too self-helpy about it.