I wonder how many of my friends are IN.P’s? (Where the dot is typically T with a noticeable amount of F mixed in.) Rather a lot, I suspect.

My impression is that, from a scientific point of view, tests like Meyers/Briggs are pretty much the sort of normative/instrumental type of tool that one would expect to find at the junction between psychology and management practice. In other words, since people are used to the way they themselves think and can be puzzled about how other people’s thought processes work, a framework for thinking about those differences has its obvious uses for an instrumental domain like workplace interactions, but on the other hand neuropsychology has advanced to a point where a schematic such as that used by Meyers/Briggs bears little resemblance to the ways in which features of mental functioning are identified and categorised and probably elides more than it reveals.

The Meyers/Briggs system is what, 30 or 40 years old at this point? Models for things like personality and temperament are now dependent on results in neurophysiology and cognitive science in a way they could not have been a few decades ago. I suppose the change might be described as being analogous to the move in biology from descriptive taxonomy to genetically based taxonomy.