but an apple IS different form an orange and just because some oranges have 6 seeds and some apples have 6 seeds does not make them the same type, except the typology applied is stupid, which is what happens in the reality of human's thinking. yet, there are pure types, if we understand them or not. they can be a different or similar as they want, but oranges are never apples. just by zooming out and refusing to see a difference between apples and oranges you wont make them compatible in reality. all that relativism does not contribute to understanding nature it only insists on a specific human stupidity, as if it could not be overcome some day.You could zoom in and find plenty of differences between people that share a type.
"type" as theory is handled very differently by different typologists. thus its different/various perspectives on a real thing. the map is not the territory. let aside those typologists who understand nothing about the territory but only their arbitrary constructed map, which they copied from other maps, "improving" it for sake of symmetry or something, there should be a lot of typologists who have actual perspectives on the territory, meaning perceptions. the more different perspectives (methodologies) are applied to the territory, the better the actual territory is understood, the more accurately the territory will be represented by our map(s) - but only if those perspectives don't try to fight/dominate/overwrite each other.The concept of a "type" is an artificial construct that tries to summarize and categorize your most frequently observed habits.
has nothing to do with the topic though (yes, i don't really get the original question myself, but i don't care).
no, type does not explain prodigious talent, it only describes some modulations / form giving aspects to talent.