It's a model. Models go well inside intuition that reflects upon itself.
It's a model that allows a convenient understanding of people in terms of things and processes. This goes well with thinking that focuses outside on making decisions about what is and isn't happening.
ENTJs don't care much for models, for they have the impulse to immediate physical solution to problems. Feelers don't care over much for models, for they care much more for the actual individuals. TPs aren't greatly fond of models that yeild only intermediate results; they'd prefer to know what's really true in proper detail. And some INTJs just don't care.
I assume that that MBTI can account for the disavowal by some types of MBTI itself is naught but the MBTI confidence trick busy tricking the confidence. Alternatively, it really is to some depth an explanatory model for the realities of cognition.
And in general, dogmatic insistence that an intellectual product has no utility at all is just that tiny bit dumber than the dogmatic insistence that the intellectual product explains everything.
So what is it y'all are really asking for that MBTI is continuing to fail to provide for you?
And how hard is it to understand that while the majority of persons are slaves to other people's ideas, someone with a goodly amount of intution--a system of symbols and signs constantly under redevelopment--should be able to grant meaning to a cool looking bunch of symbols that happen to accord quite well with a lot of what goes on around him? (And be a tad pissed off that other persons of lesser--or shall we say differing--gifts are requiring that I should think in the way they do.)
The a priori doesn't afraid of nothing. Suck it!
Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."