This perspective appears to discount the notion of having categories of differences
What I find interesting is that in spite of individuals each having individual traits that make each one unique, there are certain psychological categories such that an individual is either one or the other. That the individual, having chosen (for lack of a better word) one path over another (e.g., one function over another), becomes inherently different, in a categorical way, from those who chose the other path.
Or more plainly, there wouldn't be an endless generation of "Fe/Fi threads" if the differences were not observably real
That said, yes, individuals are unique, and are best understood as individuals with unique traits. But the categorical differences remain useful: it quickly becomes obvious why person A readily understands an idea, and person B does not, or vice versa ... NOT because person A is so smart, or person B is so dumb, but that the thinking of each are in entirely different spaces. And that
understanding is what allows one to explain an idea such that both people understand it.