we did go through inductive and deductive ways to come up with a personality theory, didnt talk much about kant, because im not studying philosophy. i dont really see what this has to do with the subject. that is ofc if you are saying that inductive theories are the only ones that can be truth. i see alot more truth in jungian types(mostly deductive) than in big 5(inductive). you simply cant explain the human mind properly with purely inductive research, its far too complicated for that, thats why big 5 is so simplistic and jungian types offer more. you should know that since you are acting like you know what you are talking about.
no one is talking about ignoring actions, but actions isnt what jungian typology is trying to explain, naturally cognitive processes do effect the actions(cognitive psychology is looking at behavior, but from the point of view of the brain processes(then there is the cognitive neuroscience that is looking to find neural connections to cognition)), but because actions vary sooo much even in the same situation because of different cognitions, its stupid to look at behavior without looking at cognition first. pure behaviorism has been abandoned many years ago already in the field of psychology, cognitive sciences replaced it simply because behaviorism fails to do what it was meant to do.
i really dont understand why you want to isolate MBTI from peoples thought processes, because thats exactly what MBTI is. that just doesent make any sense. but since we can see difference in types with EEG, its not necessary to look at behavior at all, its enough to make the patient think and let EEG read his brain waves. you could make a computer program that analyzes the brain waves and shows the right stuff on the screen to activate brains for measurements and you would get a type by showing computer screen to someone.
i know that environment activates genes and lack of environment would leave genes unactivated to some extend, i already said that.. i didnt say anything about % of nature vs nurture, dont put words into my mouth. i said that big 5 test could vary some % with identical twins(same genes), due to differences on environment activating genes and trying to repress natural tendencies of genetic behavior that has already been activated. gene for extraversion seems to be activated in already with babies under 3 months and its not dependable that much of environment(they havent studied putting a I and E new born babies in dark room yet and seeing if there would be difference when they hit 3 months, like there is if they have some interaction with the environment).
i really cant believe that you are comparing twin studies in personality research to racial hygiene
here is something you should watch:
http://vega.org.uk/video/programme/11
i know they talk about big 5, but this works the same way in jungian typology