Donald Trump's Myers-Briggs Type

[Poki]

I think he's pretty clearly ESTP and he's basically the posterboy for the MBTI 16 "ESTP" ie Se-Ti at that.

The argument for him being a Te lead is defeated by the simple fact that Trump doesn't care about what makes external logical sense, he doesn't include other people in his decisions, he doesn't look outwards towards what is going to be accepted as logical - Trump looks within Trump for his decisions - meaning, his decision making process is introverted, and he looks at what makes the most sense to him - though, he does have a very solid understanding of what will have the most impact with regards to the wider social spectrum of Feeling so it's not like his F is non-existent - and, it's clearly extraverted.

That said though, does Trump actually make decisions in accordance with social values? Nope. Like I said. Trump looks to Trump for his decisions.
Ergo, his introverted Thinking is preferred over his extraverted Feeling.

With regards to S/N - there's not a whole lot to talk about here, N is obviously his biggest flaw - he can't see what's coming, he simply can not connect the dots and project his imagination into the future - he is the posterboy for the silly MBTI "Se" stereotypes whereby someone is so wrapped up in the present moment they can't see anything else.

Trump gathers too much information than he knows what to do with, hence why so many things he says are untrue or have a very very tiny amount of truth in them - so he's gathering real-world facts, but he's not making any sense of them at all, he's not comprehending and understanding the information.
So due to the above, I place him as Se over Si - Si types, due to introversion, mull over known information *more than* people preferring to take in more and more and more information (Se/Ne).

So for the reasons above, Trump is a stock-standard MBTI 16 types SeTi type, imo.
His information gathering process is Sensation, and it is extraverted - this is cross-checked with an inferior intuition that is found within him failing to project anything into the future, he can't do anything non-tangible, there's a huge disconnect between Se and Ni with this guy.

I agree his Te is screwed...hence

The unhealthiest types of ESTJs tend to operate with a warped or highly imbalanced Extraverted Thinking function. They tend to appear as dominating, aggressive, controlling, and confrontational. They like to be in charge, but when in charge they become the strictest micro-managers, seeing their way as the only “right” way and ignoring other alternatives or perspectives. They see things in extremely black and white contexts, jump to conclusions quickly, and are insensitive towards others. They may pride themselves on “saying it like it is” and may feel that this is simply honesty and therefore a trait to be admired. However, there’s a certain pride in their “no-holds barred” criticism, and they can walk all over other people and their feelings without care or concern.

From another site

Destructive ESTJs are dictatorial, aggressive, and controlling. They believe that they know what’s best for everyone, and that their way is the only way. They suppress their moral compass and disregard the feelings and values of other people in exchange for their own rigid views. They push forward to achieve their goals, but instead of taking time to reflect on their decisions, they steamroll over everyone in their path in order to accomplish tasks without considering alternate viewpoints or the moral implications of their actions. They may be loyal to a corrupt system or authority and suppress anyone who stands against that authority or questions it. They trust their own personal experience and disregard other people’s experience. They scoff at the emotions and values of others while they allow themselves to have their own temper tantrums and emotional overreactions

 

[Dashy CVII]

I think he's pretty clearly ESTP and he's basically the posterboy for the MBTI 16 "ESTP" ie Se-Ti at that.

The argument for him being a Te lead is defeated by the simple fact that Trump doesn't care about what makes external logical sense, he doesn't include other people in his decisions, he doesn't look outwards towards what is going to be accepted as logical - Trump looks within Trump for his decisions - meaning, his decision making process is introverted, and he looks at what makes the most sense to him - though, he does have a very solid understanding of what will have the most impact with regards to the wider social spectrum of Feeling so it's not like his F is non-existent - and, it's clearly extraverted.

So your definition of Te has nothing to do with real reason/logic. Real logic exists in the human mind, the difference between Ti and Te instead is, where this logic is going to be applied: to the external, or to the internal. I've been down the road of stereotypical MBTI functions with people, like the one you posted, and they just don't work. Someone with T > S > N > F as their clear order, who is an extrovert, will have their Logic attributed to the immediate external situation as a matter of practicality, it won't go inward into situation-ignoring reflection where ideations on general systems are mapped and thought about. We all use Te and Ti, but the functions themselves are opposites.

The argument for him being a Te lead is defeated by the simple fact that Trump doesn't care about what makes external logical sense,

Not if you define external logical sense as: including people in decisions, and what will be accepted by people. None of these things have anything to do with logic. These are typically examples of someone who doesn't think and let's the group think for him. Te is about the Logic of the Externals, as Introverts don't primarily pay attention to Externals.

Te is my logic, I don't need other people to think for me. I use Te for the reasons that I don't have a strong makeup of logical systems or clear-cut maps. Te is situational logic so "Ti" goes subconscious: Te grows through its external experience, not like Ti with conscious mapping and ruminating. I think you went and misdefined the functions. My recommendation, read what Internal vs External Logic and other functions are in the links I posted around this thread and in my signature. I agree Trump may have some Ti there, but Te is much stronger, and Se is pretty absent as far as I can see. I gave my take on his type using the real functions.

 

[Turi]

So your definition of Te has nothing to do with real reason/logic. Real logic exists in the human mind, the difference between Ti and Te instead is, where this logic is going to be applied: to the external, or to the internal. Someone with T > S > N > F as their clear order, who is an extrovert, will be that their Logic is attributed to the immediate external situation, it won't go inward into the situation-ignoring subject where reflections are based on more general and subjectively-chosen systems. I agree Trump may have some Ti there, but Te is much stronger, and Se is pretty absent as far as I can see.

I didn't provide a definition of Te, so any comments on how I would define it are beyond the scope of my post - however if you will reread my post, you will find that I did indeed suggest Te pertains to external logic.

Not if you define external logical sense as: including people in decisions, and what will be accepted by people. None of these things have anything to do with logic. These are typically examples of someone who doesn't think, let's the group think for him.

That's now hot I define "external logical sense", although including the decisions of others, what makes sense to others etc is a requirement of Te - due to extraversion.

Te is my logic, I don't need other people to think for me. I use Te for the reasons that I don't have a strong makeup of logical systems or clear-cut maps. Te is situational so "Ti" goes subconscious. I think you went and misdefined the functions. My recommendation, read what Internal vs External Logic and other functions really are, in the links I posted around this thread and in my signature.

Te is not "your" logic, it is essentially a communal or global logic ie what makes sense outside of yourself.
Anything else fails to understand extraversion.

I'm not interested in defending myself any further nor debating anyone on definitions and terminology ala every other thread anyone attempts to post in.
It's somewhat annoying how every thread devolves into debating the same thing - how to define the terms.

 

[Dashy CVII]

It's somewhat annoying how every thread devolves into debating the same thing - how to define the terms.

How is it annoying? It should be the pinnacle of talk. And how is your stereotypical take on Te the correct one, in the human mind about how "Extroverted Logic" really reads and demonstrates in people? In my experience, Extroversion is geared toward the externals and situation, while Introversion is geared toward general reflection that ignores the specific situation. Te is the orientation of logic that attunes quickly to the outside and makes plans and logistics happen. Te isn't about giving away authority to other people and calling it logic.

That wouldn't even be much in terms of "thinking."

I said on the last page "Te is a way of acting to appropriately fit the external moment to a logical program of behavior or rationale; to a given situation. Xe is one's dynamic personality for the external situation."

 

[Poki]

I didn't provide a definition of Te, so any comments on how I would define it are beyond the scope of my post - however if you will reread my post, you will find that I did indeed suggest Te pertains to external logic.



That's now hot I define "external logical sense", although including the decisions of others, what makes sense to others etc is a requirement of Te - due to extraversion.



Te is not "your" logic, it is essentially a communal or global logic ie what makes sense outside of yourself.
Anything else fails to understand extraversion.

I'm not interested in defending myself any further nor debating anyone on definitions and terminology ala every other thread anyone attempts to post in.
It's somewhat annoying how every thread devolves into debating the same thing - how to define the terms.

Te is communal logic because it extraverts logic. Its an effect of extraverted logic. Te has 2 methods to operate...works to find and extract communal logic or find communal logic that matches understanding. A healthy Te will know when to adapt and work towards communal logic and when to find communal logic that matches yours. Unhealthy does opposite in support of ego. Healthy method and ego is supported for you because of good positive growth.

I can tell you exactly what Trump needs to thrive as a person and as a president. And its strictly based on who he is, not some communal logic of actions or some republican or democrat policies.

Go listen and watch Trump and you will see an unhealthy ego driven narcisistic use of Te. Then go listen to zig ziglar and you will find some of the most healthy driven Te I have seen.

Making sense has nothing to do with logic. Making sense is a perception function. Even logical sense is created through perception. Sense is one of the easiest ways to manipulate people. Once you know what they know you tweak things so that a picture forms that aligns with everything else they know.

 

[neko 4]

ESTJ

 

[Peter Deadpan]

All I know is that he's a Je 8 with lots of 3 flavor. I heard he is Sp first (in a video with Katherine Fauvre).

 

[ducks]

I say entj. He's not "likeable" enough to be estp. He's also too free minded to be estj, I don't see the Si values that you would see with estj. Entjs are kind of you respect them or you don't. That's how he is. Entjs also come across as crazy often.

I don't really like that stereotype. The ENTJs I've known, although often too confrontational or in my face at times, they always believed that a person earns respect and generally all seemed to have an irreverence for politics. Usually it boils down to having morals and not wanting to lose that. Politics can be very amoral. Plus they have a way of pissing people off and making things harder for themselves by holding to their morals (admirable). They also seem to have a very inquisitive mind that is often very open and accepting of diversity and healthy differences. The Don is anything, but that. Amorality is perfect for Donald and his subjective logic. But I agree with the crazy part lol. They all seem to have had a bad part of their lives where they indulged way too much and went off the deep end a bit.

 

[Turi]

How is it annoying? It should be the pinnacle of talk.

It completely prevents anybody from having a normal conversation, every threads turns into a piss-fest about what the functions and definitions mean, nobody gets anywhere.

Completely unproductive.

And how is your stereotypical take on Te the correct one, in the human mind about how "Extroverted Logic" really reads and demonstrates in people? In my experience, Extroversion is geared toward the externals and situation, while Introversion is geared toward general reflection that ignores the specific situation. Te is the orientation of logic that attunes quickly to the outside and makes plans and logistics happen. Te isn't about giving away authority to other people and calling it logic.

...see, here you're forcing me to respond because you're misrepresenting what I said, and then attempting to "correct" me with your own completely subjective definitions of what Te is - knowing, no doubt fully well - that I, some guy on the internet will not just roll over and accept what some other guy on the internet says as any kind of truth.

Thinking is Thinking, regardless of orientation - it's the same function - when it is direct outwards, ie extraverted - this means it's looking out towards the wider spectrum - it is thinking about what works for others, given current facts - this can be either in a direct fashion regarding people, or an indirect one - but Te is absolutely oriented externally towards what makes logical sense in according to external facts, this includes other peoples opinions and decisions etc - something like the law is ultimately adherence to what makes sense to others - Te is others oriented. It is extraverted and it is a decision making ie rational function.

Nobody is suggesting Te "gives away authority", it simply looks outside of itself to inform its decisions.

So in judging whether a particular thinking is extraverted or not we must first ask: by what criterion does it judge— does it come from outside, or is its origin subjective?

Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (Routledge Classics) (p. 318). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

Extraverted thinking, then, comes into existence only when the objective orientation predominates.

Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (Routledge Classics) (p. 319). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

A further criterion is the direction the thinking takes in drawing conclusions— whether it is principally directed outwards or not. It is no proof of its extraverted nature that it is preoccupied with concrete objects, since my thinking may be preoccupied with a concrete object either because I am abstracting my thought from it or because I am concretizing my thought through it. Even when my thinking is preoccupied with concrete things and could be described as extraverted to that extent, the direction it will take still remains an essential characteristic and an open question— namely, whether or not in its further course it leads back again to objective data, external facts, or generally accepted ideas.

Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (Routledge Classics) (p. 318). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

This type will, by definition, be a man whose constant endeavour— in so far, of course, as he is a pure type— is to make all his activities dependent on intellectual conclusions, which in the last resort are always oriented by objective data, whether these be external facts or generally accepted ideas.

Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (Routledge Classics) (pp. 321-322). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.


It's pretty clear that what we refer to as Te, ie Thinking in the Extraverted attitude, is oriented externally towards - verbatim - "objective data, external facts, or generally accepted ideas" and that it draws it's conclusions and informs its judgments from the outside.
I could go on, if required - ideally in a different thread.


Now that that's out of the way, back to Trump.

Trump looks at Trump with regards to the decisions he makes - he doesn't scout out other peoples opinions, he doesn't care about what's worked in the past, he doesn't care about what makes logical sense outside of himself, he doesn't make decisions in accordance with external facts or objective data - the criterion by which Trump makes decisions comes from Trump and Trump only, this is why I believe Trump is Se-Ti and not Se-Te.

 

[Jaguar]

Trump looks at Trump with regards to the decisions he makes - he doesn't scout out other peoples opinions, he doesn't care about what's worked in the past, he doesn't care about what makes logical sense outside of himself, he doesn't make decisions in accordance with external facts or objective data - the criterion by which Trump makes decisions comes from Trump and Trump only, this is why I believe Trump is Se-Ti and not Se-Te.

Sounds like James Comey talking:

CNN on Twitter: "Former FBI Director James Comey says President Trump doesn’t have “external reference points”

 

[QueenBeech]

As an ESTP, I can confirm Trump is an ESTP.

 

[Turi]

Sounds like James Comey talking:

CNN on Twitter: "Former FBI Director James Comey says President Trump doesn’t have “external reference points”

Ha! Hadn't seen that!
Matches basically everybodies observations - and also, obviously, doesn't reflect Te at all.

 

[Poki]

Ha! Hadn't seen that!
Matches basically everybodies observations - and also, obviously, doesn't reflect Te at all.

He won the election right. He is filthy rich right. People wanted his name on their buildings right. He had his own magazine. He has many reasons why he would see himself as great. He is married to a model. Why doesnt he have any external reference points? Now you can argue that his reference points may not be that accurate, but thats denial and denial is not function or type specific. Te is more about results then truth. He talks for pure reaction to get results. Which is half ass, but if you just look at good half he is great.

Do you understand what perception is?

 

[Dashy CVII]

It's fine Turi, I know you're heeding to the stereotypical definition of Te, like with Jung you quoted. But in my experience those definitions alone are superficial and miss the point of real Extraverted Logic as it exists in the psyche of individuals. In truth it paints Te as too similar to Ti, just not sounding as much like "Thinking." Te and Ti are opposite orientations. INTJs like me are supposed to get thinking and logic on MBTI tests? Their own thinking? And ESTJs have it as their strongest function. There's much more to Te and Ti, than Jung noted.

On E vs I, I take the more Socionics approach here which understands Extraversion as external immersion, and Introversion as internal immersion. While Ti as one's logic unlike Te does avoid external influence, Te and Ti are actual opposites in personal logic. Te is driven to thoroughly manifest on the surface in logical action and practicality in situations/discussions, and can do so by heeding influence from others in a situation. Ti being object-ignoring retreats from the situation, back into the internal situation, thinking of its general structures and mapping of reality, not applying logic situationally but making the situation serve their internal mechanism which they can decide to proact on their own. Ti types then use Te or Fe to make external judgments, but they are static types who do this activity less. Ti decisions and ideas are fully individual, that is, free from the objective situation.We use all the functions to more-or-less degrees. These dichotomies apply to all Xe/Xi functions, and is why I think Socionics can (sometimes) be a little better in some of its definitions.

Most importantly, I find trump not only manifesting in primary Te behavior, but Si. Trump as clearly T > S > N > F, we don't see much Se Immersion anywhere in Trump like we see with in Se dominants. See how an SeTi type would flow from high immersion inward, their primary function is bold perception and interaction, their energy is sensorially explorative and engaging. Trump isn't primary Se. I have him as a solid ESTJ, driven to practical situational thinking and his sea of inner details and memories (Si), while ignoring situational concrete perception (Se) and a reflective (Ti) structuring of reality. Situational concrete perception is weak, while Situational abstract perception is strong (Ne.) It might be better by your theory to call trump a Ti primary.

There have been plenty of Fe-Ti politicians where precedence isn't given to Ti, but assumed by mostly Fe-Ti public. Trump fully divulges his Thinking because he's always had it collaborative and situational, even after his authoritarian bent, which a Ti type doesn't interpret and in the same way, Te-Fi public tend to assume Fi out of Trump even though it doesn't greatly manifest but in signs and actions. This is one reason Trump appears so cold and immoral: Te primary behavior is the extraverted personality and protocol. Fe ulta-inferior is manifest to the public in the same vein as Fi-inferior being frustrated and complex in defending itself from Fe. Trump doesn't have inferior N or S.

Talking about function definitions completely prevents anybody from having a normal conversation, every threads turns into a piss-fest about what the functions and definitions mean, nobody gets anywhere.

This is a typology forum. I don't find that to be true at all. I can type Trump using the Jungian system too, but I choose not to generally, based on my experience of it not working on its own. It's best to start with the fundamentals, and it's practical to read about peoples' individual experiences of the functions and how they see them manifest in reality.

 

[Turi]

It's fine Turi, I know you're heeding to the stereotypical definition of Te, like with Jung you quoted. But in my experience those definitions are superficial and miss the point of real Extraverted Logic as it exists in the psyche of individuals. In truth it paints Te as too similar to Ti, just not sounding as much like "Thinking." Yet INTJs like me are supposed to get thinking and logic on MBTI tests? Their own thinking? And ESTJs have it as their strongest function?

Nope - I'm not "heeding" to any such "stereotypical definition" of Te. I don't think your opinion really matters when we're talking about functions - Jung is basically "the source" for any functions-related speak - to hear you suggest that his definitions are superficial and miss the point is somewhat telling.
To each their own.

For what it's worth, I don't strictly follow Jungs work when typing either - I prefer ObjectivePersonalitys - Te there, is the following:
"Decides based on tribe’s spectrum of social reasons"

I find this an accurate representation of Jungs work - compare and contrast it to the Jung quotes I posted earlier, for reference - or to Psychological Types - and do note, regarding EJs (ie extraverted rationals):

The rationality of both types is object-oriented and dependent on objective data. It accords with what is collectively considered to be rational. For them, nothing is rational save what is generally considered as such.

Jung, Carl. Psychological Types (Routledge Classics) (p. 334). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition.

In light of the above, let us look at the orientation of Trumps Thinking - it is either determined an introverted decider or an extraverted one, the following are the descriptors for those according to the method I prefer to use:

• Prioritizes self decisions before tribe’s (introverted decider).
• Prioritizes tribe’s decisions above self (extraverted decider).

You tell me which one Trump fits.

To drill home why I believe he fits Se-Ti, it's mostly about how his T/F are relatively balanced in relation to his S and N.
EP types are outlined as "Over gathers new info, slow to organize known info" - this is exactly Trump, it can barely be argued - he gathers so much information that he never organizes it or makes sense of it, he's an example of someone with Oe (your Pe) very far removed from Oi (your Pi) and this is also aligned with Jungs work.

I take the more Socionics approach here which understands Extraversion as external immersion, and Introversion as internal immersion. Te and Ti are actual opposites. While Te is driven to thoroughly manifest on the surface in logical action and practicality in situations/discussions, Ti being object-ignoring retreats inwardly into thinking of general structures and mapping of reality, not applying logic situationally, but making the situation serve their internal mechanism which they can decide to proact on their own. Their individual decisions and ideas are free from the objective situation. Ti isn't a function of external response, ESTPs use Te and mostly Fe for that. We use all the functions to more-or-less degrees. These dichotomies apply to all Xe/Xi functions, and is why I think Socionics can (sometimes) be a little better in some of its definitions.

That's cool, I'm not into Socionics - to each their own, but Socionics forces the Grant stack onto people and I disagree with that idea (ie that we all follow IEIE/EIEI).

Most importantly, I find trump not only manifesting in primary Te behavior, but Si. Trump as clearly T > S > N > F, we don't see much Se Immersion anywhere like we see with in Se dominants. Situational concrete perception is weak, while Situational abstract perception is strong (Ne.) It might be better by your theory to call trump a Ti primary. I have him as a solid ESTJ, driven to practical situational thinking and his sea of inner details and memories (Si), while ignoring situational concrete perception (Se) and a reflective (Ti) structuring of reality. See how an SeTi type would flow from high immersion inward? Their primary function is bold perception and interaction, their energy is sensorially explorative and engaging. Trump isn't primary Se.

That's fair enough - you can type him however you want.
From my perspective, utilizing some of Jungs work (I'm obviously not adhering to Jungs theories on the general attitude of consciousness - just like Socionics doesn't) and also a methodology I prefer as it's more consistent (imo) - he fits Se-Ti.
He doesn't fit Te at all from a Jungian perspective insofar as he would be an Extraverted Thinking type and he doesn't fit Te (imo) within the model I prefer.

This is a typology forum. I don't find that to be true at all. I can type Trump using the Jungian system too, but I choose not to generally, based on my experience of it not working. It's best to start with the fundamentals, and it's fun and practical to read about peoples' individual experiences of the functions and how they see them manifest in reality.

You're allowed to feel that way, sure.
Just as I'm allowed to suggest it's annoying to see every thread turn into the same discussions, whereby someone is trying to "teach" or force others into believing what they believe and attempting to correct others understandings.

 

[QueenBeech]

*Whispers from the forgotten shadows of humanity*

Maybe you should trust the person who is an ESTP to know their own.

 

[Dashy CVII]

I think QueenBeech hit the nail on the head. More succinctly, we need to trust the Extravert who identifies with Dominant Sensing > T > F > N. That is the Se type, and we need to continue to thoroughly examine them:

Nope - I'm not "heeding" to any such "stereotypical definition" of Te. I don't think your opinion really matters when we're talking about functions - Jung is basically "the source" for any functions-related speak - to hear you suggest that his definitions are superficial and miss the point is somewhat telling.
To each their own.

This is just your opinion. In reality, the source of the functions are the humans. Se needs to be understood through someone who actually has Extroversion + Dominant Sensing. (Not someone's definition of Se, but the real manifestation of Extraversion + Sensing. We have examples of that, and it's not Trump). Te needs to be understood through someone who actually has Extroversion + Dominant Thinking. We must have clear examples of the psychological orientations of E and I in humans to understand the difference in functional orientations (ie. Ti vs Te.) This is my personal approach, and as I said, Jung is useful to understand some aspects of Te, but his theory only by itself falls apart, mostly useless with weak typological boundaries and implications. It has for years been observed that individuals can be classified much more usefully and effectively using something (a) more Socionics-related, (b) more coinciding with real "Extraverted Thinking where Extraversion + Thinking occurs in the mind, and not just in someone's definition." My advice for you? get with the times in these different typological systems.

Observational theoretics of how the mind actually manifests itself show so many people don't relate to their primary functions in MBTI. But ime, they do have a clear dominant function, it's just based on what dichotomies they're strongest in. I strongly and primarily identify with Intuition of Internals despite not really caring for various mainstream definitions of Ni. I've written many definitions on Ni myself throughout the years as the general orientation of perception of Ni types. I'm I/N > T=F > S, and observations of anyone including myself will point to what Ni does in people and how it manifests--actually understanding people, not simply prescribing to the original observations in the theory. It falls apart so much, because people like Trump don't actually rely on dominant Se. He's a clear example of the dominant Thinker of the extraverted situation, and fits spot on with the other Delta orientations, Si-Ne, Te-Fi. But I'm fully open to discussing this with you and reaching other conclusions.

 

[Introspector]

I think QueenBeech hit the nail on the head.

You think he's ESTJ, right? Check out her earlier post.

As an ESTP, I can confirm Trump is an ESTP.

I'm not taking any sides here, but if you are going to quote someone, make sure the quote is supporting your side.

Have a nice day.

 

[Dashy CVII]

Well it doesn't have to support my side if it's just one poll of information. I agree with her not as an authority on ESTPs, but her statement. What she said is truth: you go to real ESTPs (or study them) to find out more. A little off-topic though. The only actual way to verify an ESTP is to verify Extraversion + Sensing Dominance, aka individuals of Concrete Immersion in Perception. It is then we can go to them (or study them.)

 

[Introspector]

It doesn't have to support my side if it's just one poll of information. I agree with her statement, not her as an authority on Trump's type. What she said is truth. There are many Extravert + Sensing Dominants out there, she herself might relate to actual Extraversion + Dominant Sensing, or maybe deep inside her she finds another function to be stronger and isn't an ESTP, I don't know. Her comment said to go to ESTPs, not self-typed ESTPs. Trump is very unlikely an Se primary type because ESTPs are those with Extraversion + Dominant Sensing. I have plenty of data on how this function manifests and examples of ESTPs.

Would that make someone who is not that type's opinion invalid? If I were the only one allowed to say who is an ISTJ 5w6-3w4-1w9 so/sp, than I would say (well, not really but in theory) that nobody else in the world is that type because I'm a special snowflake. However, there are other ISTJ 5w6-3w4-1w9 so/sp types out there, so taking an opinion like that would be detrimental to figuring somebody's type out. Your other points are valid but that one just didn't make sense to me.