Let's rewind. My post wasn't clear and is being misunderstood or I've misunderstood and am going off on a wild tangent now.
1.) I am talking about MBTI / JCF not providing
as many growth points as I believe the enneagram does. That is NOT to say the study and awareness of MBTI / JCF offers no benefit to personal growth.
2.) The enneagram positions itself to more fully outline a spectrum of unhealthy to healthy, which I think opens the door to greater personal insight ergo personal growth. Emotional growth is what prompts a person to examine their weak spots in more detail and provides sufficient motivation to follow through with everything from learning to play the piano to wanting to be more ambidextrous to studying JCF.
3.) That being said, I do think MBTI type does help one gain a greater awareness of areas to examine and work on for personal development, and also identify those differences in others and reconcile those with your own preferences. However, I do think this cannot go as far as the emotional work enneagram propels.
Enneagram is phenomenal for development, but I think typology is just as useful for the notion of cognitive growth.
I want to be clear what you define as "cognitive growth"? Using one's inferior functions? Or the opposing functions to your dominant? And when you say typlogy, you do mean MBTI / JCF correct?
If you mean developing one's inferior, my issue with this is you can't turn a fish into a bird. I can act and function as a Te dom all I want, but that focus on Te comes at a cost to me, not as an inexhaustible benefit. In fact, it can blunt my Fi, dull it down, leaving me not as in tune with myself or my emotions as I want. I know this because I've experienced it so often in my life. Not only that, continual use of the inferior is a great recipe to burn out, actually. So, yes, Te is definitely in my toolbox (anyone who knows me isn't even going to attempt to argue against that) but I pay a price to use it. My competency in use makes
no difference either to how much it costs. The energetic cost is very high. I am just not as "good" at it, and to be "good" requires so much in payment!
If you mean using Ti for example, I am not even sure how to begin discussing that. Is that your focus?
So I am trying to understand what you are getting at, without derailing the thread too badly. Am I off the mark here?
And, I am not sure what neuroplasticity has to do with that?
I have no issue with the article, but using the example of handedness, I don't believe any right-hander is as good with their left unless they are actually mixed-handed to begin with. You simply will not find using the left as effortless as the right. Lefties who have been raised to use the right may appear to write with ease but they do not use the same regions of the brain to write with as a right-hander - the forcing of mechanical adaptation does not "rewire" them. In fact, I think it's believed to overload one part of the brain whilst under-stimulating the other leading to lots of negative consequences. (I can find the studies and all if you are interested.)
I guess I feel it's great to have lots of tools in the toolbox, but IMO such strategies are best for short-term use with the realization that constant usage comes at a cost of neglecting other functions and depleting one's resources.
OTOH, emotional work, even for non-feelers, is not as contrary somehow ... and I need to think that one out more.