Here's the thing. I've become obsessed with typing my self. I don't see how it's accurate. However I want an accurate type anyhow so I can dig deeper. I'm obsessed with the information gathering process. I can never accept something on the basis of limited information. I typed myself infj after taking the test although I've taken the test multiple times with different results. When I take the test the results may vary based upon what situation I think about. I'm trying to prove I'm not infj although I think and feel I am.
Hey, just remember that MBTI is not science, in fact it's almost certainly pseudoscience. There is a sense in which it is
tautologically true, in that there's an element of circular reasoning in the interaction between questionnaire answers and type descriptions, but that's about it.
However, it does have utility as a very accessible means to delve into your own personality and attempt to define what it is that makes you, you. This has a very positive effect in reducing 'I'm not normal' anxieties and allowing individuals to be confident in themselves and in the way they behave.
MBTI holds archetypes up to you and asks if you identify, and in that process you embark upon a meaningful journey of self discovery.
The MBTI is bullshit science, but think of it like this: is it important that
The Lord of the Rings is also bullshit science?
Gandalf or Aragorn are about as useful as INFJ in terms of defining archetypes, and all of them have some use to the individual's quest in understanding themselves if they identify with the characters.
Think of it like that, almost as a kind of literary reflection of society and the individuals who comprise it, and you won't misuse the system.
Personally, I think the idea of the functions is conceptually useful, and discussing it speculatively is
fun. I suspect there is some truth to it, but no one has even come close to proof.