Typologies vs Typologies

[sar]

Long (but important! ) post.

As I was looking around for more information on the various systems that derived originally from Jung's original work (Kiersey, MBTI, socionics, enneagram, etc.) I realized that various little social experiments conducted by each of these typologies conflict.

Obviously, some people on here are aware of this...but everyone (including me) passes it off for some strange reason...isn't it sort of a BIG deal? To illustrate my point consider this: the intertype relations of socionics (Jung's original 8 personality types mixed with Kępiński's ((who critizied much of Jung's work! )) information metabolism) state that an ENFp with an INFp make for "extinguishing relations" (not good). YET on other mbti studies on relations such as this one conducted on hundreds of subjects: http://www.massmatch.com/MBTI-2.php has INFP and ENFP as one of the most ideal relations. NOW I understand that socionics and mbti are "totally different systems"...BUT Odds are an INFP will be an still be an INFp. To make this easier to imagine, I'm an INFp and also an INFP. So what gives? Isn't it just that everything is totally subjective and that if you're looking for the letter A in the alphabet you'll find A? And that if someone else is looking for the letter B, they'll also find B? Isn't it obvious that someone can look at a painting and laugh and someone else can look at the exact same painting and cry? The painting isn't changing, it's the same. Yet the perspective is different.