Quote Originally Posted by Tigerfadder View Post
Just maybe you think to highly of your own intellect. to express something complex with simple words yet capture the essence of the subject is something of an art. There should not really be any "subjectivity", now what that really means, in typology. But you can stay trying to determine type from the perspective of subjective, objects and systems if you so like.
In theory, that is desirable I agree that it is something to aspire to always. However, in practice, that isn't always feasible with regards the importance of absolute precision in conveying extremely counter-intuitive and complex aspects of reality.

The biggest risk is the distortion that comes from "simple words", in fact, it is a big problem which is why we are forced to create & utilise new vocabulary to minimise its effect. The only reason for advanced vocabulary is not to be pretentious but rather to minimise communication interferences from the miscommunication of ideas.

And finally regarding this:
"Just maybe you think too highly of your own intellect"
This idea makes no sense to me, with regards to intellect the proof is "in-the-pudding", or the thought-product as opposed to the agent. I don't see why personality attributes inherent to a person matter with regards to analysing the strength of their intellect. Whether the person has intellectual pride or not is irrelevant is critiquing the product of their thought.