See I think it would be a ton more interesting for everyone to instead of arguing socionics is not real, which has been explored at great length, to instead wonder :

that socionics is very, very real. That the Russian psycologist from the 1970s got it accurate, and the reason its not popular here in the west is that it has implications far to disturbing for the current paradigms in society. To be known so intimately by such a oblique system of thought that has its roots in the transpersonal and intuitive frame work of Jung, along with a suggestion that core types of people exist in a pattern and that those patterns make up a community, is an affront to the specialness and uniqueness world view people currently live within.

The trouble, if any, lies in identification and attatchement, as it always has, which is why the sages said this, in so many ways, again and again over the centuries..

The more I let go from needing, wanting, or catagorizing my type, the easier it became to play the socionics game without the inevitable hangups that come with attatchement.