I do agree that astrology is a fun parlor game, and it's interesting to study without necessarily believing whole-heartedly. Definitely not the same as socionics, though, as astrology is all predetermined whereas this is more of putting names to observable patterns.
Also, a little off topic, but didn't Dario Nardi do some brain scans showing there's an observable cognitive basis for the functions? Obviously it's complicated but if the matter of people not taking it seriously is just down to not having enough academic proof, it seems like there's at least some interest brewing. Problem is we can't all go and join a study to get our heads shoved in an MRI machine to get typed yet, so we have to make do with a personal journey of self-discovery. Which...is not that bad though?
