MBTI: CS Joseph's Famous People Typings

[calm]

Does anyone tune in to C.S. Joseph's "How to Type Famous People" segment on Youtube?
If you're not familiar, here's the Playlist. He started off doing one person at a time but I really started watching when he started doing clusters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DA9J...4F_FOQMLRc0ldI
(I'd start at the middle of the playlist, his method has been a little harder to follow recently.)
Here's a list of his typings:https://www.csjoseph.life/famous?r_done=1
I trust most of them due to the method he uses. I employ a lot of his techniques when I type. He basically uses interaction styles and temperament but he has a cool little chart that helps me narrow down just as he does in his videos.
I was curious to know if anyone else is familiar with this. I watch his videos then go in to the threads on here and I see how people just "assume" celebrities' types, get it wrong, argue with eachother, use their MOVIE CHARACTER personas, and music lyrics that the artist didn't even write, to type.
I think if we all got familiar with this method it would help us type more correctly. I also use his confirmed typings for VI.

(His other lectures are hit or miss. I enjoy his series on the individual types and the cognitive functions but he doesn't believe in socionics IR and is instead encouraging people to get with what would be their contrary partners- but in his defense I wouldn't take Fi advice from an ENTp.)

[Rusal]

I'd seen him. He would make an argument that a declaration classifies as "movement" category and then some videos later state that something very similar or the same belonged to "control". I don't remember the exact statements but I stopped being interested in what he had to say. Not to mention that much of what he proclaimed as one of his categories could be argued to belong to the opposite. Not much clarity and bordering on unreliable.

Last I checked, he tried to redo the quadras and he converted all the types automatically because"the J and the P are inverted in socionics"... This led to strange results like having INFJ (which pretty much corresponds to INFj) in the same quadra as ESTPs. Hilarious.

But more to the point, I think he works with the mbti system. This can lead to misunderstandings. For instance, he types Mark Zuckerberg as INTJ and in his thread here you can see some favour INTp. However, some defend an ILE Dominant subtype typing. If you accept INTJ/INTp as final typing you lose the nuance of socionics. What if he is indeed an ILE Dominant? Tomato tomatoe perhaps, but the intertype relationship aspect of socionics would be lost. Dominant ILE is still ILE and an INTp would be still be in gamma.

[gone]

He talks a lot but doesn't really say anything, it's just vocal diarrhea. His interest in MBTI over Socionics doesn't help either.

[silke]

Does anyone tune in to C.S. Joseph's "How to Type Famous People" segment on Youtube?

I've listened a couple of his videos from links of a friend who was still into MBTI. Discovered that he's horrid at characterizations and typings, and that it's a waste of time to listen to him. For anyone who's made any progress into personality typology he's easily passed by, so he mainly catches the interest of complete beginners.

[Sol]

In common, the _real_ typing matches (when the both typers did not got opinions from other people before) with Jung types are <20%. It's what was seen in the existing experiments.
The match of opinions about famouses between experienced typers seems to be <50%. It's about those who type many famouses themselves, before geting opinions from anyone else. With higher _conformism_ those matches about famouses may arise significantly.

So what a random typing dude may explain about his typings is mostly interesting for novices. As other ones would notice too many disagreements.
Just from the 1st example. Trump is EIE, what is far from his SLE.

P.S. the movement of this theme out of "general socionics" is doubtful idea. with this approach the mod should move Gulenko's texts from Socionics sections also, as those in some parts are even farther from Jung. MBTI relates to Jung in dichotomies totally and this theory is the main practice in it, to keep MBTI related _practice_ in Socionics section