Modern psychologists have found over and over that the Myers Briggs Type Indicator is, while not completely useless, an incomplete tool. Its tests are unreliable, and its definitions on introversion, extroversion, intuition, sensing, feeling, thinking, judging and perceiving lack solid support in science. At the same time, science can confirm that people really do have many differences; the problem is that the MBTI has not connected with this research. We need to change and we need to do better if we want to complete what Carl Jung set out to do. If we want a more solid understanding of people and people’s needs, we need to improve.

Stereotypes and unscientific beliefs, the biggest problem with the MBTI? 
The eight personality traits do touch upon real important differences between people, but not in a sufficient way. Often, the tools fall prone to stereotyping. Other times, they use such complex jargon that it becomes hard if not impossible to understand the practical implications.
The Myers Briggs system often falls prone to the Forer effect, where personality descriptions are streamlined to be as general as possible, often describing qualities that all humans possess. This makes it hard to gain accurate, meaningful understanding of differences between people, thereby getting lost rather than found within the Myers Briggs type descriptions.

We Need Neojungian Typology To Address These Problems

Neojungian Typology has made efforts from the start to research real neuroscience on personality. The goal has been to fit Carl Jung’s theories into the modern world of psychology, making personality psychology into a valid science, in tune with modern research.
The biggest thing we did was realise that a personality type wasn’t a pigeon-hole or a box. An introvert is not doomed to a certain behaviour. Personality type is not a diagnosis, it is merely an assessment of A) your interests B) your motivations, C) how you manage stress, and D) how you manage your emotions. It helps us see the real nature of all personality traits – for instance, introverts simply have a different way to balance themselves, compared to extroverts.

The Problems With The Tests

With the traditional systems, people were forced to answer based on how often they did this or that, how outgoing they were, how nice they were, or how logical they were. Often, the questions weren’t clearly related; for example, why would a person that enjoys talking about values be less interested in science? Often, I have found that, on the contrary, a person interested in complex moral discussions will usually also enjoy discussing theoretical physics. The more intelligent you are, the more curious you will be.
Other times, questions depended strongly on the situation:  At work, yes.  At home, no. Because of this, people were forced to say what they related to most of the time. Sometimes this meant I just had to click an option at random. This means that the personality descriptions will only describe one part of us, the us we relate to the most. However, we have many more sides, and we would learn more if a system was diverse enough to capture more of our sides and our developed traits: The INFJ at work, the INFJ as a parent, the INFJ in love, and so on.
We also have to be more clear on our definitions. Often, our definitions of our concepts are so vague or generic that science simply cannot operate on it. Often, values-related words can have multiple possible interpretations. This is both the limitation and the possibility of our language. We have to be more clear about what we mean. I have noticed that many MBTI-like systems, like socionics, depend on this ambiguity, and on using words so complex that anyone can interpret anyone as anything. For a psychologist, it becomes almost impossible to test the claims made by socionics.
What It Means To Practice Neojungian Typology
We are now in the process of setting up our team and spreading our theories about typology. What we try to do is initially fourfold:

1. We try to provide definitions that can be clearly tested and understood…Definitions that are clearly opposed and easy to interpret and put into practice.
2. We avoid complex jargon that can be easily misunderstood and that creates unnecessary barriers between newcomers and old-players. Ideally, we want to understand psychology enough to know how to make ourselves understood to anyone.
3. We provide a more diverse system of classification that allows people more freedom.  We also show more sides of a personality type. This means relying on our research on subtypes to help show how each personality type shifts depending on mood, energy, and how motivated they are.
4. Neojungian Typology will work a little like the Enneagram, offering you growth advice perfect for your personality preference.

Going beyond this, we are pioneering a new dimension to the system:

5. We launch eight new cognitive functions beyond the traditional eight, showing similarities between ENFJs and ENFPs, and INTJs and INTPs, that have been previously undiscussed. IN, EN, IF, EF, IS, ES, IT, ET – all related to your letter combinations.
6. We show that the cognitive functions are intelligences that can be practiced and developed, and we tell you what happens when you begin to become more skilled in the use of each individual function. This means increasing your intelligence, your empathy, or your memory.
7. We launch the cognitive functions not just as cognitive but also as emotional functions. There are emotional implications for the person and their emotional makeup. Each cognitive function represents a certain strategy for managing a certain emotion.

Yes, we have a lot to do, everyone! We need all the help we can get to make this good.
What we are looking for in our team members

• People with an interest in making connections between modern psychology, modern sociology, and personality typology theories and application.
• People interested in learning more about how personality psychology ties into self-development and the pursuits of happiness and meaning.
• Finally, we need people who have a critical mindset and that are ready to challenge us and question us. If you don’t get it, chances are that others don’t either. Help us transition from our alpha stage, to our beta stage, and to becoming a serious, credible system.

We do not possess all the answers; we are merely setting out to map out a new field. We need all the help we can get in this process. There will be platforms where you can discuss these topics in a comprehensive manner. And we will be launching courses, certification systems, and steps you can take to become just as good at this as we are. For now, become a patreon, a financial supporter, and join us on facebook. Write to us on facebook. Say hello on youtube. Or send us an e-mail. But you don’t just have to talk to us.
We recommend you to start writing your own articles about Neojungian Typology, or maybe make your own videos. You already have what you need to make a difference. So what do you think needs to change? How can we improve? And how can Carl Jung’s claims be tested and understood better? If you want to submit something here, send us an e-mail, and we will help you out.