system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
cmv: MBTI is overrated and bad tool.

I was in MBTI community for almost a year, yet I think it is just a funny test. We shouldn't use it in schools and work, and it honestly is overrated. While there is a logical framework, there aren't any solid empirical evidence.

This could also be said about enneagram, tritype, etc. 
The only good test is Big Five (also HEXACO). 

I know why this test is so popular. It is easy to relate to 4 letters, it is easy to think you are special among others, while also be part in community. 
But when something is wrong... People just ignore it and say you are mistyped. 
 
It has many flaws:
poor validity (i.e. not measuring what it purports to measure, not having predictive power or not having items that can be generalized);
poor reliability (giving different results for the same person on different occasions);
measuring categories that are not independent (some dichotomous traits have been noted to correlate with each other);
not being comprehensive (due to missing neuroticism).

Many people think you should type by cognitive functions, but were is evidence they even exist? 

What I also dislike is how instead of giving evidence, a lot of people just quote psychologists, even Myers do this:

Furthermore, the evidence given by Myers for the orientation of the auxiliary function relies on one sentence from Jung:

"For all the types met with in practice, the rule holds good that besides the conscious, primary function there is a relatively unconscious, auxiliary function which is in every respect different from the nature of the primary function."

And how the fuck a lot of psychologists just make up things from their head. Freud, Myers, Jung... What the hell?
gpt
These are some common arguments against MBTI and they have some credibility of course, due to the obviously complex nature of cognition, personality etc, but there are also plenty of things it's perfectly capable of doing.

Notably, the 'take/retake' problem you bring up is invariably a larger issue than it is in reality, precisely because of the dichotomy of the system itself.  Anyone who is near the average, and, it's an *average* for a reason... can easily one day fall on the opposite side of the spectrum, because it's not that far of a move.

Also the 'predictive' problem is also generally only a problem when people try to use it to predict something it is not meant to predict.

You don't use a ruler, to weigh yourself, as I've heard said before.

Briggs and Myer stated "any type of person can be successful in any type of job" and that the test was not meant to predict job performance.  Which is one of the things people nowadays attempt to use it for.

The MBTI does have some valid predictive ability to correlate job *choice* and job *satisfaction*, and validation studies in the past have shown both predictive effects are observable.

It's never going to predict what you should be doing, but it does have predictive ability on what you will do, and your satisfaction in the choice you've made.