otherwise a lot of stuff would be wrong

personality is inherently a subjective thing

its actually very impressive that considering the crap tests

and people's changing moods etc.

it still gets to like 70%

A test that isn't reproduceable isn't worth using

depends what you are talking about

In this instance

The instance of personality tests.

in this instance, reproducibility would be nice

all the lack of it really tells you is the tests are shit

not that MBTI is shit

if you decide MBTI is shit because the tests are shit

Didn't you just say that MBTI isn't reproduceable

you've not really given it a fair chance

or has poor reproduceability

it's like 70% reproducible

not scientific or objective

exactly

so it sucks

I'm not going to be able to impress this on you I think

My results aren't guaranteed to reflect objective reality

reproducibility is not objective reality

as personality is subjective

a person can have 1 type, but answer differently

depending on various factors

not all of which can be accounted for

I took one and it says I am extraverted

which is true yet false

this problem comes up in medicine a lot

I see what you're saying

a lot of stuff is tested to be just great, very useful

but has no clinical significance once actually put into practice

partly that's just bad faith testing

correct would be:
Extremely open to new experience
Highly conscientious
Extremes of introversion and extraversion depending on the day
Not agreeable at all
High neuroticism

and a lot of stuff done in medicine does not have good ("A") evidence

5 disparate things that come together into nothing at all, I've always found

what five things

the ones @Deleted User 57835c2c just said

its his big 5

what do you mean by "come together into nothing at all"