Thinking vs. Feeling Is a False Dichotomy

Until they've got a sound statistical basis and a working model for cognition, this is just astrology or alchemy for modern society. Models that purport to predict human behaviors and motivations hide a vast and deep well of implicit knowledge that every human uses in social behavior.

Just like psychics, magicians, and con men can do cold readings based off of exquisite understanding of human behavior, body language, and statistics, eq and Myers-Briggs and much of psychology can give individuals a framework around which they can successfully navigate, inform, and manipulate other people. We have brains evolved to do things that allow us to successfully interact socially, and almost any structure at all can augment the possibility of repeated successful outcomes. Penn and Teller could perform magic tricks that work 999 times out of 1000, that doesn't mean they're actually magic. A psychologist could successfully treat 999 cases of depression out of 1000, but that doesn't mean they know what they're doing, in a scientific sense.

Success shouldn't imply validity of a model in the scientific sense, and this is what we find in the field of psychology. The big 5 model is derived statistically, and has allowed for many rigorous and will designed experiments, but even that is missing the more crucial understanding of what brains are actually doing. You can use big 5 testing and astrology, or religion, or insert your favorite psychology style here to achieve positive and therapeutic results for people. Catching the edge cases, defining what mental health means in a scientific sense, and finally developing a solid technology of cognition is still out of reach, and it should be far better known than it is. The field of psychology is barely better than a religious practice when viewed critically.

The replication crisis is deeply apparent in the field. It may be that neuroscience will supplant psychology as neuroscience improves. Neuron level connectomes are being investigated, and mathematicians will eventually be able to untangle the chemical, electrical, and structural algorithms underlying the functions of human cognition. Machine learning and ai may produce a valid high level model as well. Without that model, though, more than half of what you need to understand and predict human cognition is an unknowable black box.

The attempt to expand the idea of iq and eq as equally legitimate orthogonal aspects of cognition is well intentioned, but you might as well use a horoscope, the i ching, an e-meter, or the numerological interpretation of someone's name.