There's so just room for some sort of splitting to represent truth.

The article talks about packers and mappers and that either is it isn't a useful distinction. I am open to either, but I wouldn't dismiss the idea because it's "splitting" by nature.

I get that splitting can be useful and logical in many particular situations. But when we talk about very general case like being a good engineer, it is definitely not a good way to reason.

So you're saying that the splitters are split into two groups? One group which knows when it's a good time to split, and the other group which doesn't?,

This feels like a false equivalence. Splitting articles try to make broad generalizations about human behavior, but, as any social scientist knows, human behavior is extremely complicated and multidimensional. A critique of these articles is about falsity, which is binary.