A whole lot of mental health knowledge fits into the category of repeatably identifiable categories of dubious usefulness.
Think phrenology: it is indeed possible to categorize the shape of people’s head in a statistically valid way… it just has nothing to do with their mental health.
It reminds me of "brain (mostly) for movement " (no decisions to make, no brain is necessary). Sea squirts being a prime example: "As an adult, the sea squirt attaches itself to a stationary object and then digests most of its own brain." (Rodolfo R. Llinas I of the Vortex: From Neurons to Self) https://www.amazon.com/Vortex-Neurons-Rodolfo-R-Llinas/dp/02...
“Repeatable identifiable categories of dubious usefulness”
Yep, there’s a lot of this in modern science.
“Is this method of classification useful? wrong question! All you need to ask is, is it easy to write a reproducible paper (or shareable web content) on this method of classification? Yes, yes it is!”
There’s a lamppost problem at work here.
It solves a problem, just not the problem most people think it solves.