The Wikipedia article does not make that point, and its section on criticisms of the MBTI (which itself should be treated differently from the general scope of Jungian theory, especially after a quantitative model of Jung's theory has been published, and further developments have been suggested) jumps around so much from micro-facet to micro-facet (effectiveness of executives?) that it is nearly impossible to take as a serious exposition. I am researching this area heavily myself and have to say that the Wikipedia writeup deserves serious TLC by those who have cogent arguments that lead to conclusions like the one to which you have leaped.

The test is largely bullshit, but the function stack that underpins the MBTI concept is a good model of the way people think.

It just turns out that discovering somebody's function stack is way harder than it looks. Rather than take a test, it's best to study the functions, pay attention to how you think, and suss out how your function stack works.

Of course, the MBTI letters that are used to describe the types are misleading. You look at INTJ and think "somebody who favors introversion, intuition, thinking, and judging", and that's such a horrible oversimplification it's easy to dismiss. But if you're familiar with the function stack, then you know INTJ is code for "introverted intuition > extraverted thinking > introverted feeling > extraverted sensing" (for short: "Ni > Te > Fi > Se"), and if you know how those functions are defined, then you can actually get a decent grasp on how an INTJ thinks.

I can say that from doing a lot of introspection that my four functions are Si, Fe, Ti, and Ne. I have still yet to suss out the exact order of my functions, and that appears to change with my mood. The two most plausible orders for me are Si>Fe>Ti>Ne and Ti>Ne>Si>Fe, which would make me either ISFJ or INTP, respectively. The usual descriptions of both types resonate very strongly with me in different situations (but never at the same time), and I can't say the same about any other type. One thing to note is that people can develop their weaker functions to the point where it becomes possible to emulate a type with the same functions but in a different order (there are four such clusters consisting of four types each), so maybe I'm just good at wielding my lower functions.

Fascinating that you think you may be ISFJ or INTP. I am married to an ISFJ and have a few ISFJ friends and they are quite a bit different from my INTP friends and family members.

MBTI is missing some of the dimensions of Big Five but it has a more positive, and non-pathological look on personality. Who would want to measure his "neuroticism"? There is this "aha!" moment when you first read about your type and identify all those little quirks of behavior you thought were your own as a type thing. It's liberating in the sense that it equally accepts all the personality types as normal - this shows there is more to being a woman than ESFJ - the archetypal woman type. There are also INTP women and they too are normal. No need to feel weird about being a little different. That's what I got from MBTI.