"The type dynamics model of psychological type was examined and criticized from several perspectives. Problem areas include the following: Type dynamics has persistent logical problems and is fundamentally based on a series of category mistakes; it provides, at best, a limited and incomplete account of type-related phenomena; epistemologically, type dynamics is not based on efficacy or the preponderance of the evidence but is strictly a method that assigns individuals to typedynamics groups or categories while offering little explanatory power; type dynamics is thoroughly confounded with its Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) content or composition; type dynamics relies on anecdotal evidence, fails most efficacy tests, and does not fit the empirical facts; and finally, it is doubtful if typedynamics is Jungian. The empirical record is inconsistent with type dynamics and often contradicts it in ways that are fatal for the construct. Type dynamics—in any form—does not organize the data in an orderly fashion that corresponds with the facts, because typedynamics is a conceptually compromised construct that lacks coherence. Preference multidimensionality was presented as a theoretical alternative to type dynamics that organizes the relevant data in an orderly fashion that corresponds with the facts. Orderliness occurs when research untangles the confounding that is natural to type dynamics and when we recognize that E–I points to E–I and J–P points to J–P—not to E–I. "