This is a précis of my model of those personality attributes that are tied to cognitive differences.
Table of Analytics.
systems researcher or mathematical philosopher
UI programmer (+syn) mathematician (+int)
engineer, physicist, software developer, economist (*)
graphics designer (+ana) philosopher (+int)
fashion designer, writer, artist (*/**)
*: in order of increasing egomania
int: intellectual, values ideas for their own sake
I used to think that people like Willard van Orman Quine, who chose a profession as a mathematician-philosopher, did so because they grew up before computers existed. But I was wrong. I now know of at least one mathematical-philosopher in the modern age.
And according to my personality interaction model, people at the top get along best with people from the other table for some unknown reason (+), then the left hand branch in their own table, and last with oddballs. Oddballs are people who don't trust the form of cognition they possess.
So for example, programmers who trust synthesis more than analysis, or writers who trust analysis more than synthesis. They don't have the form of cognition they trust so this can take a hit on their ego but more importantly they're more willing to recognize and accept people who do have the form of cognition they trust.
Being told "there's no such thing as analysis / synthesis" or even better "analysis / synthesis is unimportant" is roughly equivalent to "there's no such thing as homosexuality" and "get over it, it's not like being homosexual is important in any way".
+: I don't have the slightest theory why this would be but it is a fact with much empirical evidence supporting it. Nearly all of the data points I could gather support it. Those data points not supporting it are ambiguous in proportion to how much they violate the trend.
**: Engineers serve society. Physicists serve their profession. Economists serve the rich. And software developers serve themselves.