Good Questions, and they are both connected in a way.
It would probably be most accurate to say that Pod'Lair is primarily Physical in interpreting and reading Mojos, but we read into more than what is taken in from our eyes. What you really should understand when you study Pod'Lair and you came from something like MBTI or JCE or any of the other known Typologies, as that our Model is Perception first, theory second.
This opposed to MBTI, JCE, or the other typologies which is theory first, perception second, meaning they are defining their perception based on their theories rules and logic. For example, things like "this person is way to into sports to be an intuitive, as according to our model Intuitives are not supposed to be like this" or "this person does not show very much emotion, this person must be a thinker, as that is how thinkers are supposed to act."
In other words the rules to what defines the behavior of a type have already been created, and the typing process is putting people into these static categories. It is what I would call a method a stereotyping that focuses more on the what, rather than the deeper why.
In Pod'lair it is the other way around, we read simply what is coming natural to this person, and do not allow ourselves to be biased by our idea of how said Mojo is supposed to behave. You see ultimately, theory is the most vulnerable part of any model. Of course, theory is an extremely important component, but ultimately its one duty is to accurately interpret the natural law behind a phenomenon, and in this case our phenomenon is the Mojo/Personality type phenomenon. Now when the theory contains the phenomenon, like in MBTI/JCE then you end up with a lot of false assumptions, such as This type is supposed to act like this and only this, and that type is supposed to act like that and only that. You end up with a theory being in charge of defining natural law, but in reality, theory never rules over natural law, it only interprets it to the best of our human ability. So when you have a theory that tries to define natural law, instead of the other way around, you end up with a clumsy model like MBTI/JCE, full of false assumptions and dismisses phenomenon that are paradoxical to its principles as less than they are, and only useful for feeding back into itself and perpetuating flawed ideas.
In Pod'Lair, we have bypassed that pitfall, because our theory is based on the natural law behind people and how they interact, nothing else, we are not trying to fit nature into another model, we are making a model that is expressive of the nature that we are observing.
In doing so we actually get far more accurate reads of people, as well as a much deeper understanding of what is behind these Mojos than any Typological model that came before us. You see, if you can physically see that a person is a certain Mojo, then it does not matter if you did not know said Mojo could potentially act the way they are acting, because they are obviously doing it right now. What it does mean is that it is time you expand your understanding of said Mojo, because in reality there is clearly no paradox between this behavior and their Mojo configuration, the Paradox only exists in your Paradigm because it conflicts with your assumptions, and it is time you expand you paradigm, as opposed to restricting it to these assumptions.
So to answer your question, there are correlations between the 16 Jungian/MBTI types, and the 16 Mojo Configurations, but it would not be accurate to say that these are the same. I say this mainly because when you read Pod'Lair theory, I want you to read it as something you have never read before, as opposed to seeing a Zai'nyy and thinking "Oh I already know what that is, that is an INTP." All that will do is set you up for mistakes and false assumptions. I don't want people who read Pod'Lair material to think they already know what they are reading, because they don't, and it requires you to be comfortable with letting go of what you think you already know to really understand it.
MBTI defines types by descriptions and a set of characteristics, in Pod'Lair you will find that many if not most Mojos do not behave in the ways their MBTI correlations said they were supposed to behave. It is not because we are wrong, it is because MBTI failed to add many dimentions to their understanding, and have restricted their understanding to a very narrow lens, when that nature of the phenomenon is vast far more complex than that.
So I will not say "yes" to your question about the Mojos being exactly like the types, because I don't want to set you up later for thinking you are seeing a paradox, only because you have made an assumption on how an INTP or Zai'nyy is supposed to be, versus how they actually are in or how they actually can be.
This is why Reading people does not, will not, and cannot exist in Jungian Typology or MBTI. You cannot expect to be able to accurately read into the natural phenomenon when your theory demands that the phenomenon give you specific results. You cannot allow your theory to trump reality, when your theory has only so many answers, and reality has all of them. You need a new system for that, one that is not bound by assumptions, and we have created just that.
.
