Overgeneralization

I attended a seminar today on better ways to sell. This seminar was through the Natl. Speakers Assoc. and the person leading the seminar was a well-renowned expert in sales. However, ya couldn't prove it by me.
One thing I found fairly insulting was the speaker's "secret" on building repore with one's potential client/customer. The "secret" was to ask the client what he/she did before coming to their current position. Fair enough-especially if, like me, you're just a people person who wants to get to know folks. But, that wasn't what this was all about. Instead, if the client answered that their previous position had been as an engineer, the speaker said to use very accurate, meticulous terminology because, well,, we all know engineers are so detail oriented. And if the person had formerly been a graphic artist, then be sure to use terms that revolve around creativity and vision.
That's all good and fine, but I think the key word here is "previous." So the client may have been an engineeer...if he was enjoying that field so much, why is he now doing something different? It was an overgeneralization that I found a bit insulting. One thing that was a proven point is that people generally fall into one of three categories; visual, audio or kinistetic.Hence, they want to "see" what you're saying, "hear" your point or "feel" the idea. Overgeneralization would say that yours truly is an audio or kinistetic learner due to the fact I can't see. Yet, this is really not accurate. I don't enjoy having my "learning type" generalized any more than a former engineer may. It's not productive and rather insulting, when you get down to it.