Perhaps you are right in your own experience, but if SJs were so unable to understand or see what another person "sees" in them then they would never mature. True we can grow out of our own experiences based on our own conclusions disregarding anyone else's advice, but it's the experience involving someone else that gets us to reflect and take some kind of action. Even if we don't prove to someone that we've considered the information given, the information is still there, it's just stashed away. That's why we can become so stressed out sometimes because we can reflect and over analyze what we are given.
Perhaps coming down to your "very abstract level of thought and speech" is a bit too abstract and not constructive enough for the discussion. There must be some middle ground, otherwise someone must be lying if all is agreed without opposing factors considered.
I would like to add that broad thinking isn't necessarily more abstract than specific ideas.
Wouldn't it be hypocritical to consider someone's inability to reason with you on your terms just as much as trying to with theirs? I say this based on your "specific experience" oriented descriptions.
I agree it is annoying when one stops trying to listen because of strict views that become confronted, but I think with SJs you generally have to budge a bit, get inside their head and present your ideas from the inside. The ideas must get collected first before you pick them apart. One by one.
With self reflection, SJs sympathize with others quite a bit because the experience we hold is just as vivid to us when some else experiences the same thing. Even if we can't relate to someone's perspective, we try look for some analogy or even different references to come up with what logically makes the most sense.
SJs aren't incapable of perceiving themselves through others, but it's a very difficult point to get to and sometimes it has to stress us out enough to break through that wall.
If someone states it so, then you have your right of say to knock it down.Thats why I am picking a fight when someone puts things in a huge historical content or a traditional line of logic that led to today. That of course is not wrong, by all means no, but I am a fighter for individuality and I like to be free from my past.
But picking a fight (which I don't even consider this being) and then admitting you understand the opinion part of it is a bit strange to me.
I didn't know I was treading on personal views, I was merely throwing out an idea.
I'm glad you have something you believe strongly for, but I think individuality occurs in a single person with sequentially unique, separate experiences and not one that needs be fought for.
Reflecting on my op, and this discussion, I believe there's much irony in the way nature works, and I think I just sought out a few of those contingencies.