I have nothing to add to this except FDG, that was a really good NT to NT post. I felt like you two were speaking the same language and you made sense to provoker, like you reached something in the cockles of his mind.
Provoker, I liked your post above better than your OP. You explained yourself better and didn't come off as condescending. I understand what you're saying now.
Relationships have normal ebbs and flows. They do not automatically get better and better when the participants learn more and more about each other. Instead, the participants have to work through the tensions of the relationship (the dialectic) while they learn and group themselves and a parties in a relationships. At times the relationships is very open and sharing. Other time, one or both parties to the relationship need their space, or have other concerns, and the relationship is less open. The theory posits that these cycles occur throughout the life of the relationship as the persons try to balance their needs for privacy and open relationship. Interpersonal Communication Theories and Concepts Social Penetration Theory 1 Social Penetration Theory 2 Social Penetration Theory 3
The question emerges: how does the politics of intelligence affect your behavior in real time?
The politics of intelligence may affect my behavior in real time the same way that it does for you. As NTJ's, we tend to process things in a similar way.
I found myself hesitating between being focused on a) the message a person is conveying and its informational value or b) the relationship with the other person.
The postulate us NT's often have is that other people also focus on the message likes us. The problem is that many other types have the postulate that other people focus on the relationship like them (even ST's). This arrives to akward situations of communication where you are dicussing something logically, say inadvertently something that has a negative effect on the relationship, and the other person interprets this as though you had the intent of bothering them. Ironically, you were being very respectable by arguing because you were postulating that they would be focusing on the message. As an NT, this is your way of building a relationship, by seeing a logical problem in front of you and the other person... and building a bond by solving the problem together logically. This is not necessarily other people's way of doing things.
In order to resolve the dilemna between focusing on the message or the relationship, I would advise you to identify personality type first and adapt your communication style depending on the other person. In practice, you will probably find that only NT's enjoy consistently focusing on the message. Many types do not care so much about the content of the message, but how the things others say will make them feel and what they mean for the relationship. This is a perfectly valid way of communicating too that an NT must accept. It's not because you say something that is not message focused that you are losing your integrity. You can have integrity in terms of how you are related to others too, and how the things you say affect your relationships. For example, if someone asks you "do I look fat in that dress", and the message focused answer is "yes", delivering this will mean losing your relational integrity to the other person.
One compromise I have found is to focus on the message but filter parts of my reasoning that may have a negative impact on the relationship. Although this requires more energy, it provides a "best of both worlds" approach.