I found this in The Lenore Thomson Exegesis Wiki and thought it was an incisively accurate description of many of my disagreements with NTJs. (The original referred to INTJs and INTPs, but I find that it applies equally well to their E counterparts so it's slightly edited.)
The peculiar disconnect that nearly always happens between NTJs and NTPs. From the NTJ's standpoint: "He seems awfully attached to his model, as if it's the only possible one. There are so many possibilities he hasn't ruled out. His argumentation is simply unfair: he is choosing observations to stack the deck to favor his interpretation over all others. He seems oblivious to the complexity of the subject. He does not seem to know what he's doing."
From the NTP's standpoint: "I'm trying to point things out and draw distinctions in order to define a vocabulary that carves out some aspect of the subject matter. That would be forward progress. But he refuses to look. He keeps translating everything I say into some moronic vocabulary that he's already familiar with, where what I'm saying is a trivial goof. He seems completely stuck in his box."
Anyway I believe this was written by an INTP, so I wonder if it only makes sense from the NTP standpoint or if NTJs see any merit in it as well.