ENTPs. The following is not a dictation of what you must do, however, if your goal is to give feedback to the INTJ, then I recommend proceeding in the following way: (1) Observe positive distinctions that are on average markedly expressed in INTJs compared to other types. Just as there are sensible ways of distinguishing a boxer from a bull dog, specify a range of indicators that you view as highly particular to the INTJ. (2) Following this, select the chief characteristics that you like, dislike or are indifferent to in the INTJ. Since everything happens for a reason, if you know what the reason is then expound it; if not, then admit your ignorance. (3) After aggregating the features of the INTJ, and adducing reasons pro, contra, and indifferent to their existence, put forth an evaluation of your results. If this can be done with such precision that not the smallest doubt remained, that, to be sure, would not be entirely without importance.
From this, INTJs and other personality speculators will gain insight into the competing thoughts of ENTPs. Such an endeavor is desirable, for there are only four ways of increasing objectivity with respect to the self: (1) Through time--i.e. with age comes experience and with experience comes empirical knowlege, which can combine with judgment to give one a more objective appraisal of one's earlier self. However, this cannot be accomplished in the present. (2) Through space--i.e. one can move to a different environment, which allows one to put oneself in comparative perspective by contrasting the new standards with the former ones. However, this option can be costly. (3) Through philosophical introspection--i.e. it is not a matter of reading yet another book, but finding the moves in oneself, from which the entire universe is deducible. (4) Through other people--i.e. one can gain objectivity with respect to the self by asking many people the same question and calibrating the average response. While not bulletproof, we know from the so-called Who Wants to be a Millionaire phenomenon that the majority outperforms the experts 90 percent of the time when this resource is used. Now, it is also true that the herd can get it profoundly wrong since the primal herd instinct has not yet been shed in evolution. Certainly the bastard democracy that occurred with the democratically elected Nazis in 1933 is evidence of this. Nevertheless, if geography, contemplation, and the average perspective of others all coincide on a point, then it follows that this is as objective as it gets at any given moment, and only time (history) will be able to falsify it. Hence, also, it follows that by providing critical feedback, ENTPs shall be engaging in the process of rational discussion, from which the INTJ and ENTP both gain. Herein, therefore, it also follows that with the right feedback, when inefficiencies arise in real time the Mozart of strategy and tactics will be able to apply his knowledge punctiliously to arrive at a Nash equilibrium in which each entity gains.