In another thread, you stated that you dislike people reading things into your words at not taking them at face value. I am sorry, but I cannot reconcile that with this. We're supposed to take your words at face value, except for when you're not?
Since INTJs tend to be blunt and not beat around the bush, this means I actually do take their words at face value, unlike with some other types. This means that when they argue for something that is harmful or false, I also take this at face value. I have no way to separate the wheat from the chaff, at least in a text-only environement. Perhaps, in person, their would be things I could use.
This is also the issue I have with being told to "trust" their Ni statements when they are not backed up by anything more than pieces of evidence with no connective tissue. No, I don't see it. And I'm not going to accept any of it just because you said so. I cannot separate the wheat from the chaff and determine which things are off the wall crazy (especially if they're thrown in alongside Holocaust denial) and which things are of value and are worth intellectual consideration. People say dumb shit all the time... I don't say any reason to act as though it as worth of consideration as something insightful.
If I treated all of it as if it actually made sense and tried to unravel it, I'd have no framework at all, and would be flitting from one viewpoint to the other. All because someone farted out someone because they had a fight with their girlfriend or something. This is why I look for emotional content and what is going on underneath.
I like intellectual stimulation, but I cannot afford to take anything anyone says ever as though it had equal weight, because then I'd be insane. My introverted thinking is not that fast, so doing that would paralyze me. To some extent, I already have this problem.