I haven't read the most recent posts in their entirety yet, but I did want to make this comment now:
[MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], you are losing your audience (viz., thoughtful INFJs) with the vituperative tone your posts carry. While I agree with most of your underlying logic, I think you're having a hard time separating your own hurt from your arguments. In other words, you read pissed off due to past wrongs. Unfortunately, this undermines the truth in what you're saying by distracting the reader's attention toward the hurt you're carrying.
what is there is to gain: see how he reacts to seen his fallacies & cognitive mechanisms satire'd to the raw extreme form, his failed mental blocks played into, would he be able to laugh at himself? would he reicipate by playing into it further? would he put himself aside and look for the logic to counter argue? would he smiply blow a fuse? or find a self rightous hole to shove his head into? turned out to be the last, but just because the answer isn't pleasing doesn't make the question less worthwhile. tie the picnic basket behind a rock and and see under what circumstances can [MENTION=20531]yeghor[/MENTION] bear still catch it, different reactions supporting different models carrying different possibilities in turn.
what is there to loose: his insight into the very same mechanisms he demonstrates not being able to see in the first place? his respectable moral authority of should's & shouldn'ts built on nothing but fragile towers of self justification blocks? his sophisticated understanding of typology repeating the same good old process of people identifying with the metaphors ingrained in function description to augment one's beliefs about one self and thus attributing the lack there of with the opposite function? what is it that i am expected to take seriously?
however, on a slightly off topic but related matter...
I've been reading this exchange with interest. I don't think I really have a strong opinion anymore. I know that I tend to soften towards people I have some history with, even if we have not always agreed. On the other hand, Mane, I am consistently finding your approach to obscure the useful things I could take from your message.
i am pretty sure i've being honest about it in the past: my intent isn't to give information but to get it - to to gauge as much information as possible to get a better grasp of the range of mental models i have to work with, it's internal mechanisms and how do i work with it. that's not to say that if their is something you want to get out of this you can't ask, its just not my core motivation here. i was actually sort of shocked when it turned out that some INFJs have decided to avoid doorslaming as a result of this. its cool and all, and has potential insight in itself to offer, but was never my intent.
unfortunately, the blindspots are largely proving to be within the blindspots, so asking straight forward questions has proved repeatedly to be mostly useless (with very few exceptions who know who they are): instead of self conscious insight all you get is a combination of attempts to distance one's self & reactionary self-righteous justification to how it might imply something negative, and those justifications usually in line perfectly with the very same pattern of an inability to examine one self from another's perspective. the doorslammed react but arguing with the answers they received - the justifications, the doorslammers react to that as a demand for further justification and end up feeling like they are on trial, the association with typology gives the trial a tribal twist towards MBTI as a source of identity bringing other INFJs in (in particular sensitive those who identify with it as a way to compensate for feeling misunderstood most of their lives), all while demonstrating the very behavior they attempt to argue against, reinforcing the opposition, which in turn reinforces what is basically ganging up [on people using their live stories to treat you as punching bags, apparently].
it can be repeated endlessly, and all it does is provide further evidence towards the same areas of the mental schema, same patterns of dancing around any possibility for looking at one's self. same old freaking dance going nowhere. in the mean time, there is a lot more to be learned by extrapolating on the models internally to different directions and testing for possible reactions to various arguments and emotional conditions.
i realize how condescending that can sound, because.. well, it is, no excuses there. but i don't think i blocked the door for honest exchange - there's a hill to climb on but the requirement to do so is never higher than the ability to put your ego aside, which in the case of self examination seems like a requirement for honest exchange anyway.