Considering that Highlander is using a quote of mine to start the discussion, I should perhaps chime in.
Overall I've observed the following:
- Te/Fi vs Fe/Ti seem to generate the most misunderstanding and agitation, since they determine what kind of conclusions one believes to be reasonable.
- N vs S doesn't generate misunderstandings so much as a degree of incompatibility, as the interests of each can differ significantly.
- Ni vs Ne generates some mild incompatibility (the "myopic" observation), but generally get along as usually both parties tend to appreciate what the other sees.
There is actually a slightly stronger aspect of the Ni vs Ne difference which is an interesting conflict between Ni and Si. As I explained in another thread that I don't care to look up right now, while Ne endeavors to look outside the box, seeing the box as "way over there" while one's thoughts are "way over here," Ni instead makes new boxes and tries out lots of different boxes. Due to its association with Si, Si sees a single box, or an array or grid of boxes. The boxes, as Si, don't subjectively change, but are experienced as being rather concrete.
At an extreme level, older, very experienced and smart INTPs tend to have very "Si-specific" ideas about everything they know, and it's hard for a new idea to find its way in if it is perceived to contradict what is already known. Einstein is a very good example of this. In spite of making the second major breakthrough in quantum mechanics (describing the photoelectric effect), his attitude toward most quantum mechanics research of his time was very reactionary. He just couldn't believe that it was truly that random. (Of course, he never had the benefit of Feynman's quantum electrodynamics predict quantum behavior to one part in a billion, which is absurdly accurate for most
deterministic physics experiments, never mind something as "random" as quantum mechanics.)
I would suggest that the Ne/Si attitude is along the lines of always searching for something new (Ne), and that as one learns and gathers new information, it gradually becomes "old" (Si), and is regarded as a known fact.
The Ni/Se attitude differs in that the external world is regarded as an ongoing input of empirical data (Te, Fe, Se), and that one has to continually adjust one's own perspective (Ni) in order to make sense of the whole.
Ni (in an INTJ for example) can still be just as stubborn as the INTP's Ti/Si "matrix", but is of a very different nature, where it exists. Ni tends to combine with the extroverted judging function and intimidate those around into backing away from arguments, which is an ironic tendency because Ni very much desires the dialectic debate and contest of ideas. Also, Ni has often made some very odd subjective assumptions which may be entirely correct, but it can be extremely difficult for others to figure out how to analyze and poke at those assumptions, especially if those others don't have Ni.
Having observed many INTJ/INTP conversations about complex theoretical topics, I've noted that the INTP will work toward finding common
definitions (Si), while the INTJ will work toward finding a common
frame or perspective (Ni). This can work out badly (or, more likely, just require a LOT more work) in those cases where the Ni perspective involves several very-slightly-different definitions from a given standard Si perspective.
For an intuitive understanding of the prior paragraph, consider a typical color selection UI which isn't just a list of standard colors, but the entire spectrum from red to purple, light to dark:
The Ni approach is analogous to saying "that color" and clicking the one spot on that grid and sliding the shading bar on the right to just the right shade. Below this UI, there are a bunch of boxes that list the intensity of each of Red, Green and Blue, with specific values from 0-255. [The Hue, Sat, and Lum values are a dependent set of values that describe the same color as the Red, Green and Blue values - a completely different definition in a different frame, describing the same thing, and in fact map directly to the horizontal, vertical and sidebar positions of the cursors. Very Ni.
] This list of values is analogous to the Ti/Si definition of color. So Ni wants to adjust the perspective such that it is a slightly lighter shade of lavender, but over in Si-data-point land, it involves tweaking each color definition by a very fixed and precise amount, say Red +2, Blue -3 and Green +4. So the Ni perspective will see a very simple tweak that "makes everything work out", but this involves changing all three definitions of which the INTP is keeping careful track.
Thus it can require a lot of feedback between both parties to achieve both the proper definitional agreements and perspective agreements. Once the agreements are achieved, then the ideas tend to bounce around between the two far more cooperatively.
As for whether this is the INTP's Ne/Si, or really "just Ti", watch the precision with which INFPs (Fi, Ne, Si, Te) state their ideas, and how nitpicky they get when a description is ever-so-slightly off, in their estimation. It's the same Ne/Si in play. I don't see similar evidence of such behavior from ISTPs or ISFPs.
EDIT: To give credit where credit is due, much of my observations I make here were originally noted by Orobas, and I've gotten a very good feel for where these Ni/Si issues come into play due to several long, in-person conversations with her. Since she is Ne/Fi/Te/Si, I share the Te/Fi but not the Ne/Si, so where we have issues sharing ideas, it appears when I keep on presenting hypotheses that seem to "tear down" her rather fixed Fi/Si notion of how things work, and rebuild something brand new in its place. The compromise between the two perspectives is aided by noting that the new construction is entirely temporary, unless it is actually better.