Argument by authority. Worse, no actual explanation of why/or how the supposed authority supports anything, which is essential to any rational debate on the topic.
Depends on how you define "essentially" and "significantly". For the record, while INTJs and INFJs have a LOT in common (I get along with INFJs extremely well), but INFJs really don't understand how INTJs think. The paths of thinking are similar, but the root assumptions are different. (This is, by the way, how I differentiate between INTJ and INFJ. INFJs tend to "sound like me", but the basis of their reasoning often differs very much from my own. I'm not talking conclusions, but the steps to reach those conclusions.)
Yes, I'm known for being emo. I think I'll go get a tattoo now to protest society's impositions upon myself.
(I believe you'll find the explanation of my reply should you google "projection." The core point of MBTI and Jung is that different people think differently. That if YOU had said what I had said would be "emo" does not imply that if I say it, it is emo.)
Yes. This is quite different from thinking similarly to everyone else. Basically, I force my entire worldview to understand everyone else's, and they don't bother to understand my worldview. (There's no need, since society agrees with that societal worldview.)
It is neither blame nor causation. It's more "it is what it is." I am who I am. You are who you are. We do not
necessarily understand each other at a fundamental level.
True. Well said.
Yes. But in the end, it turns into, "oh, I need to say things like
this, instead of like
that, otherwise, they'll read things into what I said that I never intended." (Or more aptly, they're write their own assumptions about how they think into what I think, and arrive at conclusions that are entirely unwarranted.)
I'm not saying that INTJs are incapable of learning relationships or how human society operates. Rather, the conclusions that we
tend to reach about these topics don't sound much like your viewpoint at all.