This is totally me. I've stopped conversations before to make sure our definitions of what we're discussing match up.Unlike INTJs, who resist strict conceptual definition until empirical evidence renders it indisputable, INTPs must categorize and define their ideas into clearly distinct blocks before they can even begin a discourse or exchange of information... Until we know precisely what our words denote and connote, we can't even make any meaningful differentiations--which are, of course, the foundation for everything.
I've had people comment on my seemingly instant ability to come up with endless metaphors. It's all wordplay to me.For many INTPs, this becomes one of the most valuable and far-reaching gifts that Ne has to offer--she may find, much to her surprise, that her natural talent for noting structural similarities between the seemingly unrelated allows her to rephrase the most abstruse hierarchies of ideas into surprisingly understandable unifying explanations with which her audience can readily identify.
I would add here that it's not just the problem of social cues, but that human behavior itself is inherently illogical. While we may view our own behavior as logically-based (though, as previously mentioned, that is entirely subjective), we cannot easily understand other people's motivations and behaviors until we develop a greater understanding of human psychology. In fact, the INTP desire to understand typology/psychology/sociology/etc. is most likely driven out of a need to categorize and understand illogical processing. Young INTPs who don't have as much experience doing that research may not have any framework for understanding and accepting seemingly illogical behavior, and thus reject people who behave in a way that doesn't make sense to them.Try as they might to deny it, beneath the surface of the unconscious, inferior Fe (aided by auxiliary Ne) does drive INTPs to seek social acceptance and emotional connection; however, they often find themselves so hopelessly clueless at understanding and adjusting to social cues that they quickly develop intensely negative associations with the whole process of attempting to share themselves with others, content to interact only with those whose beliefs are consistent with their own, and thus non-threatening.
Overall a very well-written article. Thanks for posting it.