@Reficulris: I think it's pretty typical at the higher levels of maturity to find the divergences of type to look more subtle than about an inability from the standpoint of cognition to see what might motivate the other's perspective. It's rather that one knows internally that, when that other perspective's subset of valid demands relevant to oneself is addressed well, typically one can address it from one's own perspective (the ego), making appropriate forays into the role/polr to close the gaps. When one is essentially forced to engage with hard problems in the polr's perspective, usually it's experienced as something of a brick wall, where one can certainly see (if mature) why such demands might be made, but where there's a strong sense that the very reason one is feeling compelled to think from the polr's perspective is having hit a brick wall of sorts at addressing the situation with the ego's perspective. One recognizes that if the situation is to be resolved, one would probably have to address significant higher-dimensional concerns of the polr, but instinctively know if you're at this point (especially as a mature instance of your type), it's probably a sign the situation is somewhat unreasonable.