Robert is a 25 year old Rational Architect, (INTP). He is a graduate student in English and is working on his doctoral thesis. He teaches a basic undergraduate English class which he doesn't much care for but is a requirement for grad students. However, he has one or two students who show real promise, and he has enjoyed mentoring them. His goal is to become a professor at a university and spend time researching ancient Latin literature.

Robert finds women rather confusing. It seems like most of them are illogical and easily upset. They'll agree with almost anything he says even when he contradicts himself deliberately. Some women are reasonably logical, but these ones tend to be unwilling to admit when his argument is the better one.

His girlfriends have fallen into these two groups. With the first group, they will often start out the relationship by debating with him. However, they often base their arguments on things that seem irrelevant and hard to measure, such as emotions and values. As he has demolished their arguments, they have become less and less likely to debate. When he asked one girlfriend why she had stopped debating she replied that it was because he never admitted he was wrong. His response was that she had never had a valid argument. That didn't go over so well.

With the second group, the girlfriends are willing to debate him and generally base their arguments on logical and measurable concerns. However, they have not been swayed by his superior arguments. While a lack of agreement doesn't bother him between friends, Robert wants him and his partner to have more intellectual agreement.

In analyzing his past relationships, Robert is realizing that he's more or less created a catch-22. He wants a woman who will debate with him logically and spiritedly but who will always agree with him in the end. He is also seeing that he needs to validate whatever part of his girlfriends' arguments make sense to him.

Robert decided to try out his new ideas with the girlfriend he has now. Recently, they had a debate over politics. Robert's initial feeling was that her concerns were short-sighted and illogical, but instead of trouncing her, he decided to ask her to expand on her concerns. When she did that, he could see that some of her ideas were valid even if poorly expressed. He restated her ideas, and she was pleased that he understood her concerns. When they wrapped up the debate, Robert made sure he included some of her ideas in his own. He felt good about himself and the relationship.

Do you have advice for Robert? Do you know or are you a Rational Architect and can you give information about how other Architects have dealt with the dating game?