What follows is careful reasoning regarding the question, “Does it bother you?” I could have used lots of other questions, but this one seemed very broad and inclusive and it worked very well in this exercise. Bold is used to help you catch the essense of each argument, though I’m sure you didn’t need that kind of help.. Here goes.

You are asking me: Does it bother you?
1) No. Why would it bother me? I have no rational reason to be bothered. I am completely aware that if the situation were ideal, I just shouldn’t be bothered. I want it to be as ideal as possible. Therefore no, it does not bother me …
2) But what does rational reason have to do with it anyway? Sometimes we’re just bothered because that’s the way we feel. It’s not because that’s the way we think–or rather, it’s not necessarily the way we want to think. Yet, the feelings are there. These should be acknowledged and taken seriously. Thus, it might actually bother me despite of my knowledge about how I ought to feel …
3) But still, I have to answer no to the question if I’m not supposed to be bothered. Why? Because if I say yes, I already know what the next question is going to be: “Why are you bothered?” And I cannot answer that since my feelings are irrational. I can’t defend being bothered, and you would expect me to. It just wouldn’t satisfy you that “it’s just the way I feel”, I mean, how could it? It doesn’t even satisfy myself. But if I don’t tell you that I’m bothered, you probably won’t know about it, and I won’t have to be bothered that you’re bothered with me being bothered, in addition to just being bothered. That means less bothering for both of us …
4) But then again, I would be more honest, true to myself and to you, if I just admitted that it bothered me, even if I’m not supposed to be bothered. And honesty is important. It’s the only way to really know one another. Trust, respect, and accountability. All these things depend on honesty as to how we really feel, even when we think we ought not to feel that way …
5) On the other hand, if I claim not to be bothered, I might actually find it easier not to be bothered. Saying no to your question might be part of deciding not to feel bothered. In this respect, I am not bothered if I tell you that I’m not. I simply won’t let it bother me, let alone tell you that I am.
6) In addition to this, who decided in the first place that being bothered should be about how we feel? If my rationale tells me I shouldn’t be bothered, feelings are irrelevant. It’s just feelings, why should these be counted as more significant than my thoughts? If you are more concerned with my feelings than with my mind, you are not taking me seriously as a rational individual. Regarding emotions as superior to thought makes even less sense when considering the nature of thought and feelings: Thoughts can be altered, but feelings are out-of-control. Therefore, it would be completely truthful to say, “No. I might feel bothered, but I’m really not!” That is the only way of maintaining human freedom. You are defined by what you think, not by what you feel. If you were defined by your emotions, you would be unpredictable, your choices would be random and most importantly, you wouldn’t be free ...
7) So does it bother me? I don’t know.

Analysis of the discussion
1) Emphasis is on choice based on rational thinking.
2) Emphasis is on feelings/emotions with no regard to rationale.
3) The aim is to avoid conflicts, either because these are not considered constructive (a rational reason) or because they are emotionally unpleasant.
4) Appeals to the ethical values held dear by both feelers and thinkers. Also notice the aim to get (emotionally) closer to each other.
5) Existential reasoning, a statement about how things are (in the present) must reflect how you want things to be (in the future) in order to make progress.
6) An echo of 1). More aggresively attacking the validity of feelings as defining the present state or mood of a person, appealing to concepts of free will and what it means to be human.
7) A very open conclusion.

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator perspective
Most psychological theories on personality claim that there are four basic types. The MBTI distinguishes these by considering four dimensions of the human personality. The discussion reflects very much the conflict between the Thinkers and Feelers–that is one of the dimensions measured by the tests–and to a large extent the intuitive ones (who are mostly concerned with abstract concepts). In other words, this discussion reflects the struggle between NFs and NTs.

In my case, I consider all the listed arguments valid. At times NTs seem to me insensitive (yes, cynical) and carelessly ignorant to important interpersonal patterns. At other times, the NFs seem to me unstable and pleasure seeking slaves of their rosy delusions. And I guess that I am both, at different times. However, the NT is more dominant as I believe that “Follow your heart, not your mind” is commonly the most effective recipe for disaster (and teen pregnancy).