It's interesting to note how much of what passes for discussion on the 'Net goes away when you blip past articles and comments that are nothing but fundamental attribution error.
Believing you have insight into another person's primary motivations when you don't know them well and haven't had the opportunity to observe them over time is enormously limiting and damaging, yet almost everyone does it almost all the time.
In a communicative relationship it is silly: you can simply ask the other person, "What's up with that?" In an uncommunicative relationship it is almost useless, because we are demonstrably so very bad at it. That doesn't leave a lot of room over where it is valuable.
Believing you have insight into another person's primary motivations when you don't know them well and haven't had the opportunity to observe them over time is enormously limiting and damaging, yet almost everyone does it almost all the time.
In a communicative relationship it is silly: you can simply ask the other person, "What's up with that?" In an uncommunicative relationship it is almost useless, because we are demonstrably so very bad at it. That doesn't leave a lot of room over where it is valuable.