*discuss*
*discuss*
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
ok so these would be medium psychological distance. i've noticed that good ones for me are with LSE, SLI, ESE, LII, SLE, EIE, or alternatively,
benfactor, semi-dual, activity, mirror, lookalike, beneficiary. probably beneficiary has been best for me.
other extraverts a little more than introverts.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
Activity and I also think Beneficiary, which is actually the mirror type of your Illusionary. Activity I'd say for more of a team effort (balance), and Beneficiary for leveling up (leverage), and you could form a decent team with the ring of benefit, consisting of you, your benefactor, superego, and beneficiary. The process of this group might be too hasty though, my superego giving my beneficiary advice, which in turn gives to me, is not necessarily good news for me.
interesting. i've often thought of the ring of benefit as a process where the benefactor is endowing the beneficiary with something they need for the next part of the work project, and so on. the beneficiary becomes the benefactor to the next beneficiary.
with lookalikes, i've noticed we kind of see things the same way, don't have to talk very long to get to the yes, and then just crank out production pretty effortlessly.
mirrors are helpful in planning a complex project.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
For Cowokers:
Good: Contrary, Dual, Identical, Business, Illusionary, Mirror
Fine: Super-Ego, Supervisee, Supervisor, Benefactor, Beneficiary, Lookalike, Semi-Dual
Bad: Conflict, Quasi-Identical, Activation
For Boss:
Good: Contrary, Dual, Identical, Mirror, Supervisor
Fine: Lookalike, Semi-dual, Beneficiary
Bad: Conflict, Quasi-Identical, Activation, Super-Ego, Supervisee, Benefator, Illusionary, Business
I think I would really enjoy working with my lookalike. (SEI) In thinking about this further, I enjoy working with all alphas. There's something nice about them! They're friendly, refreshing, nonjudgmental, etc.
IEI-Fe 4w3
Definitely Identical, at least for me. You think similarly so you make a good team. Much less time is spent explaining things.
I don't enjoy having a superego boss. There's a whole lot of good stuff I can say about him, but he expects me to fill the role of an LII and sometimes it drives me crazy.
gilligan and skipper.... ah so true
I agree, medium psychological distance. Not too close, but not too distant. I would say kiddie corner quadras make good work partners. alphas/betas and gamma/deltas.
I think (well, my experience suggests) that dual is the best relation even in work-settings; when you're looking to get things done. If you're promoting a new project, then identical or supervisor (yes, supervisor: remember that they love your base function, since it's their creative) is the best. My worst relationship in work-settings is with my comparative, too much head-butting.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Dual (LSE), Semi-dual (LIE), Activation (SLI), Benefactor (ILI), Business (LII)
EII INFj
Forum status: retired
LSE/Activity. They actually get stuff done. Dual is pretty bad, since we just wind up goofing off. Supervisee I could see as being bad, since they're good at legwork and could get pretty pissed at me achieving absolute bupkiss.
LSE would be plain ideal anyway. They are EJs (born to work) and they are my supervisee.
Well I don't think I'd always like working with EJs, now that I think about it.
I relate to that description for the most part. ITJs aren't any better however, in a work-style situation, because of all their stupid rules and by-the-book attitude, so I think LIE would be a good choice too, and I would probably feel a connection. We Te types pretty much dislike rules, but I still picture the Te dominant type as a bit anal and whatnot, so I'm unsure. Maybe I'm just imagining things.Wikisocion
IPs see EJs as annoyingly pushy and insistent in their initiatives; they may respect their energy levels but also wonder if they don't see that a lot of that energy is spent wastefully to no good purpose.
I usually end up ignoring people anyway, so I think an LIE would be good.
haha, sometimes we (well, I) just like to do stuff to pass time, not because there is a good purpose
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
Eheh, because we (well, I) feel happier when I do stuff
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
All I'm saying is these Ti rules are made for Ti people, not me. I won't follow them. Can you explain what you mean by Te rules? You mean like simple self-evident logic and whatnot, yeah that is easy to follow internally.
I don't know... I feel a lot better with other irrationals... or people who aren't "fixed" and seem to try to make everyone else be as rigid and anal as they are while focusing on 1001 details that they get on your case if you miss them. (Unfortunately this really doesn't say anything.)
I think in-quadra relations are still best.
It is not good to have a supervisor as a boss. Just because the word is "supervisor" does not mean that person would make a good supervisor. That person would be highly critical and you would get passed over for every promotion because you'd be considered to be a loser.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
i've been supervised by my socionics supervisor at work and SM is right...this is a terrible relation and you do always end up looking like a dipshit. they have psychological AND contextual power over you, so it's really not pleasant. i've also been supervised by my supervisee...this goes slightly better since they can't really touch you, but they get pissed off and you get some retaliation, so you have to be careful.
best people to supervise: intra-quadra.
best supervisors: intraquadra, relations of benefit, semi dual, lookalike
best co workers: lookalike, contrary, benefit.
the work turns out ok but a lot of discomfort: conflict, supervisee
not good for work/getting stuff done: illusionary, quasi, comparative
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
i've actually seen this play out at work. i was hired to set up a program...intp guy doesn't want to follow the program. he likes to make decisions based on individual clients, i like to set up programs that meet the needs of the vast majority of clients, and individualize from there.
his individual clients probably get pretty good service, if he has the time for them. my clients get a wider variety of service to pick from.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
I happen to disagree. Supervisors usually like their supervisees. Supervisors tend to cause trouble for their supervisees when they are less developed than them, in which case some sort of insecurity brews in the supervisor, which causes him/her to be overall annoying to the supervisee, PoRL hitting him/her constantly. But usually they get along just fine. This also depends on the types involved.
Conflict is more of a "damn, I don't get this person" thing, than anything.
Yeah, my old boss was my supervisor. I think he liked me well enough, but the supervisor relationship definitely played out. I'm so glad I'm out of there.
I get along with my quadra mates the best. Past that, ILIs... SLEs... ILEs, but it depends on the person and what our roles are.
IEE
Some supervision relations are better than others, and of course sub-types affect the dynamics.
LSE-Te is sometimes hard to tell the difference with.
I tend to think that ESE-SLI isn't that bad a pairing in terms of work environment, as they're both focused on comfort and relaxation issues, and the ESE Fe tends to manifest differently than that of ENFj's, it seems more low key (possibly related to plus and minus types should you pay attention to that, at least Filatova's behavioural descriptions seem OK to match up with RL).
Idk exactly what you mean octopuslove, but if you mean Te doesn't care much about the inner workings, that is what I think. I just need the information and know that its going to work, and if I have to get that information by trial and error, then thats what has to be done, and sometimes its faster that way and I figure out things on my own. So procedure is more of a word I'd associate with Te, because its the actual action I care about (a+b=c) not the inner working (a=4, b=x c=6). Ti is more of applying rules, because in order to know what to do with an inner working, you must know the rules. Know that a goes there and b goes there, in a generalization. With Te, a+b=c is just useful information, and its not a generalization, so a+b=c is its own seperate thing. As much as INTPs theorize about useful information, we don't really theorize about the inner working. Ni however makes those elements of Te (the information and procedures) come to life through synthesis.
My dad for instance explains to me the logic of why every day events happen, in the news and what not, at least his theorization of them, and to me I get it, but I don't really see the point of him explaining all of this to me, and he asks a lot of questions to me and prods me for reasons, but to me it is trivial. It is very general, and it is unfocused on task at hand, and I am likely ignoring him and focusing on something a bit more forward in my day. His information does not really have application, and he is kind of just deconstructing it and placing it into categorical ideas. I am always trying to gather constructive thought specifically towards something in my day. Specific is the key word I think for me. I do not find an unrelated principle to be influential in my daily activities, but to him I think he sort of feeds off of it and finds some inner repeating pattern with it.
One thing about the LIE I work with though is when working side by side with him, I tend to stop working and just sit there and watch him do stuff, and tell them I'm thinking or taking a break, and it usually lasts a while and I don't return to my work until the next day. I feel bad because I feel like I didn't get anough work done, but for some reason he tells me I did a good job. I think he's just happy I actually did something productive and am building on it. He does talk to me when I stop working and we have an insightful conversation, and then he tells me to finish up as best as I can, but it doesn't end up too well. So at this point, I don't really know how to fix this problem. I have a habit of stopping work, because I don't find it stimulating, and retreating to my mind. So I'm thinking LIE might not be the best stimulus at this point. Writing music can be a very demanding task to do for me, when I don't have the influence. It is quite easy in theory, but its just so external for me. If I don't have the influence, I have to just jump into it with as much energy as I can spare. Narcotics, like food and sweets, don't help as much as one would think.
thank you. that explains him but not you.... i get your dad...to you this info feels trivial but to us Ti types. when we run into similar kinds of information, we can understand it really quickly. that way you don't have to do an indepth thought process on every fact that comes your way.
how do you prioritize what is important for you to think about?
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
we've stumped him, director abbie.
ILE
those who are easily shocked.....should be shocked more often
LII-Ne
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and the Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare!"
- Blair Houghton
Johari