Supervision description not fitting experience

[Ezra]

Had a look at intertype relationships between my best friend and me. Apparently, it is something like this:

"Asymmetric relationship. One partner (the recipient) feels like he is being watched closely by the other (the transmitter) and becomes overly self-conscious and defensive or apologetic. The transmitter doesn't appreciate most of what the recipient does and underestimates his abilities and personal qualities, which hurts the recipient's self-esteem and can lead to long-lasting scars. The transmitter is surprised by the recipient's sensitivity and doesn't know what to do about it. The recipient feels like he can't take any initiative when he is around the transmitter, who wonders why the recipient doesn't do anything on his own. Difficult relations for a close or medium psychological distance."

This is inaccurate. However, both the functions and type descriptions of ESTp would seem to accurately describe me and my friend is definitely an INTj.

To what extent should intertype relationships be used as a theory to show that, for example, I am or am not a certain type?

[Exodus]

Ideally, it should all fit together. If it doesn't, you should consider that one of you is mistyped.

This might be a shot in the dark, but can you describe the relationship and how it doesn't fit that description?

[Ezra]

Pretty much the whole thing. I'll put in bold the specific things that could never apply to the relationship even if stretched to an extent.

"Asymmetric relationship. One partner (the recipient) feels like he is being watched closely by the other (the transmitter) and becomes overly self-conscious and defensive or apologetic. The transmitter doesn't appreciate most of what the recipient does and underestimates his abilities and personal qualities, which hurts the recipient's self-esteem and can lead to long-lasting scars. The transmitter is surprised by the recipient's sensitivity and doesn't know what to do about it. The recipient feels like he can't take any initiative when he is around the transmitter, who wonders why the recipient doesn't do anything on his own. Difficult relations for a close or medium psychological distance."

[BLauritson]

How much would you say the look-a-like and/or comparitive relation descriptions fit the relationship? Just to explore similar areas (similar in the sense that..ah I can't be bothered to explain, I'm sure people will know what I mean)

[Exodus]

It's safe to say that you aren't his supervisor. Maybe he is INTp?

[Expat]

If your best friend is the guy you described earlier, I thought he was INFp.

Such statements as "definitely an INTj" are not very helpful to find out what's going on.

[Expat]

On this -- I know that INFps will be described as "more emotional" than you probably perceive your friend as being. Well, at least as far as my views of that type is concerned, please take a look at my recent "possible INFps" thread. INFps, especially men, will very often make a logical and relatively unemotional impression, take a look at Baby's video. In fact, their + combination often makes them quite confident in their logic and they may well see themselves as logical types, if the issue is ever raised.

[Ezra]

How much would you say the look-a-like and/or comparitive relation descriptions fit the relationship? Just to explore similar areas (similar in the sense that..ah I can't be bothered to explain, I'm sure people will know what I mean)

I don't understand.

[Ezra]

It's safe to say that you aren't his supervisor. Maybe he is INTp?

No, he is definitely INTj. Definitely.

[Ezra]

Two friends. One is ENFp (possibly INFp - that's who you might be thinking of, Expat) who is my very good friend, Leon. My best friend is INTj, Liam. There is no doubt about his type. Leon's type is little debatable - he is most certainly a Ni or Ne first, and Fi/Fe must come in there somewhere.

Put it this way (I'll use Liam as the example of my relationship). If I take my type to be any one of these, I'll show how likely it is that he - as an INTj - cooperates with me:

1. ENTp
2. ENTj
3. ESTj
4. ENFj
5. ESTp

It would seem that I am ENTp based on that, not ESTp. But like in the other threads, there's a lot of stuff stopping me from deciding that I'm ENTp.

[Expat]

Two friends. One is ENFp (possibly INFp - that's who you might be thinking of, Expat) who is my very good friend, Leon.

Ah ok.

[UDP]

INTjs, or any type I imagine, can optimize their interaction with you if you seem like a good enough person.

[BLauritson]

How much would you say the look-a-like and/or comparitive relation descriptions fit the relationship? Just to explore similar areas (similar in the sense that..ah I can't be bothered to explain, I'm sure people will know what I mean)

I don't understand.

Sorry, I was rushing a bit there. Basically, you've said certain elements of the Supervision relationship description didn't fit. I was thinking on a hunch that, in terms of functions, the look-a-like relationship and comparative relationships seem to be most similar to the supervision relationship. So it's implicitly suggesting the possibility of, instead of ESTp and INTj, either ISTj and INTj (comparative) or ESTp and ENTp (look-a-like). So I was just wondering if either of those relationship descriptions fit your relationship any better than the supervision description.

[Ezra]

I had a look at ISTj, and it would be too much of a far cry to call me that over either ENTp or ESTp. It would be an even further cry to call my friend an ENTp. ISTj is possible, but INTj fits him much more. In any case, IxTj wins versus ENTp hands down any day.