The Muppets (Show)

[Krig the Viking]

Should I Wake Up Bert?

Haha, I hadn't watched that video before now. That's totally LII>IEE supervision right there. Ernie is worried, because every option he considers (the whole opening sequence is Base-Ne) results in Bert getting mad at him. In fact, the whole video he's worried about Bert being mad. It seems to me to be an obvious depiction of Supervision, where the Supervisee, no matter how hard he tries, can't please the Supervisor. In the end, Bert is only happy because there's pigeons, not because he thinks Ernie did anything right.

Also, the clip ends with this interesting exchange...

Ernie: "Are you mad now, Bert?"
Bert: "No, I'm not mad, Ernie."
Ernie: "Oh. Oh good. 'Cause sometimes it's kinda hard to tell, Bert."

I think all 1-d Fe types can relate to getting comments like that.

vs -PoLR math fail?

YouTube - Classic Sesame Street: Ernie & Bert - Pizza and Grape Juice

Heh, yes, awesome. It makes sense as an LII, whose Base Ti is constantly concerned with justice and fairness and making sure everything is "correct", getting annoyed at an IEE, whose Vulnerable Ti is usually oblivious to such things.

I'm more sure now than ever that Bert and Ernie are N-LII and C-IEE.

...and now I feel a little silly for analyzing Sesame Street so seriously.

[Marie84]

Heh, yes, awesome. It makes sense as an LII, whose Base Ti is constantly concerned with justice and fairness and making sure everything is "correct", getting annoyed at an IEE, whose Vulnerable Ti is usually oblivious to such things.

I'm more sure now than ever that Bert and Ernie are N-LII and C-IEE.

That makes sense. I'd think an LSI would take it upon himself to "make" it more equal, rather than just passively telling him how to do it, or at least be more vocally demanding

...and now I feel a little silly for analyzing Sesame Street so seriously.

yes

[CILi]

...and now I feel a little silly for analyzing Sesame Street so seriously.

Hey, no shame in it.

I wonder if, as kids, things like this were our first "typings," if you will.

Sure, we didn't have some nice, neat Russian lettering system to wrap around it, but we did have hours of footage/interaction to start figuring out how "people" work.

...and now I feel kinda silly.

[Aiss]

Bert always gets annoyed by Ernie so Ernie should be Bert's supervisor, not the other way round.

I'm pretty sure it's the Supervisor who gets annoyed by the Supervisee. The Supervisor sees the Supervisee as being in some sense "broken" and in need of fixing, and it can be annoying if the Supervisee doesn't agree and resists being fixed.

The Supervisee, if anything, is intimidated by the Supervisor, whose Base function looms imposingly over their Vulnerable function. To be annoyed is to feel superior, not inferior.

+1000 to what Krig said.

Though it does explain some of JohnDonics .

[Gilly]

I'm pretty sure it's the Supervisor who gets annoyed by the Supervisee. The Supervisor sees the Supervisee as being in some sense "broken" and in need of fixing, and it can be annoying if the Supervisee doesn't agree and resists being fixed.

The Supervisee, if anything, is intimidated by the Supervisor, whose Base function looms imposingly over their Vulnerable function. To be annoyed is to feel superior, not inferior.

No, the supervisor sees the supervisee as someone who needs their help, and while the supervisor may get frustrated with a continued lack of compliance, they ultimate have an intrinsic appreciation for the supervisee as someone who is both similar to themselves (creative->base) and seems to need what they had to offer (primary->polr).

The supervisee, on the other hand, thinks that the supervisor overestimates their similarities (base->creative) and their own abilities (devalues dominant function), and feels "constantly watched," as though the supervisor is trying to correct every little mistake they make (polr->primary).

I think mirrors, particularly of opposite subtypes, tend to run into similar problems (role<->polr, creative<->base) on a sort of case-by-case/from time to time basis, but the ultimate similarity of their perspective and goals tends to override the minor frustrations.

[Gilly]

FWIW I find I can usually get along with both my Supervisor and my Supervisee; I feel more core similarities to ILIs than SEIs and find their presence less uncomfortable, but, to me at least, it seems that SEIs and I seem to have a more consistently similar perspective on things.

[Gilly]

Ah, I know.

Bert - SLI
Ernie - ESE

[Minde]

I like this thread.

[krieger]

would have said ISTj-ESFj without thinking too much about it. I suppose calling bert ISTj doesn't work well if Ernie is ENFp instead. Calling them duals is pushing things a bit, though. Their relation is only ever half-functional (the "wake up" video is a good example).

[Suz]

Hey, no shame in it.

I wonder if, as kids, things like this were our first "typings," if you will.

Sure, we didn't have some nice, neat Russian lettering system to wrap around it, but we did have hours of footage/interaction to start figuring out how "people" work.

...and now I feel kinda silly.

No dont feel silly. I've had the same exact thoughts, actually! I've suggested in the past that everyone really knows socionics. They just dont know it in a written, defined way. Take a look at movies and shows. In analyzing some of them (e.g. Lost) some of us were could swear the producers knew socionics. But i think what we try to translate in to types, etc, is just common knowledge in a human instinctual sort of way.

And I was actually going to suggest LII for Bert too, Krig! Gilly i have to say Bert doesn't seem to act SLI to me. He's too "responsible," for lack of better words.

[Blaze]

I'm pretty sure it's the Supervisor who gets annoyed by the Supervisee. The Supervisor sees the Supervisee as being in some sense "broken" and in need of fixing, and it can be annoying if the Supervisee doesn't agree and resists being fixed.

The Supervisee, if anything, is intimidated by the Supervisor, whose Base function looms imposingly over their Vulnerable function. To be annoyed is to feel superior, not inferior.

you could be right....LII supervisors get annoyed with IEE supervisees. i am not sure that the other supervision pairs always conform to your analysis. for example, i don't get annoyed with LSI's...i think they get annoyed with me. :wink:

[Krig the Viking]

No, the supervisor sees the supervisee as someone who needs their help, and while the supervisor may get frustrated with a continued lack of compliance, they ultimate have an intrinsic appreciation for the supervisee as someone who is both similar to themselves (creative->base) and seems to need what they had to offer (primary->polr).

The supervisee, on the other hand, thinks that the supervisor overestimates their similarities (base->creative) and their own abilities (devalues dominant function), and feels "constantly watched," as though the supervisor is trying to correct every little mistake they make (polr->primary).

I agree with all that. I'm not sure what the disagreement is. All I'm saying is that when negative feelings do arise, it's more likely to be the Supervisor who is annoyed by the Supervisee. The Supervisee may get frustrated with the Supervisor, or upset or hurt, etc., but annoyance doesn't seem accurate.

Ah, I know.

Bert - SLI
Ernie - ESE

Those are my second most likely typings, but I still think LII-ESE is most probable. I agree with WorkaholicsAnon; Bert is too uptight, particular, and "responsible" to be a laid-back IP type like SLI. IJ, and in particular Base Ti, make much more sense to me.

you could be right....LII supervisors get annoyed with IEE supervisees. i am not sure that the other supervision pairs always conform to your analysis. for example, i don't get annoyed with LSI's...i think they get annoyed with me. :wink:

It's true, there does seem to be some differences between the vertical Supervision pairs and the horizontal ones. I think it has a lot to do with whether the Supervisor is Rational or Irrational.

For my part, I've never quite understood how IP>EJ Supervision works out in the real world.

[krieger]

Bert's social attitude and intonation are just totally un-INTj. I don't see how people end up suggesting that type.

A tendency towards reacting angrily to things is very uncharacteristic of INTjs, for example.

[Krig the Viking]

A tendency towards reacting angrily to things is very uncharacteristic of INTjs, for example.

Are you serious? If I'm really tired, I'm exactly like Bert in that "Should I wake up Bert?" video. LIIs try to be polite when possible, but if you keep poking at them and annoying them like Ernie does, it won't be long before they can't hide the irritation any longer. Some LIIs are better at hiding it, but underneath, we all react like Bert when someone disrupts our order.

[Marie84]

Speaking of spending too much time thinking about Sesame Street...

Oscar The Grouch, ILI anthem?

[Gilly]

I agree with all that. I'm not sure what the disagreement is. All I'm saying is that when negative feelings do arise, it's more likely to be the Supervisor who is annoyed by the Supervisee. The Supervisee may get frustrated with the Supervisor, or upset or hurt, etc., but annoyance doesn't seem accurate.

Well the supervisee's weakest function is constantly being hit, so it makes sense that they would experience the most negativity in the relationship. For the supervisor, only the Role is affected, and only superficially; their PoLR is unthreatened for the most part, and they have a perceived outlet for the dominant function.

Those are my second most likely typings, but I still think LII-ESE is most probable. I agree with WorkaholicsAnon; Bert is too uptight, particular, and "responsible" to be a laid-back IP type like SLI. IJ, and in particular Base Ti, make much more sense to me.

Well he could be an E6. He seems too grouchy and unreceptive to Fe/annoyed by Erny to be LII; won't rule it out, though.

[1981slater]

They can't be duals or conflictors because it's an asymmetrical relation.

Bert always gets annoyed by Ernie so Ernie should be Bert's supervisor, not the other way round.

Ernie: ENTp
Bert: ISTj

Could it be ISTj and ENFp/ESFp?

I'm pretty sure it's the Supervisor who gets annoyed by the Supervisee. The Supervisor sees the Supervisee as being in some sense "broken" and in need of fixing, and it can be annoying if the Supervisee doesn't agree and resists being fixed.

The Supervisee, if anything, is intimidated by the Supervisor, whose Base function looms imposingly over their Vulnerable function. To be annoyed is to feel superior, not inferior.

And the supervisee usually loses his nerve, gets paranoid and counterstrikes on the supervisor. In this kind of relationships, the supervisee tends to "prevail".

I like this thread.

It reminds me of those commercials in which a superstar endorses a product with a few words. "I'm Michael Jordan and I drink Pepsi"

Well the supervisee's weakest function is constantly being hit, so it makes sense that they would experience the most negativity in the relationship. For the supervisor, only the Role is affected, and only superficially; their PoLR is unthreatened for the most part, and they have a perceived outlet for the dominant function.

And...you know, when look-alikes meet, both of them "supervise" each other with their base functions. In the streets, violence is an acceptable way of dealing with problems. In an office, is verbal violence what people draw.

[717495]

Well the supervisee's weakest function is constantly being hit, so it makes sense that they would experience the most negativity in the relationship. For the supervisor, only the Role is affected, and only superficially; their PoLR is unthreatened for the most part, and they have a perceived outlet for the dominant function.

Yeah that seems to make the most sense, from what I can see. A lot of times supervisors appear kind of oblivious to the "problem" aspect and only see the easy solution. Because their dominant function was never a problem, it was always an automatic thing that had to be done. There is typically much less a negative role than what the supervisee is experiencing with his vulnerable function.

[Aiss]

Maybe there are differences between particular supervisor-supervisee pairs, but the way I see it, Krig got it right.

Supervision and benefit rings are primarily related to mostly one-directional information flow: from supervisor and benefactor to supervisee and beneficiary, respectively. Supervisor's ego functions are supervisee's conscious evaluatory functions, and information from that source affects them strongly. Supervisee's ego, on the other hand, is wholly situational to supervisor - they simply don't value the latter's input. To supervisor, supervisee appears simple enough to understand, but missing essential points - in a way, "not good enough".

The supervisee's negative reaction is secondary, dependent on supervisor's negative reaction to him, i.e. it's not that supervisee is annoyed with supervisor as such - they are rather upset by supervisor's annoyance, condescention or simply lack of patience with them, making them feel unfairly judged. And they can feel more strongly about it, as supervisor's opinion often matters to them, whereas supervisor finds it far easier to disregard theirs.

The way I see it, Bert is frustrated with Ernie, but he's patient and doesn't mistreat him because of his disapproval - so Ernie doesn't hate him, but still tries in his own clumsy-supervisee way to do better, even though it's never enough.

[717495]

This thread is embarrassing lol.

[krieger]

Are you serious? If I'm really tired, I'm exactly like Bert in that "Should I wake up Bert?" video. LIIs try to be polite when possible, but if you keep poking at them and annoying them like Ernie does, it won't be long before they can't hide the irritation any longer. Some LIIs are better at hiding it, but underneath, we all react like Bert when someone disrupts our order.

Yes, I haven't noticed this kind of behavior in any INTj, except maybe in the entirely trivial sense that anyone would behave like this if the level of stress raised to great enough heights.

[consentingadult]

Ernie doing dual seeking Si:



too bad I can't find a Dutch version, Ernie is a lot more annoying in Dutch!

ETA: Dutch version here: http://www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=182734 However, it's differs from the English one...

[Krig the Viking]

Supervision and benefit rings are primarily related to mostly one-directional information flow: from supervisor and benefactor to supervisee and beneficiary, respectively. Supervisor's ego functions are supervisee's conscious evaluatory functions, and information from that source affects them strongly. Supervisee's ego, on the other hand, is wholly situational to supervisor - they simply don't value the latter's input. To supervisor, supervisee appears simple enough to understand, but missing essential points - in a way, "not good enough".

The supervisee's negative reaction is secondary, dependent on supervisor's negative reaction to him, i.e. it's not that supervisee is annoyed with supervisor as such - they are rather upset by supervisor's annoyance, condescention or simply lack of patience with them, making them feel unfairly judged. And they can feel more strongly about it, as supervisor's opinion often matters to them, whereas supervisor finds it far easier to disregard theirs.

The way I see it, Bert is frustrated with Ernie, but he's patient and doesn't mistreat him because of his disapproval - so Ernie doesn't hate him, but still tries in his own clumsy-supervisee way to do better, even though it's never enough.

+10

The success or failure of a Supervision relationship is entirely dependent upon the Supervisor. If he can restrain himself and refrain from crushing the Supervisee's PoLR out of annoyance, the relationship will be fine. The problem is that, as the psychological distance decreases, the Supervisor finds it harder and harder to hold back his criticism of the Supervisee. If the psychological closeness continues (in a close romantic relationship, for example), the Supervisor will eventually find it impossible to refrain from criticizing; it's inevitable. The only solution is to give each other plenty of space, and reduce the amount of contact between the two.

[Krig the Viking]

Yes, I haven't noticed this kind of behavior in any INTj, except maybe in the entirely trivial sense that anyone would behave like this if the level of stress raised to great enough heights.

Ok. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, then, I don't know what else to say.

[Logos]

Much like labcoat, LII did not ever pop to mind when I see Bert. I still struggle to see it. My impression of Bert was always as an ST of some variety. Bert seems far too cranky and agitated to be an LII. LIIs are more aloof.

[Suz]

Ernie doing dual seeking Si:

YouTube - Classic Sesame Street-Ernie gets thirsty

too bad I can't find a Dutch version, Ernie is a lot more annoying in Dutch!

ETA: Dutch version here: Bert en Ernie - dorst - Humor & Komedie - 123video However, it's differs from the English one...

That was HILARIOUS!

But was that really Si-dual seeking? or was it Si ego?

I'm just saying, I dont really complain that much. And I dont make people get stuff for me, in fact i feel a little uncomfortable if that happens too often. That reminded me a lot of my ESE mom, actually.

[golden]

You're all mad geniuses, and this is my favorite thread so far.

[consentingadult]

That was HILARIOUS!

But was that really Si-dual seeking? or was it Si ego?

I'm just saying, I dont really complain that much. And I dont make people get stuff for me, in fact i feel a little uncomfortable if that happens too often. That reminded me a lot of my ESE mom, actually.

I first didn't watch the English version, I thought it was the same as the Dutch one. In the Dutch one, Bert refuses to get Ernie water, and instead tells Ernie how to solve the problem himself.

Making other people do things for you indeed isn't very IEE. I do know a lot of IEIs who are like that ;-)

[Absurd]

[Suz]

I first didn't watch the English version, I thought it was the same as the Dutch one. In the Dutch one, Bert refuses to get Ernie water, and instead tells Ernie how to solve the problem himself.

Making other people do things for you indeed isn't very IEE. I do know a lot of IEIs who are like that ;-)

Yeah I think a more IEE scenario might be thirsty Ernie not being able to fall asleep but not quite sure why, and just tossing and turning, and getting up, not really saying anything until Bert asks "what's wrong?". Then Ernie would say "can't sleep..." (An Si-dominant bert would then go fetch some water (without even thinking twice or feeling annoyed))

A friend of mine who I think is EII has actually joked that if she's hungry, she'll keep repeating it until she is able to get some food (she's pretty independent too so she doesn't necessarily want someone getting food for her though), so i guess doing the "i'm thirsty, i'm thirsty" thing might be Si-HA too. Not that I think Ernie is EII or LII. He's not.

[717495]

Well obviously because Ernie knows what water is and that it even exists means he's Si ego.

[Krig the Viking]

The whole "I'm thirsty" thing just seems to me like an Infantile not-so-subtly asking for Caregiver help. However, Bert is not a Caregiver, so it just annoys him.

A real Caregiver, in my opinion, would be more likely to just go and get the water himself, without asking for help in the first place.

[leckysupport]

The whole "I'm thirsty" thing just seems to me like an Infantile not-so-subtly asking for Caregiver help. However, Bert is not a Caregiver, so it just annoys him.

A real Caregiver, in my opinion, would be more likely to just go and get the water himself, without asking for help in the first place.

I think what Workaholic said makes more sense.

Yeah I think a more IEE scenario might be thirsty Ernie not being able to fall asleep but not quite sure why, and just tossing and turning, and getting up, not really saying anything until Bert asks "what's wrong?". Then Ernie would say "can't sleep..." (An Si-dominant bert would then go fetch some water (without even thinking twice or feeling annoyed))

Comparison to Rick's robot example:

The robot would have to display helplessness indirectly - not through blunt questions like, "Can you clean me? I feel dirty." To this the owner would probably reply, "Go clean yourself. I'm busy." Much more effective would be to have the robot cough and look tired and preoccupied when dust begins to build up inside or some other maintenance is required. This kind of robot behavior would be ideal for owners with strong Si. These robots would lighten up and start sharing insightful observations about events around them as soon as they are fed and properly taken care of. They would also need to finicky and infantile to provide an outlet for their owners' caretaking tendencies.

The Socionist: How to Create Psychologically Compatible Robots

If someone were to do what Ernie did to me I would suspect that they were trying to take advantage.

[krieger]

The whole caregiver thing is overrated, imo.

Ert & Bernie are not gays, btw, they are this:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...alLifePartners

[Suz]

Get your minds out of the gutter! Bert and Ernie aren't gays, they're roomies and friends. Hello? They sleep in separate beds! And they're never lovey-dovey.

[Creepy-male]

Saying Bert and Ernie are gay is like saying that square roots are meaningful within the strict context of rational numbers. It's SESAME STREET people.

[717495]

Bert's a fag, dunno about ednie

[Creepy-male]

Which is why they have to pretend they're roomies for public television & social acceptance. Get with the times people.

Now you're just talking complex numbers.

[Krig the Viking]

Comparison to Rick's robot example:

The Socionist: How to Create Psychologically Compatible Robots

If someone were to do what Ernie did to me I would suspect that they were trying to take advantage.

Yeah, but if you'll notice, Ernie never did ask for water. He just kept commenting to himself about how he was thirsty. It's exaggerated Infantile behaviour. Or do you think it sounds more like a Caregiver, Aggressor, or Victim? I dunno, I'm just not seeing those.

[CILi]

Gays. They're gays. I'm convinced they're gays. ...Bert's a fag.

My childhood just died a little.

Ernie never did ask for water. He just kept commenting to himself about how he was thirsty. It's exaggerated Infantile behaviour.

It's probably OT, but what's the motive for Infantiles to act so helpless and desperate?

Like Ernie, I could just as easily grab a glass of water (or meet my needs) as anyone else, but something in my head/heart says, "Don't."