The Muppets (Show)

[JohnDo]

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

[Krig the Viking]

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

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.

[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).

[717495]

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

[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.

[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.

[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:

[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?