EII-ILE supervision relations (INFj and ENTp)

[Pookie]

Smart Kid

[Nowisthetime]

I'm just wondering if supervision plays into it at all.

I don't think it was a good example of supervision, but I think supervision could play into it, yes. The supervisor feels confident using his base function and notices that the supervisee pays attention to whatever he does. That can lead to risk taking and wanting to manipulate. Feeling of superiority.

[FoxOnStilts]

I don't like being told how I feel, and that's something Fi-egos love to do.

[Pa3s]

I don't think this is just about the "supervision" dynamic. I dunno. Rar.
I dunno, I can admit I've done stuff kinda like that before, but I think most people can. But...the extent of that pushiness was kinda...I dunno. Too much, for sure. Could be Se-polr related? I've read Se-polr as being uncertain to how much pressure to exert in a situation, which can lead to too much or too little expression of wants or something. But..I DUNNO. Rar.

Do you actually talk like that sometimes?

[Beautiful sky]

Oh no, this person is not an Se ego type. Not all EIIs are going to be nice to kids. There is variety among all types. She has outside issues that affect they way she is as well. This would absolutely be an extreme situation and not just supervision. I'm just wondering if supervision plays into it at all.

Also, Se ego types are much better at knowing how to get what they want. She has this passive-aggressive weird way of pushing pushing pushing TRYING to get what she wants and trying so poorly that she upsets people. She is completely unable to be upfront and say what she wants. It's always under this veneer of sweetness, but it's just a veneer. Every time someone is unpleasant, they are not showing ego block Se, but this is another thing that explains to me how you could possibly type such a huge percentage of the population SEE.

Well, I'm around plenty of Se and Fe egos and I've seen Se ego types push push people into trying to get them to do what they want and not be successful, not having success has to do with how firm you are in terms of standing up against that type's Se, not about having Se PoLR. You'll often see that when the Se ego is not getting their way, they will laugh at the situation, and try to make it seem as though it were a joke that they didn't get their way, after all.

Anyway Se PoLR responds from outside pressure; this kid isn't pressuring her to have her way. She is simply requesting to see one movie; this other person, who you claim to be EII, is finding ways to push her will on to her and the kid is remaining firm.

I don't see myself doing this.

[Slacker]

You think you're around tons of Se ego types because you mistype people like crazy and your most common mistyping seems to be SEE.

And for the millionth time, not all EIIs will be exactly like you, even if you are EII. People are complicated. Two EIIs will have some things in common, and some things that are different.

[fen]

Do you actually talk like that sometimes?

"I don't know" is probably the phrase I say most. As far as "rar"....it's something I type out online, but in actuality it's more of just a feeling of not being able to explain something well, and I get uncertain and frustrated. I don't say "rar" in real life, but I do say "rah" in those situations. Why?

[Pa3s]

Why?

I dunno, just curious.

[Absurd]

Looks like there's a lot of SEEs supervising Maritsa. Maritsa, you sure you're not your own supervisor? You self-type EII as well.

[Esaman]

I don't sense 100% evil from the eii, even though yes, that is annoying. I sense more intense condescension with a 'neener neener neener, I'm doing this to you because you're young' sing songy nanny voice.

I can see that too, but the problem is that Fi PoLR child will most definately experience it as 100% evil abuse.

[ashlesha]

I can see that too, but the problem is that Fi PoLR child will most definately experience it as 100% evil abuse.

100% evil abuse?

do you ever watch the news or anything?

[Esaman]

Common, it is one short sentence. How did you manage to miss me talking about subjective experience of the child. Also, "100% evil abuse" does mean "worst possible abuse", just that the abuse is experienced as evil in nature.

[Radio]

I don't like being told how I feel, and that's something Fi-egos love to do.

Reminds me of this Family Guy episode.

(...)
Brian: Yeah, so there's this seminar in New Haven on creating your own web based internet series. Sounds like it could be right up my alley!
Lois: Is this one of those classes where you make the checks directly to the teacher's name?
Brian: *dead pan* Feel good about that? Feel good about what you just said?

Here: http://www.4shared.com/video/MsFsbyj0/818.html it's right at the beginning.

[Eliza Thomason]

I don't think its because the EII is an EII here, I think its because this EII is a Narcissist, and the interaction you give is exactly what a Narcissist does. I know because my ESE ex was a Narcissist, and this is exactly what he does. I have seen him do the very same thing where he will make a deal with someone and then show up pretending the deal went his way, and he is so confident and sure in his act that it leaves others questioning their sanity/memory. (After many years with my ex I was unsure of my sanity and memory).

But this poor child needs protection because having a Narcissist who is an adult AND is your Socionics Supervisor is about the worst possible case scenario ever. Read what it says on this site about Supervision. Psychologically dangerous! Can make the child physically and mentally sick! The child needs protection.

That the OP sees what is going on and sticks up for the child, pointing out reality, is priceless in this child's life. OP is an extremely important presence in the child's life, a witness to reality (and sanity).

[FoxOnStilts]

I don't think its because the EII is an EII here, I think its because this EII is a Narcissist, and the interaction you give is exactly what a Narcissist does.

It's a bit of a stretch to type someone based on one exchange, considering its one topic/conversation and you're not a professional (I'm assuming, as no professional psychologist would diagnose based off of this. You sound more like someone who minored or took a few psychology classes and think you know whats wrong with everyone around you.)

It sounds like someone is underestimating the mental capabilities of a child and trying to take advantage of that. Just because she does that with kids doesn't mean that she does it with adults. You often hear of people whose kids say something like, "Ew I hate broccoli" and the parents responding with "No, you love it" and the kids being all, "oh that's right, I do."

But depending on the age of the kid that won't work. Some people seem to forget that kids aren't idiots. That kinds stuff doesn't work on my boyfriends 6 year old at least. >> She calls you out on that shit.

[717495]

I don't like being told how I feel, and that's something Fi-egos love to do.

What?

Anyway, no this EII in your example sounds like an inconsiderate liar or is somehow not grasping the picture. I personally see the ILE-EII relation a bit differently and from my subtypes' point of view have had mostly decent positive relations and lots of interesting speculative chatter. The ILE of course sees their supervisor as odd and detrimental to their world view (aka. not the most "interesting" or "well-suited" person ever), as we can be quite intensive and obstinate about our own feelings and individuality, and they can see that as a coarse and blind attitude towards the realistic social world and don't want to be around that type of person. Sometimes with a more Fe subtype ILE they can come across as invasive to our personal life choices and don't give individuality enough credit.

This negative depiction is also a bit biased toward my 4 nature. As far as major problems the EII has, is usually with our supervisor not supervisee ofc. I often see my ILE friends as being pretty inspirational and a breath of fresh air. The problem that arises with Ti is trying to get information out of them; they can be quite selective about their own intensive focus, which might be fine for an Fe ego who is interested in gaining a knowledge of quality-based ideas, but serves no specific means among specific questioning and categorization of terminology. So the ILE is left saying about Te "what is the real point? (of a stand-alone fact or comparative clarification, if it serves no ideational purposes)."

[Beautiful sky]

Supervision isn't sitting on someone's throat and waiting for them to make a mistake so you can call them out on it, or is it? If you look at the my "dear SEE" thread, you may see how my "supervisor" Dolphin, calls my attention to addressing my response/post a certain way. This is how supervision is like. It's not purposefully trying to be mean to another individual but in a way asking them to be like you or speak your language.

[Ningyo]

I know an ILI who does this. Sounds like immature Fi to me, too.

[Codie]

I know an IEE- who's always telling her son off.. he's ILE, I guess she could be trying to teach him ... she doesn't go on at her SEE son at all. I wonder if she supervises her ILE son to a degree because of her Fi subtype...?

[willekeurig]

Inspired by Dolphins thread about SEE supervision.

The Supervision relationship between SEE and EII seems rather obvious to me, and I'm very much aware of it in interactions with SEEs. In relationships with ILEs, however, the Supervision dynamic not half as clear to me - maybe because then I'm the one in the "position of power", maybe because of something else. In any case, I'd like to hear about your experiences and observations.

There sure is a big number of ILEs that fit the stereotype of an embarrassing social cripple, but ime these individuals tend to be on the lower end of the intelligence curve and are generally considered as incompetent by the majority of people, not just EIIs or Fi valuers. The more intelligent ILEs, however, can be quite charming and possess many qualities that EIIs lack completely - I think the EP temperament is a major factor in making them seem less "inferior". I can also see how the Fi polr could work as a benefit; allowing you to be more independent and worry less about what others might think etc. (almost all EIIs seem to be timid, helpless doormats).

[Iris]

Inspired by Dolphins thread about SEE supervision.

The Supervision relationship between SEE and EII seems rather obvious to me, and I'm very much aware of it in interactions with SEEs. In relationships with ILEs, however, the Supervision dynamic not half as clear to me - maybe because then I'm the one in the "position of power", maybe because of something else. In any case, I'd like to hear about your experiences and observations.

There sure is a big number of ILEs that fit the stereotype of an embarrassing social cripple, but ime these individuals tend to be on the lower end of the intelligence curve and are generally considered as incompetent by the majority of people, not just EIIs or Fi valuers. The more intelligent ILEs, however, can be quite charming and possess many qualities that EIIs lack completely - I think the EP temperament is a major factor in making them seem less "inferior". I can also see how the Fi polr could work as a benefit; allowing you to be more independent and worry less about what others might think etc. (almost all EIIs seem to be timid, helpless doormats).

My bread baking EII friend that I wrote about in the SEE supervision thread is married to an ILE. She is very gentle, and tolerant up to a point so they have a good marriage and the supervision is not obvious. He was raised strictly by an ESI so he is pretty socially adept, which is a good thing, because the EII is very proper in the area of good manners. But you can see that he is very focused on minding his Ps and Qs. He does a good job, but it is not a natural state, and you can see this crazy little naughty boy underneath a veneer of good manners. (I think it's actually very loveable.) Where the supervision comes into play, is that he is always coming up with crazy schemes and underestimating their physical difficulty, and then injuring himself. She sees it coming and warns him with her demonstrative function and he ignores her advice with his ignoring function. Then he gets hurt. Then he feels embarrassed. Then she has to doctor him which she does in a very selfless way that takes a lot out of her. She never says, I told you so. But I am sure she is thinking it. The areas where she is not tolerant are areas that he happens to be in agreement with her. So it works pretty well. But I know he would never want to violate one of her principles. She never loses her temper, but she is fierce in a quiet way when that happens. So I guess there is socionics supervision going on all of the time with the manners related items. I don't know what you call the warning then catastrophe pattern thing that looks like supervision.

[Aquagraph]

The more intelligent ILEs, however, can be quite charming

I can also see how the Fi polr could work as a benefit; allowing you to be more independent and worry less about what others might think etc..

Yes. I totally agree with you.

[Iris]

I reread my post above and it sounded condescending toward the ILE. Which is too bad because he is someone I respect and enjoy being with. He is creative, hard working, kind and always wants the best for his family and friends. Conversations with him are always interesting, and I come away from them with new ways of looking at things. And I always end up examining myself and my motives after I have had a conversation with him. He is a very transparent person. And I can't say that about myself at all.

[Iris]

The more intelligent ILEs, however, can be quite charming and possess many qualities that EIIs lack completely - I think the EP temperament is a major factor in making them seem less "inferior". I can also see how the Fi polr could work as a benefit; allowing you to be more independent and worry less about what others might think.

One time my ILE brother was pontificating about something and got carried away by the fun he was having, and inadvertently started revealing some things that were embarrassing to my SEI sister-in-law in front of their kids. She kept quietly remonstrating with him but he never noticed and kept on and on. I felt so bad for her. Probably later she spoke to him privately and he probably felt bad because he doesn't want to hurt a fly. But he did not experience any public humiliation from his wife. If he had been married to my EII friend, she would have turned from a lamb into a lion and smote him right then and there with some dignified and completely freezing remark. Public humiliation would have occurred. My brother and I were brought up, sometimes painfully, to observe the social niceties, so he is usually pretty careful about what he says. Other ILEs might be a little more reckless in what they say and there would definitely be instantaneous correction if they were to cross a Fi line with an EII. This is one of the things that I both admire and fear about EIIs myself. I would never want to incur their displeasure. Not that any of my EII friends would ever explode. I just greatly value their standards and fear that I might inadvertently cross a line.

[Iris]

I wanted to edit the above post to read "admire" but can't edit my posts on this computer. Drat.

[willekeurig]

Yes. I totally agree with you.

You are the exception that confirms the rule, dear. I supervise you even when you're not here. FEEEEEL ITT.

[silke]

@Agarina does this sound any familiar? It's a recount written by an EII girl concerning her impressions of ILEs.


"From a distance EII can see this mysterious, extraordinary, and, most importantly, such an intelligent person as an ILE in a rather positive light, and even be in awe. The most important, and most celebrated advantage of the ILE is his intelligence, a quality that the EII values very much. ILEs can understand such things that sensing types struggle to grasp, and this quality sometimes is in very short supply, even though their intuition has a logical slant to it. Often ILEs love literature, art, science, architecture, and generally anything of this kind, and very eagerly await intuitive communication, when they can speak such alluring, intelligent, original nonsense that seems attractive and charming, and even instills an inferiority complex, though in this respect things usually turn out well.

This is the first impression of the ILE with whom an EII hasn't spent much time together. Now the question is of whether the EII will attract his supervisee. Try to capture the moment when you have interested the ILE and at this point proceed to gently draw attention to yourself. Show yourself off reading a good book, for example, then listen and heed. ILEs know how to court and take care when they wish: here completely naturally there may be poetry, original locations, and other unthinkable charms, in addition some ILE are endowed with a remarkable share of charisma and charm.

However, here the good parts end. So how does this supervision relationship manifest? Honestly speaking, I don't know what the ILE feels, I can only guess. My ethical judgments were taken seriously by all the ones that I've met. The following is the impression from my side as an EII. Lets suppose that this is a romantic relationship, or at least a very close one. Here I write more from the female point of view. Everything was so swell, then communication becomes more intimate and all the flaws of the person come out. To your disappointment you see that this person is a rag in all respects. EIIs in general are more or less conservative about matters of gender roles. It is worth considering that their ideal is their dual LSE, and that speaks for itself. In general, A MAN SHOULD NOT BE A RAG!

In addition, EII is a rational type and appreciates reliability. And ILEs are usually the type of people on whom one cannot depend. They live their entire lives in a sinusoidal manner - at times taking over everyone and everything with his wit and charm and cutting down the jackpot, and at other times creating considerable problems and troubles on the spot, meanwhile living on the brink of utter poverty, which with enough perversity can go as far as going around hungry. Here what is needed is a SEI for whom Te, including money, as a painful function, is combined with their ability to listen, cook, eat, and in some unknown way write up all the cabbage, apartments, cars over to themselves, which from my point of view is very beneficial for the ILEs.

In general, from my point of view ILEs look like they have been spoiled by fate, and in presence of all their talents and an enormous potential they waste their lives, meanwhile being often unable to take any responsibility not only for the others but even for themselves. ILE is a big baby, no matter what age he is, who may live off the efforts of anyone who allows for it. The tales of their bottomless stomachs, by the way, are not a myth. ILEs themselves rarely bother about keeping cleanliness and order, to the contrary, and ILE living by himself usually amasses an incredible mess, but at the same time he expects sensory vigilance from the people who live next to them and are pretty picky about the food. EIIs take care of all of this when it is necessary and without pleasure, but the main motivator here is duty and example. If somebody is working next to you, then it's shameful to not carry out your share of duties, and if this person cares for order very much, then it's even more important." - Polina (EII)

[willekeurig]

Ehm.. I can relate to the appreciation of ILE's intellectualism and witty ideas. I also agree that many ILEs seem "raggy", but it's not like EIIs are the most practical or initiative-taking people themselves, so I find it hard to see anything Fi-supervision-related there. I'm not sure what the gender role/conservatism thing is supposed to refer to, but intuitively it sounds like something I'd have a hard time accepting. I personally dislike manly (in the traditional sense) men, do not believe in men's and women's jobs/chores, etc. In any case, having different lifestyle preferences doesn't make one person the other one's supervisor either.

The only thing I could see fitting the supervision phenomenon is the ILEs inability to see how their leeching, parasitising and ignorance of shared duties negatively affects their relationships and harms other people. It's not like EIIs are naturally much better at providing for themselves, but being able to see why those thing matter, they at least make an effort.

[Pierreuse]

EIIs typically have a Fi-driven agenda in almost everything that can easily upset/hurt the ILE and seem extremely petty/malicious to them.

Example of an EII doing this:

My ESE mom hates our landlord and decides she wants to move, so she asks all of us for help finding places online for her to check out. My EII sister only turns up places in the areas SHE wants to live in, with amenities SHE wants, like floor to ceiling windows. Many of these properties are out of our mom's price range, but she refuses to show cheaper listings because she feels entitled to get these things when we move, and petitions for them tirelessly. ESE mom, LSI brother and I are all turned off by her transparent selfishness so we just ignore these petitions and proceed without her. However, an ILE would probably feel pressured to logically consider these options and give them a fair chance, and feel bewildered when the EII continued to insist even when choosing one of those properties would put strain on everyone. The ILE doesn't want to be the cause of misery to the group.

Also, when angry, EIIs are prone to making personal, villainizing (not a word, I know ) statements about people. The ILE can't see this for what it is (petty name-calling) and tries to reason with the person or redeem themselves even if doing so is impossible/pointless.

[Absurd]

EIIs typically have a Fi-driven agenda in almost everything that can easily upset/hurt the ILE and seem extremely petty/malicious to them.

Sounds liek EII have magical powers.

[Beautiful sky]

I'm very nice to ILE and I try not to judge around them but to remain quiet and enjoy their company. I know how petty my supervisors, well at least the ones who don't know me well enough, can get with regards to territory and power (always suspicious of things or at least sounding like it). I KNOW therefore I try not to be so overbearing and thus come out mean. I just listen to their ideas and try to find them duals

[BrennanWayne]

I'm the entp, and it just feels that she has problems with the very essence of what it is to be me. Anyone been through this type of relationship before and can help me out?

[Amber]

You'd better give us details about the relationship to get some real insight on it . I don't mean the socionics intertype, try to look past that and say what's going on between you two in real life.

[PistolShrimp]

You're Socionically doomed. R.I.P.



What does she do that makes you feel she has problems with you? Since you feel this way, what makes the relationship worth maintaining for you? Have you told her your feelings?

[Beautiful sky]

Don't. Find a dual

[ClownsandEntropy]

She's a human being (probably) so yeah Socionics comes second. Even if Socionics actually comes first, if you don't recognise her as a human being then you'll stuff it up anyway.

But, here's some stuff which is probably relevant:

From EII one cannot demand and expect:

• enterprising spirit and initiative in production;
• decisive, resolute behavior in emergency situations;
• high state of mobilization;
• quick completion of work that doesn't inspire much interest in her;
• organizational skills.

AND

Read this: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Meged-Ovcharov (it's the last one) and try to be her LSE

AND

I haven't read this so I can't vouch for it, but this exists http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Stratiyevskaya.

AND

Don't drink too much or do anything which might make you say or do something inappropriate, cos then they'll hate you.

BUT

Be yourself. Like, why would you want to be with someone if they didn't like you for who you are *rainbow*? And also when will you find Si?

[willekeurig]

She's a human being (probably) so yeah Socionics comes second. Even if Socionics actually comes first, if you don't recognise her as a human being then you'll stuff it up anyway.

But, here's some stuff which is probably relevant:

From EII one cannot demand and expect:

• enterprising spirit and initiative in production;
• decisive, resolute behavior in emergency situations;
• high state of mobilization;
• quick completion of work that doesn't inspire much interest in her;
• organizational skills.

AND
Read this: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Meged-Ovcharov (it's the last one) and try to be her LSE
AND
I haven't read this so I can't vouch for it, but this exists http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Stratiyevskaya.
AND
Don't drink too much or do anything which might make you say or do something inappropriate, cos then they'll hate you.
BUT
Be yourself. Like, why would you want to be with someone if they didn't like you for who you are *rainbow*? And also when will you find Si?

Feel free to ignore my nitpicking, but it seems weird that you start by underlining how socionics is imperfect as a model of reality and how there's more to people than that anyway, and then continue by listing socionically stereotypical advice for fixing a specific real-life situation we know next to nothing about (unless you've had private conversations about this with the OP?). I'm an EII, but about 50% of the items on your list don't fit me. As far as my experiences go, I tend to be among the most capable non-professional people for handling emergency situations, for example. What makes you think these rough generalisations of yours would work for the individual EII in question?
"Don't drink too much or do anything which might make you say or do something inappropriate, cos then they (EIIs) will hate you." ...seriously?

[ClownsandEntropy]

Feel free to ignore my nitpicking, but it seems weird that you start by underlining how socionics is imperfect as a model of reality and how there's more to people than that anyway, and then continue by listing socionically stereotypical advice for fixing a specific real-life situation we know next to nothing about (unless you've had private conversations about this with the OP?). I'm an EII, but about 50% of the items on your list don't fit me. As far as my experiences go, I tend to be among the most capable non-professional people for handling emergency situations, for example. What makes you think these rough generalisations of yours would work for the individual EII in question?
"Don't drink too much or do anything which might make you say or do something inappropriate, cos then they (EIIs) will hate you." ...seriously?

No, fair call. I was getting all my Socionics-related thoughts about the topic out, though. The first part ("Socionics won't help you here") was what I actually thought, the second part ("Here's what Socionics says") is what the post was looking for. I wanted to answer in the context of Socionics because that's why the forum exists; but for the sake of not messing up the relationship with the EII, I said the first part.

If you disagree from a Socionics POV about some of those things being type-related then I like to hear about them (for example, you probably disagree with "don't get drunk and be stupid" being EII-specific date advice, if I read that correctly?).

[Suz]

Well, yes, I very much agree with this statement.


Bluebirds ugly flip side rant: I think that seeking out a person purely because they are ones dual, while actively ignoring others that aren't, is immoral, unethical, and a form of prejudice. Actively seeking out such a person, as ones dual, would give one tunnel vision towards specific people, while ignoring the rest, which one could have had successful relationships with. It's like not wanting to date someone because they are a certain race. Just because someone is ones dual, does not mean they are going to fulfill ones needs, necessarily. What if one finds a dual is a serial killer, racist, sexist, or a wife beater? What if someone, who is ones conflictor, isn't. I'd say, take ones chances with the conflictor! One could do just as well, or maybe even better, with a person of a different type, depending on their own, individual, personality. People are so much more, and complex, than their personality types. So call me a martyr (socionically) for wanting to walk blindly into people's lives without knowing their types. I'll put myself in the line of fire for such beliefs, and if I fall, at least I wasn't being prejudice. But, I do enjoy learning about socionics to understand people better. I think it explains similarities and difference that I had noticed in people pre-socionics and I think it can be used as a tool for understanding misunderstandings.
But....sometimes I feel like I'm in the twilight zone around here when people get tied to the idea of finding their perfect dual. It's like trying to find true love.

i see it a little bit differently. As they say, all is fair in love (and war)....we're talking about love here, ok. When seeking romantic relations, people can and do go after whatever they want, whether it's a specific socionic type, or a certain ethnicity, a certain body type, a certain height, a certain fitness level, a certain way of dressing, a certain educational level, a certain intelligence level, etc etc and etc. Is it "wrong" of people to have their own dating preferences? I dont believe so. Is it prejudice? well, yes it is... but is it inappropriate in the setting of picking out someone to share a life with? Say I would like to be with someone of a similar educational level as myself... do i still need to date high school dropouts just to demonstrate i am not being prejudiced?

The bigger question, though, is whether it's a good idea to limit oneself to just seeking out duals, and I really dont think it is. First of all, gearing your search to look for duals is likely to show you conflictors because the two can seem alike, and conflictors are more obvious and alluring initially. Secondly (perhaps more importantly), where something so nebulous and debatable as socionics is concerned, it is always possible that you may be mistyping, either yourself or other people. Never discount that possibility, no matter how much you've studied socionics, how well you know the theory, and how good you think you are at typing. In that sense, it works better to sense the interaction to gauge the intertype, than to try to pinpoint people's types from a distance, but that happens anyway through the normal "dating" process.

[Kim]

I would never use Socionics for selecting a partner. I will eventually type my partner and then maybe use socionics to make sense of behaviors or ways of communicating, but to type someone right away and to decide the person is/is not compatible sounds crazy to me...