ILEs/ENTps, do you really feel supervised by EII/INFj?

[Saoirse]

I don't feel like I supervise you guys. You are too wild. Your role Se is still too good Se for me to handle.

I feel my supervisor (SEE) has the upper hand/is superior to me somehow; they are sometimes nice to me in a pitying sort of way. I have trouble imagining ILEs feeling that way about me. How have you felt toward the EIIs in your life? Illustrative stories would be appreciated.

For what it's worth, I personally think ILEs are really cool, though I don't know if I could handle being close friends with one. I think I'd bore you or perhaps take the things you say too seriously.

[Tallmo]

I don't feel like I supervise you guys.

Isn't that exactly how supervision works. It is an independent phenomenon caused by a certain combination of IM

[The Exception]

I could see myself supervising ILE in the case where I find their Fi lacking in a situation where Fi is needed. ILE mean well, they are generally fun people with alot of great ideas but sometimes due to Fi PoLR they can be unintentionally tactless.

[Sanguine Miasma]

EIIs are sometimes very reactive to . Let's leave that alone. It tells more about less good role.

EII starts to tell stuff about people and gives advices etc. ILE only hears criticism or self evident truths. When it progresses it starts to sound too demanding. Those advices may also sound way too subjective based on how ILEs have formed their own (evidence) views.

[Sol]

I don't feel like I supervise you guys.

Types may be other, and hence there are no expected feelings. Your type and/or of opponents.
People under revision are perceived as wrong in region of your base function - you don't trust them there and often see problems which you want to fix.

In Fi - you'll see redandant rudeness, buddy-buddy behavior, the lack of kindness, compassion and of wish to take into account feelings of people. Well... any logics are similar here, but ILE as subrevisie you'd perceive as more annoying and wrong, and also harder to be controlled.

> You are too wild. Your role Se is still too good Se for me to handle.

with "good role Se" types are needed to check

> I feel my supervisor (SEE) has the upper hand/is superior to me somehow

supervisors are perceived as meaningful and interesting persons

As example (look on your impressions from his nonverbal) ILE, the dude on right

[The Exception]

EIIs are sometimes very reactive to . Let's leave that alone. It tells more about less good role.

EII starts to tell stuff about people and gives advices etc. ILE only hears criticism or self evident truths. When it progresses it starts to sound too demanding. Those advices may also sound way too subjective based on how ILEs have formed their own (evidence) views.

How does the EII reactivity to Ti differ in your mind from the reactivity in IEE? Since EII has role Ti and IEE has PoLR Ti.

[Sanguine Miasma]

Well, some sort of indicator indicator for EIIs is huge debate avoidance (https://discord.gg/vyfe4fS, pretty clear there on chats).

I don't think IEEs are lot like that even though they might avoid it as well but their arguments might not hold water at all. It is like does not fully register when it comes to IEEs. PoLR is more or less half deaf. See model G +/-.

I don't put any effort on how people might experience their own subjective disapproval (-) regarding various things. + OTOH is something where I pay some attention while it is very weak. It is like there is forgiving function but I don't really see why we must disapprove thongs from ethical standpoint.


For IEEs it would be total disregard of structural logic (+) while they try to look what bring ends together (-).
EIIs are adept at working in structural setting and SEEs build some sort of people relation hierarchies (+).

[The Exception]

I can't say I necessarily have a huge debate avoidance. I avoid debates when they started getting too heated or too emotional with people insulting each other back and forth. If it's just a friendly exchange of ideas and points of view back and forth.

[Chae]

I don't feel like I supervise you guys. You are too wild. Your role Se is still too good Se for me to handle.

I feel my supervisor (SEE) has the upper hand/is superior to me somehow; they are sometimes nice to me in a pitying sort of way. I have trouble imagining ILEs feeling that way about me. How have you felt toward the EIIs in your life? Illustrative stories would be appreciated.

For what it's worth, I personally think ILEs are really cool, though I don't know if I could handle being close friends with one. I think I'd bore you or perhaps take the things you say too seriously.

EII's supervision is precisely how you described - lacking in terms of , which is particularly felt when you turn the scenario upside down with SEE-EII. As the introvert in both of these combinations with strongly expressed intuition, surely it's not direct what is happening. EII goes the indirect route, and is rather self-aware than seeing the impact on ILE for instance, but the latter does feel it. Like as you said when you pondered being friends as a critical issue, this is your default mode of leading - through that alone ILE is put in a tight spot, it won't make any sense to them, what's wrong with the atmosphere between you and them, and so on, which throws NeTi into a dilemma without you doing much more than being your usual self. It's not about pitying this way, the issue is introverted & intrapersonal, while assesses objective strength and SEE can deliver "ridicule". EII is more of a silent enigma to ILE who does not know what they have done wrong or never guess that something was wrong in the first place and rather feel excluded through 's distancing techniques.

[silke]

I don't feel like I supervise you guys. You are too wild. Your role Se is still too good Se for me to handle.

I feel my supervisor (SEE) has the upper hand/is superior to me somehow; they are sometimes nice to me in a pitying sort of way. I have trouble imagining ILEs feeling that way about me. How have you felt toward the EIIs in your life? Illustrative stories would be appreciated.

For what it's worth, I personally think ILEs are really cool, though I don't know if I could handle being close friends with one. I think I'd bore you or perhaps take the things you say too seriously.

I've seen this kind of supervision happen in three ways, the first one was confirmed by an ILE:

- EIIs are not very emotive and outwardly expressive, which makes it hard for an ILE to read them, understand what they are feeling and their relationship to the ILE. This has that on-going background supervision effect that the EIIs don't seem to notice: it makes the ILE feel particularly self-conscious around the EII. They can't tell if you're mad at them, if you're sad or happy, do you love them or hate them, and this is unsettling for a Fe HA type. They may try to entertain the EII to make the EII "lighten up" as they sometimes misinterpret the Fi seriousness as the person being angry with them or having a bad day, only to be perplexed that this doesn't elicit the kind of reaction that they need.

- ILEs will in some shape or form test people's wits and gauge their intelligence levels, towards which end they may start debates but also sometimes they intentionally mislead others, trying to guide their thoughts a certain way, and play the trickster part. EIIs clamp down on this, as they may find incessant verbal arguing to be annoying and upsetting, and the attempts to trick and mislead others as unethical.

- EIIs especially of Fi-subtype are much more precise and concrete in their reasoning. They don't let ILEs get away with vague statements and may nitpick on something they've said, complain about the vagueness, and generally seem to hold them to a higher standard in this regard (this is more applicable for intuitive ILE subtype).

I don't think supervision is really all that one-sided as the classical descriptions make them sound. The EII cannot keep up with the ILE in terms of extraversion and their creative function - when it comes to orienting in new situations and handling new information the ILE does this quicker with greater flexibility and logical discernment than the EII - so it's not like this relationship turns into one that resembles the literal meaning of its name. The supervisee usually has at least those two points where they are able to outperform their supervisor and make a positive impression on them.

[Bertrand]

@silke

case in point

[Tallmo]

The whole point of the supervision concept in socionics is that is is an autonomous IM phenomenon. It happens because of a certain combination of types. It is not just connected to what you say or what you do. It happens on the inside. You can never escape it.

ILEs are sensitive to Fi, it's weak and they cannot ignore it, and the EII will always be on top, socionically speaking. Then there are of course other things, like the ILE often being really smart etc. But that doesn't matter.

Supervision is always one-sided.

[falsehope]

My EII wife doesn't supervise me but at the same time is resilient to logic. It takes her long time to understand logic and very often makes decisions regardless my opposition and later on regrets them. She does it all the time. On average, it takes her 2 months to understand something I can tell straight away, and it's good if some serious decision wasn't already made as she's very apt to make decisions quickly before she understands problem fully. I view her as overly emotional and unreasonable and I have feeling she needs my help a lot especially when it comes to important decisions.

Similarly it's with LSE, I think they need my help in everything which is difficult, LSE usually tries to use proven and reliable methods but it's unable to find them because she or he lacks proper understanding of the issue is trying to address in first place. So I need to find out what the problem is first, which is often difficult because LSE lacks the idea, and then make a model out of it, and based on proper understanding devise a method LSE would accept. It usually takes long time for LSE to understand the problem and it's usually 2 weeks. LSE is also not happy when the problems are even remotely complex, prefers simple problems and simple solutions and that's where difficulty in solving complex problems with them is.

Regarding supervision, it's quote shallow thing. EII is mainly concerned when I am not eating or when I am laying in bed during the day. So it's closely watching what I am doing. And also when I am going out and not coming back within 2h. But that's not really deep supervision nor really anything like that. When it comes to serious affairs, EII weak logic is what is the problem and supervision doesn't work because I don't find EII in such scenario any meaningful or revealing.

[Sanguine Miasma]

EII tells how to treat people and monitors ethical mistakes.

Let's say she thought that I was way too harsh. It didn't matter if the margin was quantitatively minuscule between me and her and it didn't make any difference (like giving points in review). I was just shaking my head most of the time.

Delta normalizing is usually about keeping people in their comfort zone. Trying to develop curiosity was dead end as well and ultimately an ethical mistake.

[idontgiveaf]

I don't think so. ILE's are not the bossy types to begin with..

Te users are supervisors for Eii.
Like as you say SEE/IEE,

But LSE/estj or LIE/entj would be too overbearing for you to handle.

So SEE/IEE is perfect

[silke]

case in point

love that moth joke, but how do you figure Norm for an EII?

[Bertrand]

I think norm often wears the guise of a misanthrope but is actually EII. if people don't type him as EII my first guess is they can't get past the guise

[silke]

mmk, moving on

[Sanguine Miasma]

This same problem ends up occurring in Kindred relationship too.

Yeah. The person was very delta NF. I ended up being fairly certain with her ignoring as it was brushed away almost instantly. Otherwise IEE might have been a possibility.

[falsehope]

I think the best solution for any relationship is to take care of your own business. To use own intelligence for own purposes I think is most effective. That's why micromanaging sucks. And being in close relationship with supervising is like micromanagement, it sucks. Usually it doesn't work. Telling me Fi stuff is just has no effect on me it just annoys me. That's why my EII figured it out and takes care of her own business and doesn't listen to me either.

[Bertrand]

naw the ideal relationship is a 100/0 split where the other is a sex doll rite

[Sanguine Miasma]

domr's definition sounds like a business deal. Marriage is about enslaving each other?

It really depends what makes it convenient for both parties. I'd rather be alone than being a slave or having indifferent room mate.

[Bertrand]

well 50/50 can be understood as a strict transactional ledger but I think what he meant was that they regard eachother as equals and the wants and needs of the other are considered to be as weighty as one's own

[Sanguine Miasma]

Marriage is a business deal, specifically a merger of two companies, according to my LSE professor.

And you don't understand duality if you want to be indifferent. Marriage ideally is duality and in duality your dual has influence over you based on the suggestive and mobilizing functions.

You can trust him/her. I say everyone should adjust that "deal" how it works best for both parties. If someone wants to be indifferent let them be. If someone wants something else let them do that. It is no brainer.

I'm much more willing to a have friend than a business deal or a pet... but that is just me.

That is much closer to duality. People are free to decide. Actually I think that marriage as it is now should no longer exist. It should be like a tick in the box.

[Sanguine Miasma]

Spoken like a true Fi PoLR. Time is limited and if I am spending time talking to someone, I want that relationship be an investment rather than an expense. So If you are indifferent then no sane person will want to waste their time talking to you. And that includes a good dual partner.

In Duality what is best for both parties is focusing on maximizing their strengths while delegating their weaknesses to the dual.
Indifference stops that from happening because it stops you from wanting to fix your partner's weaknesses.
If you plan on never dualzing, hence never operating at 100%, then continue to be indifferent. But I plan on operating at 100% so I won't be indifferent and I'll attract good people that will help me.

uuuh... you can do that if you want. It is not law of nature.
I just said something very anti authoritative. Letting people decide for themselves. It is time for new experiments as world is changing. As there are all sorts of clicks and conflict of interests among groups (I don't want to talk about it... it is hopeless... politics) people play games with those deeply seated traditions while holding on them like there is no other choice. Something has to happen.

[falsehope]

That's the exact opposite definition of a relationship. A relationship is working together to achieve common goals and the best relationship is 50/50 equality where you have equal input over your actions and the other person's actions.

50/50 relationships are not really realistic for once, and for the second I don't think they are really that effective either. I don't mean it in socionics terms.

For example, in business, there's usually the entity who owns the most and has the last word instead of doing it 50/50 which is problematic in making decisions.

Two person democracy can't work - one votes A and second B and then what? One needs to agree to another and make compromise. So one side usually makes compromise more often than the other. This way one person takes the leadership.

[Sanguine Miasma]

It is a law of humanity. That's why I said spoken like a true Fi PoLR. You are not modeling human nature correctly.



Yes more relationships are suboptimal which is why they fail in the long-run.

There are different types of businesses and marriage would be considered a 50/50 JV or equal equity merger.

Actually this whole marriage thing is very much social contract. Take a peek into history of humanity or just compare different cultures. For example in Japan this thing seems to be very permissible.

[falsehope]

Ideal Marriage = Socionics Duality.

You idealise that duality is perfect and 50/50 relationship is best, this has little to do with reality.

Relationships of two people are not 50/50 it's always one partner taking the lead, ideal 50/50 simply doesn't exist.

Socionics duality doesn't guarantee good relationship, and also incompability doesn't guarantee bad relationship. So depending on the people sometimes "bad" relationships can be better than "good" ones.

I think it's impossible to predict how two people would behave together, it may be possible to some extent but not fully and there's always room for bigger and smaller variations from what socionics can predict.

[falsehope]

I try to explain to you how relationship work and then you dismiss everything and say, "nope, can't be done." You are being really Fi PoLR right now and it's frustrating. There is no point in continuing this conversation unless you realize this and try to understand Fi logic. And if anything Ti Socionics should be a good bridge.

Relationships is a broad term and can have many faces. For me, the best relationship is when two people can pursue their own goals independently of each other. They can work on achieving common goals but their work is divided in such way it doesn't overlap so I make decisions about my part, and my partner makes decisions on her part. This works well even for conflicting relationships. In case some things are shared one part takes leadership in it.

This is different from someone who doesn't act from innate self but instead is organised around other person. This is what (extreme) dependency is (or codependency), and it's something Fi egos or maybe Te egos strive for (in less extreme form) but definitely not me, so I don't view this as ideal relationship. I strive for independence, the stronger the better.

So there are many ways to make relationship 50/50, but in practise it's never 50/50 anyway.

[Bertrand]

I feel like at the crux of this is a distinction between inter-dependence which is what strong relationships are, and co-dependence which are unhealthy relationships. strict independence is freedom from both, so you can't have both strong relationships and total independence, i.e. more of one is less of the other.

this idea that you can have a strong relationship and be independent is only true if you somehow define freedom from relational bonds as the ideal relationship, but it turns on an idiosyncratic definition of strong which basically means "preferable"--"I prefer my relationships to be weak", is the same as saying "my ideal relationships are characterized by greater independence". maybe it goes to Fi- the ideal is movement away from bad relations. the low res version of that is something like "better no relations or weak relations than co-dependent relations" which I have a certain sympathy for. but I think that's half the story, since strong relations don't necessitate falling into codependency. like in principle good relations exist

[Sanguine Miasma]

Are you all-knowing? If no then there is information that you do not know. Which means there is information you can acquire from other people. So the best relationship is where people work together to fill in the holes in each other.
And that is how high-performing teams functions.

I tend to trust my own brain and thoughts as things can be tested, verified and checked from external sources. I find that people are insufficient sources of information especially when it comes to critical thinking.

[Sanguine Miasma]

No, just personal experience. There are other sources (in which people have of course contributed) which I just tend to value more highly. The whole issue is that people should be able think on their own [if they wish so] and make independent decisions.

[Sanguine Miasma]

You may do as you will. I'm not very interested in particulars. I only said something universal about minimizing control.

[dormeur]

It depends on situation.


If it is work relations, and EII is my supervisor, I will feel that. Sometimes, I'm thinking, that everything that EIIs does is too important and hard to remember (for EIIes). So when EII tries to explain me how something works, I know how it works before EII had ended explain that. Sometimes, when I say something like: "Oh, she has cute photo on shes bussines profile", EIIs can catch that and said: "She is just cute, not only in the picture. You should know that". And after that, you could feel that thrill of cold (you did something wrong).


In friends relation, EII can be very helpful, because like no one, can see if someone is good/bad. Also they just explain, why something is priopriate or inpropriate. But sometimes, they are too emotional and deep in their thoughts.

Also I think that EIIs are on the top of the person, that I will come to their first (fe at the parties). We can talk togheter a long long long, but suddenly, I just know that its ended topic and I cant know more. I annoyed EIIs by my sense of humor and EII annoyed me that "twinkle in his eye", when I just know, just know that I did or said something really bad/inmoral.


I think, that I had EIIs ex-boyfriend and this was big waste of my energy. He wanted to spend a lot of time togheter, he talked about what someone should do something. I think that our thought about being in relationship was different. He defined a relationship like be in 50/50 equal, when you spend togheter 100% of spare time, talking about future but at the "moral" way. But for me relationship is more like rest after a long day, when I come back to home after a long day at work or after doing my things, hobbies, and I can just lay close to my partner and just relax, eat pizza which he will order, watch some happy foxes on tumblr or soup, or when we are in the same room, but still doing another activities.