Functional Dynamics & Supervision
It is helpful to keep the nature of Supervision relations in mind when typing and doing functional analysis.
In this sense, matters pertaining to your Role function that is your Supervisee's Creative Function are easily seized by you for quick intermittent handling. So it is wrong to think Role as simply weak.
Likewise, matters pertaining to your Supervisor's dominant function as you POLR Point of Least resistance can be considered somewhat aspirational,depending on the person and the kinds of adaptive experiences they've had. Even though popular Socionics literature may claim you are weak here, the truth is that one might even be taken advantage of here - they can be conditioned to give more here than is really practical. An example would be hardworking XEIs who are Supervised by Te and are overworked and underpaid in their jobs. (Work is Te as is factual data. Imagine the IEI or EIE working HR and underpaid and overloaded with inefficient paperwork). Or ENXJs is who end up with partners who kind of use them as sex or comfort "slaves" who always have to be there of sorts, or whose health issues may be exploited where they are not as naturally adept at welfare and defer too much to So-called professionals.
The thing about SuperEgo functions is that one isn't always necessarily bad at one of them. It is getting them to solidly work together in a way that is personally rewarding that troubles the individual.
So before one thinks, "I care a lot about x therefore I'm an X type", remember that conditioning, mastery and aspirational factors also exist which can mislead from accurate type. A piecemeal type method is not the most reliable compared to intricate functional understandings once the archetypes for each are discernible enough and the map of all is complete enough in one's mind/understanding/experience.
Reply With Quote
