Interesting different way of looking at it! And I could look at your posts and say, "Who is more the social butterfly?"... But I will only say that because any random thoughts I have will drag this out. But it is interesting what you did.Originally Posted by anndelise
Usually discussions are peaceful and do not worsen relations. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...rror-Relations
Closing distance, irritation may arise from inability to fully convince your mirror partner in your point of view. Which Eliza and I have faced a few times in our PRIVATE discussions
In addition, both people usually understand each other well enough to be constantly of interest to one another. They are capable of providing each other with sympathy and help, however, this help is not always effective because they are not able to fully complement each other's weaker points. I love her even if she can't help me fully she does plenty and it shows here.
Mirror relations are favorable for discussions of common topics of interest and problems that are solvable, however, expect that each partner will keep his own opinion. And I let her find her own answers because she and I communicate well.
All of which I can not achieve with Ann because at every EVERY turn we are at odds.
Serious conflicts in this pair are usually few.
Any other questions?
Ann's post was nonsense in my opinion.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 08-07-2013 at 03:07 AM.
-
Dual type(as per tcaudilllg)
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Yes, with my other Mirrors in my life, too, there is a kind of a Supervision aspect of it. My sis-in-law, close friend INFj, related by the now-dead marriage, a friendship that survived the divorce, is a good example. Our communications are always so mutually uplifting and comfortable. Almost all the time! But sometimes I get annoyed with her clear strong ideas of what i should do, or what I have done wrong - stated so authoritatively, so "Auditor"-like, the way a Supervisor would do. She feels too judgmental to me at those times. I know I do not offend her not taking the advice, and when I hold off she does too, sensing her own advice to me is not hitting home, I can see her almost shrug. Like, "Oh well. You're you."
Other times my advice does not fit her, either. I can see her almost look "hit" with this, like, 'Oh, no, is she right about this? But I don't like it!" At which point I always assure her, "But I don't know. I could be wrong. You have to think about it for if it fits you." And she does, and if its not for her, she always has a clear understanding of why, and explains, which helps me to know and understand her better.
With my other longtime EII friend its the same, but for a period of time our "Supervsion" moments were many, especially from her mind from me. It was our faith differences, and try as I may, I could not make her understand that my talking about my faith was not me telling her that hers was wrong. Which I have seen here on this forum, complaints about my talk of faith, when I am just being an IEE talking about herself and what she believes in which is just me. With this EII I had to back way up and make sure she knew I saw and understood and did not negatively judge her faith practices/beliefs. When she felt more assured of that, I could bring mine in more, without her feeling like I was correcting her. This friend "supervises" me much less than my sis-in-law.
But even after a supervision moment, we never part feeling "supervised". We part feeling like the interaction was a gift to us both, and happily energized from the interaction.
I just realized that entire NF interaction explanation will be supper boring to some of the other types!
I can cherry pick, too!
(Note, tl;dr can scan the bolded parts to get the gist)
Mirror Relations
(Maritsa's chosen resource: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...rror-Relations )
What do these have in common?Valentina Meged, Anatoly Ovcharov
Warmth in these relations is lacking.
Partners may try to teach each other, to impose their own views.
Closing distance, irritation may arise from inability to fully convince your mirror partner in your point of view.
Valentina Meged, Anatoly Ovcharov
Partners may experience difficulties being together because each strives to teach and remake the other.
Mirror partners can learn from each other, however, this sometimes leads to temptation to teach your partner.
O.B. Slinko, "The key to heart - Socionics"
Most often, mirror partners help each other understand a problem from different angles.
Your mirror partner can sometimes cause you irritation or even deeply offend you. This is facilitated by the structure of not only his creative block, but also of superego block: the role function that he falls upon coincides with your vulnerable, most painful function, and vice versa, thus your mirror partner can irritate and be feel irritated by your own vulnerable spot.
R.K. Sedih, "Information psychoanalysis"
There exist more possibilities here to provide help, but also to hurt one another.
Laima Stankevichyute "Intertype relations"
Although these relations are between types of same quadra, they can be difficult especially in cases that they are married. Partners are frequently attempting to teach and re-educate one another. When two ethical mirror types meet, they may feel at unease around each other and keep some distance.
A.V. Bukalov, G. Boiko, "Why Saddam Hussein made a mistake, or what is Socionics"
Left functions of one partner are right function for another, thus it is as if they are looking in the mirror reflection of their own psyche. However, this mirror seems curved, which prompts partners to try to correct one another.
These relations are valuable because they let each partner see the other 50% of the visible world, to observe it from two different sides.
V.V. Gulenko "Criteria of reciprocity"
There is also a sense of growing intellectual competition, which over time leads one partner to disengage. Follow-up discussions often assume increasingly controversial content and are disorienting in nature.
This pair will qualitatively analyze problems from two opposite sides,
In public one can observe a rather unhealthy tendency for competition in these relations.
Mirror partners strive for accuracy and clarity in relations, which leads them to subject everything to analysis. They even have a tendency to rationally analyze each other and sort out all information they obtained.
Mirror partners always emphasize the "other side of the coin" for one another - an aspect of the problem that has escaped the attention of the other partner. In this way, a partial picture is filled in to make it complete.
There is no merger of opinions here, only improvement of one's views by complimentary suggestions and views of the partner, which grow more and more divergent over time. The practical "payout" of mirror relations, however, is usually rather low.
Mixed states and confusion between old and newly imposed order and agreements disturb mirror relations and undermine their fundamental quality - tendency towards analysis.
Advice for getting along
Don't try to sort out your relations on basis of emotions or force. Allow your partner the right to hold a different point of view. Express your positive disposition in kind words, compliments, and by doing small favors for your partner.
V.V. Gulenko, A.V. Molodtsev, "Introduction to socionics"
These relations are called "mirror relations" because words of one partner are often reflected in actions of another: that which one mirror partner is passively thinking about, the other is actively actualizing. However this actualization is never full. The mirror is curved, so that partners correct each other's actions from their own point of view. For this reason there may be confusion and even criticism and reprimands. Each attempts to adjust the behavior of the other but such attempts usually fail. If we consider the verbal side of communication, mirror relations could be called relations of constructive criticism. Each sees one half of the same issue,
Subtypes have strong effect on these relations. If one partner is rational subtype, then for stability of the mirror pair it is best that the other partner has strengthened irrationality. When both are rational or irrational subtypes this is a worse fit, making teamwork more difficult due to differences in temp.
Wikisocion
Mirror is an intertype relation of intellectual stimulation and mutual correction. The pair shares common interests, but differ slightly in thought process and methodology.
Initially, Mirrors find plenty of things to talk about. They easily understand each other's philosophies (and usually find that they agree) on basically all issues. They are surprised to find that the other can provide a subtly different outlook and recognize valuable things they themselves would tend to overlook. As the relationship gets closer, their differences become more of an obstacle. When everything is apparently all said and done, one Mirror will point out something they consider to be a loose end. This perplexes the other, because the point appears to them inconsequential and a distraction from the main point of the process. They may even think the other is intentionally derailing their efforts, because of their otherwise understanding attitude. This perpetual sense of almost understanding leads to some frustration between mirrors,
this interaction is primarily intellectual (i.e. work-related) and does not result in a feeling of closeness or needing the other on a more instinctive level. While they may find the discussion interesting at first, too much of it can lead Mirrors to have a sense of emptiness and disappointment about the relationship.
Ekaterina Filatova, "Art of understanding yourself and others"
They have much to learn from each other, though sometimes this leads to the temptation to teach and instruct the partner.
Description from Socionics.com
These are relations of mutual correction. Mirror partners have similar interests and ideas, but a slightly different understanding of the same problems. Each partner can see only half of one problem.
The area of confidence of one partner is always the area of creativity for the other partner. What one partner considers solid and final appears incomplete and changeable for the other partner. This difference may often puzzle the partners especially when they fulfill their mutual plans. It seems for them as if the other partner simply misunderstood the main concept. Therefore partners attempt to correct each other's understanding but usually fail, because each partner acts from their confident side. For the same reason, Mirror partners can be involved in really hot disputes and can even come to blows in the name of their opinion.
The main discomfort in these relations is caused by the difference in Judgement and Perception between the partners.
Mirror relations usually lack warm atmosphere between partners.
Mirrors are relations of mutual correction, in which each sees one side, and considers the other side as missing the main point. So they try to correct and teach each other. However, in doing so, their role hits the other's vulnerable polr, which can lead to confusion, criticism, frustration, emptiness, disapointment, "really hot disputes" and as one put it..they can even come to blows in the name of their opinion.
They also say that it's easier on the mirrors if they are the same subtype, and harder on them if of differing subtypes.
So stop using "auditing" as your excuse.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
We may disagree but we don't argue each other under the table...to see who fails first. Therefore we don't have serious conflict.We have a certain sensitivity to each others' feelings because we both see a little bit of the sensitivity in ourselves and our own way of interacting. This is the same sensitivity you have when you want to establish a warm relations with people here and you've tried to tell them that you're being nice and considerate of them even if you're disagreeing with their type. I see this in me too Eliza.
Last edited by Beautiful sky; 08-07-2013 at 05:53 AM.
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
But @anndelise, while Mirrors have some Supervisory aspects, Mirrors are quite Different from Supervision. A Mirror is a "To-Four" as far as ease and comfort. To be a Supervisee, you are in the LAST place of the 16 relationship spots. LAST PLACE! The most psychologically damaging position.
So, yeah, you will see the Supervisee get her backup, and yell 'Leave me alone!" when she runs. And Supervisor will watch and say, "What the heck is wrong with her? She's crazy!"
Yes, all those things you picked from the Mirror page, they do reflect the occasional Supervision-like conflict in Mirror, which, unlike Supervsion, is a very low-conflict relation.
The difference in Mirror's "Supervsion-like" conflicts is that Mirror is an equal relationship. Equality in relations matters. Its why its better to be in a Conflictor relationship than a Supervsion relationship, becaseu as volatile as it is, the two are at least equal.
The very worst place to be of the 16 places, for close relations, is Supervisee. Worse than Conflictor is being on the bad end of an unequal relations. And for the Supervisor, its stressful, but not as bad as for the Supervisee. It is better than Conflict relations, for the Supervisor!
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
Go to the link of numerous descriptions of mirror relations and show me where it says that Mirrors is an equal relationship.But @anndelise, while Mirrors have some Supervisory aspects, Mirrors are quite Different from Supervision. A Mirror is a "To-Four" as far as ease and comfort. To be a Supervisee, you are in the LAST place of the 16 relationship spots. LAST PLACE! The most psychologically damaging position.
So, yeah, you will see the Supervisee get her backup, and yell 'Leave me alone!" when she runs. And Supervisor will watch and say, "What the heck is wrong with her? She's crazy!"
Yes, all those things you picked from the Mirror page, they do reflect the occasional Supervision-like conflict in Mirror, which, unlike Supervsion, is a very low-conflict relation.
The difference in Mirror's "Supervsion-like" conflicts is that Mirror is an equal relationship. Equality in relations matters. Its why its better to be in a Conflictor relationship than a Supervsion relationship, becaseu as volatile as it is, the two are at least equal.
The very worst place to be of the 16 places, for close relations, is Supervisee. Worse than Conflictor is being on the bad end of an unequal relations. And for the Supervisor, its stressful, but not as bad as for the Supervisee. It is better than Conflict relations, for the Supervisor!
The mirror's ROLE hits the other's POLR.
NeFi's Se role = FiNe's polr (so maritsa types me as Se role because of it)
FiNe's Ti role = NeFi's polr (so I suggest that maritsa's either a Ti-valuer, or has sold out her own Fi to replace it with a Ti theory)
Let's also consider that there was a time when Maritsa and I got along. When she felt understood by me, and felt she understood me. When she had confimed that I was NeFi.
But over time our interactions deteriorated because we kept correcting each other. I kept correcting her attacks on other Delta NFs, and trying to help her with her behavior to avoid the criticisms she was getting from other members of this forum, and she kept selling out her Fi for a Ti theory. Her Ti role vs my Se role.
Add in that she is a judging/rational subtype and I am a perceiving/irrational subtype, and there comes more problems.
Add in that she aggressively pursues kicking out delta NFs, and attacking them when they resist, and even stalking them on the forum so that they either leave or don't feel comfortable posting anything personal because she follows them around and finds some way to twist it to suit her goal. So yes, my standing up to her to try to protect these people is going to place me in Se Role mode, in which her Ti role competes with my Se role. And she says it herself...she feels like this is some kind of competition between her and I. This is exactly how the mirror descriptions from that link warn about what can happen in mirror relations. From a seeming understanding through the gradual deterioration all the way to the possibility of coming to blows.
Are you so stuck in your own mindset that you cannot even consider that possibility??
Or are you going to continue by dismissing even Maritsa's own suggested resource about Mirror relations?? Which isn't a limited one source description...but multiple descriptions by different sources.
Also, The relationships aren't in some kind of sequential order. They are merely representatives of differing ways of processing information. In Mirror's they can seem alike, but they are heading in different directions and are at risk of Role hitting POLR. In Conflictor relations, every weakness is the other's strength, and every valued element is subdued by the other.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
By the way, that mirror descriptions link has suggested to me to reconsider that maritsa might actually be a stuck-in-a-rut FiNe rather than a Ti-valuing type. Add in that FiNe are Process types, and I can now even see that maybe what I call "stuck-in-the-rut" IS her Process.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
So the war is over?
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
Bump.
Hi anndelise.
When I say "equal", I mean that it is "Symmetrical". Mirrors are Symmetrical Relations, and Supervisors are Assymetrical Relations. That's what I mean. In laymans terms, you could Mirrors they annoy each other equally, at times, though mostly get alone.
Supervision: "These relations are also asymmetrical as are relations of Benefit. One partner, called the Supervisor, is always in a more favorable position in respect to the other partner who is known as Supervisee."
That what I am referring to. What you are referring to above explains in Socionics terms why it says the Mirror conflicts can be like the Supervision conflicts. Thanks.
Yes, then she changed her mind, huh? I wouldn't try to type all those people myself; I don't feel capable. But she has been here a long time and has much interest in Socionics research, and she is she not me. Still, with so many people, I can see how she would have to concede to new info as it comes up, and change her mind.
Whatever role you were using (not saying I am correcting you, I am just going blank on that aspect at the moment), you were, as in the bold here, trying to hep correct her. And for a very nice reason - to help her avoid criticisms. And that is really a kind motive, and I am glad you clarified it. Its one of they "whys??" I have had about you two. So that's why. Thanks.
I bolded it becaeu what you said sounded like this Supervisor role: "In relations of Supervision it may also appear as if the Supervisor patronises the Supervisee, which can be quite obtrusive for the latter."
And in this interaction, with the Supervisee misunderstanding your intention, the outcome would be this:
"The Supervisee does not respond to this aid as expected and this will often increase the Supervisor's attempts to change the Supervisee. Because the Supervisee naturally does not understand what it is that the Supervisor wants from them, this may irritate the Supervisor, who thinks that the Supervisee simply does not want to understand."
Any, if this is describing you as Supervisor (it describes all of us when we all Supervise), you would get irritated with her!
Ohmigosh I am irritated with my Supervisee Mom today. She has Alzheimers, but she still is herself, she still is a person, and today, at the moment, I think its a Supervisor/Supervisee thing....
yes, judging/perceiving can be a problem!
I am constantly misunderstanding this "kicking out" statement you and others have made often. I think its because you and I think different. I don't see saying, and explaining, why according to my knowledge (or Maritsa's, or anyone's) of Socionics, someone comes across as a different type, on a typing forum, is "kicking them out". This is not a "Private - Delta's only forum". I can only conclude that you mean "It feels like she is trying to kick me/us out." Can't argue with that.
Maybe I have a similar different real life example. I was Evangelical Christian a long long time and identified with it and loved my community. Then, for theological reasons, I became Catholic. I wanted to remain both, sort of. I still believed almost all what I used to be, just some differences. They had differences. So why not? Because I loved my community, and wanted to stay. I wanted to go to Mass once a weekend, but still be a part of that community, too, as the token one-Catholic, I guess. But people were not comfortable with that, they saw me different now, as a strange outsider. I just wan't one of them anymore, in their eyes.
Maybe if feels like it will feel like that to you. Yet people of other types are in here all the time and they don't feel like outsiders to me. Oh well. You feel differently on that, i guess.
LOL, I get it. But i think its because she was being Supervised, audited, hit in her vulnerable function, and is acting accordingly.
I really appreciate your explaining your motive. It makes sense.
Yes, there is a supervisory aspect to mirrors when they correct each other.
Honestly I think we are BOTH stuck in our mindsets. Don't you?
I didn't check Maritsa's sources. That is a "Process" thing that you and Maritisa do!IMO. You two go for it.
No, there in a clear sequential order, you are right. But there is an order. Some positions are worse than others. Many researchers say that to be a Supervisee a close relationship, that is the worst position to be in of all. The Best, we know, its Duals. There are good relationships, and Mirrors are among those. And bad. Like C of confllict, Supervision. Yet even in marriage, with work, with becoming a "philosopher", one can get some good out of these relationships. But as far as comfortable or easy, you just can't say those are.
Yes, I have seen this play out for a long time IRL with my EII sis-in-laws marriage. Yikes! But they both hold their own. There is a symmetry there! I call it equality. They are equally annoyed with each others natural ways, and equally think their way is best....
We're not fighting, right? Just explaining to each other. Right?
@eliza...
If you want to educate yourself on how things used to be between maritsa and i, then look back at both of our posts from about ending of 7/2010 to just about 9/2011. At about mid 9/2011 or so is when things started going down hill between her and I. She had me typed as her mirror for over a year...and attempted to use me the same way she's using you. Someone she can use as a shield and support system while she herself aggressively attacks others, making them feel uncomfortable in the forum and in Delta subforum.
Don't worry though, you are just another in a line of people she has used this way. And I doubt you'll be the last.
Good luck with that.
I'm done in this thread.
I have absolutely no desire to even try to reason with you anymore.
I would like to relax now, and pursue less annoying activities.
Please do not call me into to further conversation with you...either of you.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
“Whether we fall by ambition, blood, or lust, like diamonds we are cut with our own dust.”
@anndeliseAnn, Is there any chance that you are an EII? I ask because when I was writing about Ti POLR in another thread, it occurred to me that your points are very carefully thought out in a studied, never awkward way. And you don't mind spending time analyzing and commenting in logical arguments. Not saying IEEs can’t make logical arguments, yours are just so consistently well presented that it reminds me much more of role rather than polr. Also, your enjoyment of and pursuit of Si interests reminds me more of my EII friends, who are very planful and deliberate, and less than my IEE friends who are more playful and haphazard in their pursuits. Your relentless pursuit of Fi truth also looks more like base than creative I think there are a few other things that make me think you might be an EII but I can't think of them now.
If you are an EII, and Maritsa feels supervised by you in her 4th function, that would make her an ILE. I would like to be sensitive to the possibility that Maritsa might not appreciate me discussing her type, so I will simply state for purposes of this discussion of supervision that the first thing that struck me is that she doesn’t look or act or write anything like my conception of an EII. The Fe in her pictures reminds me more of the joy de vivre of a Julia Roberts, rather than the seriousness that I see in my own EII friends. She also seems to have a good relationship with many alphas. She has stated that SEIs love her, and on a few occasions when Maritsa was lamenting the lack of Si in her life and the harshness of the LSEs she knows, I found myself thinking how much she would enjoy the calm and peacefulness of the SEIs I know. I wonder if she has been mistaking Si dual seeking for Si mobilizing? Maritsa’s using unwanted terms of endearment in other threads struck me as an Fi faux pas that an ILE might commit, with their variable awareness of how people view them in their relationships. Some may think that ILEs are thinkers, not feelers, but the ILEs I know are very tenderhearted and can get their feelings hurt just like anyone else. There are probably a few other things that I am not thinking of right now, that I may mention later if I think of them. But I am not interested in upsetting Maritsa in a retyping thread.
You seek a great fortune, you three who are now in chains. You will find a fortune, though it will not be the one you seek.
But first you must travel a long and difficult road, a road fraught with peril.
You shall see things, wonderful to tell. You shall see a... cow... on the roof of a cotton house. And, oh, so many startlements.
I cannot tell you how long this road shall be, but fear not the ob-stacles in your path, for fate has vouchsafed your reward.
Though the road may wind, yea, your hearts grow weary, still shall ye follow them, even unto your salvation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pukq_XJmM-k
Nah, doesn't make sense because Maritsa is ESE.
I always wondered who defines such things and on what authority.
I didn't care enough about your type to confirm it Eliza's type is Final.
Don't get jealous now, she is an IEE. CONFIRM AND FINAL
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Delta.png
“Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage.”
― Anais Nin
didn't I and haven't I SEVERAL times discussed that my wonderful cousins are LSE, the ones I get along with the most?
yes, there are cruel LSE out there and yes, I've been treated badly but that's not because of me, the world does strange things to men who have been disappointed by past relations and have turned to cruel misanthropes but that's not my fault.
You can talk to my LSE man now
Dual type
Enneagram 5 (wings either 4 or 6)?
I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE
Best description of functions:
http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html
Sounds like they are alpha and that your man is gamma
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
