# Is there some sort of hierarchy in asymmetrical relationships?



## superwaffles321 (Sep 6, 2013)

I've been trying to understand socionics for a long time. I like some of it, some are just ridiculous so I ignore it, kinda. The one thing that bothered me the most was asymmetrical relationships. How does this work? How is it that one type is favored more than the other? I truly don't understand it. I've looked into Model A theory thingy, and ya, that is very confusing. I really don't understand it. I know what the shapes mean, I know the block stacks, the order of it. I just don't get it, at all. I really want to understand why is it that there is such a thing called "supervisory" and "benefactory" relationships. Another thing is, I don't believe that man can rule over man. I feel that everyone is equal. No one is higher or lower than each other. We're all humans.


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

Basically Supervisor is super awesome at this thing that you barely notice. Every time your attention is called to that area, you feel inadequate.
So you go about your normal day, doing what you do and Supervisor comes along and goes "hey you missed this here, hey you missed this here too, yo what about this?, dude these are simple things, I don't get how someone as functional as you can make such glaring errors." And to make it worse, you know they are right.
Supervisor has their own faults. But those faults are not something you see as important in life anyway. In fact you have something (Demonstrative; 4D) that they really desire (Dual-seeking; 1D). But because it's not valued, it doesn't occur to you to care about it...at all.

So rather than people being BETTER than each other, it's more like...they are better in something you really feel nervous about and you gloss over their faults, since you don't put priority on those things anyway.
Instant "asymmetry".

http://personalitycafe.com/socionics-forum/300378-how-people-respond-supervision-relationships.html Examples here if you are interested.


----------



## superwaffles321 (Sep 6, 2013)

Schweeeeks said:


> Basically Supervisor is super awesome at this thing that you barely notice. Every time your attention is called to that area, you feel inadequate.
> So you go about your normal day, doing what you do and Supervisor comes along and goes "hey you missed this here, hey you missed this here too, yo what about this?, dude these are simple things, I don't get how someone as functional as you can make such glaring errors." And to make it worse, you know they are right.
> Supervisor has their own faults. But those faults are not something you see as important in life anyway. In fact you have something (Demonstrative; 4D) that they really desire (Dual-seeking; 1D). But because it's not valued, it doesn't occur to you to care about it...at all.
> 
> ...


I don't believe in asymmetrical relationships. Something seems very off about em. I do the same thing to my "supervisor" and I "supervise" her. She says don't worry about me. That's never going to happen because I do have to watch out for her. I do the same to my "supervisees". Same with the "beneficiary" relationships.


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

superwaffles321 said:


> I don't believe in asymmetrical relationships. Something seems very off about em. I do the same thing to my "supervisor" and I "supervise" her. She says don't worry about me. That's never going to happen because I do have to watch out for her. I do the same to my "supervisees". Same with the "beneficiary" relationships.


Can you give a few examples?


----------



## Draki (Apr 4, 2014)

I agree with Schweeeeks, my sister (SLE) is my supervisor. She always wanted to help me to get out of my nutshell and so on but always in a very hurtful way for me (Se). And I wasn't interested in that kind of help. She just wanted to help me and didn't understand why I didn't want her help. She herself is a very unreliable person I guess she could need a lot of Ni help from me ^^ She never finishes her plans and don't have any structure in her life. I myself think that my Ni is quite good but I don't really notice this function too much in my daily life. So like Schweeeeks described it, I'm not interested in the relationship. It is annoying. 

I don't have a real life example of a benefit relationship. But IEIs would be my benefactors. I don't know any in real life but on the internet I always found INFJs very interesting. Not sure if INFJs feel the same about INTPs though.


EDIT: another thing to my sister. It's a strange relationship because I actually admire her a lot. I always looked up to her. And nevertheless at the same time she is giving the wrong advices or can make me very uncomfortable. It's really a bit a love-hate relationship for me^^ But usually I tend to avoid her. She sometimes accepts it othertimes don't understand it.


----------



## superwaffles321 (Sep 6, 2013)

Alright. My aunt is an ENTJ. I am INFP. Being with her for the past 4 months was very interesting. I didn't want to be with her because I was kinda afraid of her. But I said screw it. I went out to live with her. She drives the car and I am the passenger. I watch her what she does. Often, I would catch her not paying attention to the green light and I would call her to look ahead. I know she would do the same to me. She and I have horrible short term memory loss, but in a very different way. We both help each other to remember certain things. Sometimes, we both forget it and sometimes we don't. She helps me and I help her. Sometimes I can't help her and sometimes she can't help me which makes us both feel a sense of inadequacy and worrisome but she and I said don't worry about it when really, we are both very worried, sorta. We both intuit things so differently. It's like half way there. She says if anything I want to do she would fully support me. I said the same. It's the same with my mom who is an ISFJ, sorta. It's these "asymmetrical relationships" that I feel there is a hidden brick wall that we bump into or something that we can't get across. It's really strange and phenomenal. Almost as if there's nothing we can do about it. I really appreciate these relationships. They are very interesting. 

With an ESFJ, it's a bit much. It's like we're not getting anywhere. They are wonderful. I don't know any INTJs in person but just some on TV or etc. 

The thing is that I don't feel asymmetry. I feel like in different sets.


----------



## superwaffles321 (Sep 6, 2013)

So really, I don't think there's a type that is to be more in favor than the other. That's all I'm saying and feel strongly about it that my gut keeps telling me. I don't think it's like ENTJ>INFP>ESFJ>ISTP>. It's more like ENTJ¦INFP¦ESFJ¦ISTP¦.


----------



## Draki (Apr 4, 2014)

superwaffles321 said:


> Alright. My aunt is an ENTJ. I am INFP. Being with her for the past 4 months was very interesting. I didn't want to be with her because I was kinda afraid of her. But I said screw it. I went out to live with her. She drives the car and I am the passenger. I watch her what she does. Often, I would catch her not paying attention to the green light and I would call her to look ahead. I know she would do the same to me. She and I have horrible short term memory loss, but in a very different way. We both help each other to remember certain things. Sometimes, we both forget it and sometimes we don't. She helps me and I help her. Sometimes I can't help her and sometimes she can't help me which makes us both feel a sense of inadequacy and worrisome but she and I said don't worry about it when really, we are both very worried, sorta. We both intuit things so differently. It's like half way there. She says if anything I want to do she would fully support me. I said the same. It's the same with my mom who is an ISFJ, sorta. It's these "asymmetrical relationships" that I feel there is a hidden brick wall that we bump into or something that we can't get across. It's really strange and phenomenal. Almost as if there's nothing we can do about it. I really appreciate these relationships. They are very interesting.
> 
> With an ESFJ, it's a bit much. It's like we're not getting anywhere. They are wonderful. I don't know any INTJs in person but just some on TV or etc.
> 
> The thing is that I don't feel asymmetry. I feel like in different sets.


So are you an IEI or EII? As an MBTI INFP you could very well be an EII (j/p switch for introverts). Then your superviser would be SEE (an MBTI ESFP). You would have the same problem like me then. EII have Se as their vulnerable spot and Se is the dominant function of SEE. On the other side you would admire their Fi auxilary which would be your dominant function. 



> as a vulnerable (4th) function (LII and EII) The individual tends to overreact to aggressive or confrontational behavior, taking it as a personal threat when it may only be a knee-jerk reaction or the result of a bad mood.
> He tends to avoid intruding on others' space or engaging in behavior that may be perceived as coercive, and tries hard to handle his needs by being disciplined and well-prepared himself - rather than relying on others to do things for him. If these strategies fail, his efforts at dealing with the resulting conflict make him look actively pushy in a way that appears awkward and unnatural to others. This opens him up to painful criticism and feelings of weakness and helplessness.
> He is able to moralize and instruct others about what they should do and why, but he is not prepared for others' active resistance or refusal to do as he says. In his mind, this would require him to put aside reason and good feelings and simply make the other person do what is necessary. This is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for him to do.


source: Extroverted sensing - Wikisocion

or the problem you would have with LIE when you would be an IEI:


> as a  vulnerable (4th) function (SEI and IEI) That is manifested as a skepticism and dislike for basing your beliefs, arguments, and actions on external sources of information. For instance, a SEI will rather trust the expertise of someone who seems to have hands-on experience, even if limited, than of someone who demonstrates to have read many books on the same subject. IEIs will base their opinions and views on their own personal insights and be, again, skeptical of "second-hand" factual information that contradicts it. "Don't trust everything you read" is a typical sneer of this function, especially when applied to sources of information otherwise seen as neutral and reliable, such as encyclopedias and handbooks. Another manifestation is a dislike for dealing with issues involving efficiency, productivity, and factual accuracy of statements made; statements are made according to input from other functions, not from double-checks against external facts which are seen as of lesser relevance to the issue at hand. Types with this function lack confidence in their ability to find relevant information in outside sources.


 source: Extroverted logic - Wikisocion

the relationships you described seem more symmetric. Asymmetric relationships are only bad for one person, the other one isn't so interested in it, or doesn't see want she is doing wrong.

EII and LIE would have a semi-dual relationship. So like you describe you would help each other.
Semi-duality - Wikisocion


----------



## Draki (Apr 4, 2014)

superwaffles321 said:


> So really, I don't think there's a type that is to be more in favor than the other. That's all I'm saying and feel strongly about it that my gut keeps telling me. I don't think it's like ENTJ>INFP>ESFJ>ISTP>. It's more like ENTJ¦INFP¦ESFJ¦ISTP¦.


They are not saying some types are superior. No type is better than another. 
The supervision relationship is asymmetric because it's not fitting for both equally. Supervisor wants to help supervisee but with a function which is not liked by the supervisee. So the help is rejected, it's the wrong help. On the same time the auxilary of the supervisor is the dominant function of the supervisee, so there is also an understanding between the two. 

Like I wrote in my example: I love the Ti auxilary of my sister but her Se dominant is just awful for me ^^ 
From her point of view she probably likes my Ti, too, but she is much more seeking Ni (which is also a strong function of LIIs), however LIIs are not so much interested in Ni even if it is strong. So after some time the supervisee will try to escape and the supervisor don't know why because he just wanted to help. 

In general the socionics theory suggests that everyone is always looking for their duality partner. So my sister (SLE) searched for an IEI (Ni-Fe). And she saw Ni (and a weak Fe and strong Ti) in me and tried to connect but as I'm an LII her dominant Se is uncomfortable for me. It's my vulnerable spot. So you see it doesn't really fit. ^^ One is chasing and the other tries to escape. LII's are not at all searching the functions of SLE's Se and Ti doesn't help. LIIs are searching for Fe and Si (their dual partner is ESE).


----------



## superwaffles321 (Sep 6, 2013)

Understood. Thank you all for your answers.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

From what I gather, noone understands it.


----------



## superwaffles321 (Sep 6, 2013)

Typhon said:


> From what I gather, noone understands it.


Lol.


----------



## Draki (Apr 4, 2014)

Typhon said:


> From what I gather, noone understands it.


How do you understand it?^^


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

Thats the point, I dont understand it either. It was never properly explained and no socionist ever seems to be able to provide examples of how these relations typically play out.


----------



## Schweeeeks (Feb 12, 2013)

Typhon said:


> Thats the point, I dont understand it either. It was never properly explained and no socionist ever seems to be able to provide examples of how these relations typically play out.


I like *R.K. Sedih*'s explanations. Seems like the most balanced ITR author on Wikisocion.

*Supervision*
These IV, we shall investigate as a combination of quasi-identical and mirror relations. By the way, here again we are dealing with a change order of functions within a block, compared with just described IV. This makes these relations much more strict.
C/O-Revision
Ego - Ego plus Superego. Although it is true that the more developed both people are, the better their relations will be, but even in ideal cases these relations are heavy if sustained for long periods of time, especially in the absence of duals of both partners. The reason for this is clear: partners look from the perspective of each other too critical, too picky, too suspicious. Indeed, in these relations there is a tendency to constantly test and re-test one another. People who are forced to live together often become completely worn out by these constant checks. Putting an end to this unpleasant process is often difficult even for their duals. But as soon as the distance between them is increased, partners stop causing unfounded suspicions in each other. Subject to this condition, relations of Supervision are not much worse than relations of Quasi-identity. Sometimes it can be quite fascinating, so unexpected is the train of thought of the other person. Interaction of SuperId - SuperId plus Id blocks presents its own problems. Despite the sincere efforts of partners to help each other, however useful the assistance offered, it is rarely accepted for the same reasons of distrust. These two types are poorly suited for marriage. Collaboration can be interesting, but it goes much easier in presence of Duals of each partner and opportunities to take a break from each other.


*Benefit*
This interaction we shall analyze as a combination of activity and quasi-identity. Ego - Id plus Superid. The similar element spurs a surge of activity in the individual. In this way benefactors are similar to one's activity partners.
C/O-request
Quasi-identical component brings the possibility of mutual learning, but simultaneously there are difficulties in trying to convince your benefactor, prove something to him, or adopt his point of view. This sometimes leads to explicit or implicit long-standing arguments and disputes. These attempts, however, are not completely useless, because the partners do learn a lot from each other, but often still don't manage to reach a consensus. This often makes close proximity one-on-one communication between them rather tiresome and tedious. The component of activation can make the partners seem very attractive to each other after only minimal interaction. Following this, the partners get to know each other, become closer, which prompts discussions, during which they eventually grow tired of one another, temporarily part, then, after getting some rest, come together again. If you don't allow yourself to argue until losing your voice, the appeal of this interaction can persist for a long time. However, if you don't restrain yourself, antipathies may arise instead of sympathies. Especially dangerous is the development of such situation in marriage, because here communication happens on very close distances thus partners may attempt to persuade each other with great fervor and stubbornness. It is not necessary for negative feelings to arise. The couple can find an outlet for the excess energy that is released by investing it into activities outside their union.
For example I know a family where the wife is SEI and the husband is LSI. Over thirty years of living together they have done a great deal of social work. The husband, who is a biologist by profession but working school teacher, has organized more than sixty expeditions with his students and helped found the nation's largest museum of biology. His wife of many years in addition to her regular job was also the head of women's council at a large organization and led an embroidery club. I must say that there were plenty of problems in this family. These conflicts were due to the fact that they were both sensing types. Their tastes in clothes and food did not match, neither was there agreement on how to conduct financial affairs of the family, and so on. Realizing that after decades of living together trying to prove anything to each other is useless, they, nevertheless, from time to time could not refrain from periodically quarreling.


*Not to make life more confusing, but there is a section on reverse Benefit and Supervision:*
*Reverse request (benefit)* - weary integration: Communication is not as much interesting as it is activating and mobilizing. You [the benefactor] are critical of the opinions and behaviors of your partner. During a silent moment, you start feeling uncomfortable. At times, it seems that your partner is ignoring or not noticing something, so then you start to forcibly bring the matter to his attention. You don't make efforts to befriend such a partner, more likely he invites you himself offering this or that project. Whether relations establish or not depends on whether he manages to interest you. Once you are sure that your partner indeed provides valuable information, you use it with great benefit for yourself.

*Reverse revision* - disorienting intervention: Partner is very appealing to their way of thinking and style of behavior. From him comes information that is interesting and valuable to you, but it seems incomplete and in need of clarification. When you relay your corrections to the partner, a dispute usually starts, as a result of which your criticisms will be taken into consideration, though not immediately. If the partner is trying to shamelessly impose their opinion on you, the relations can come to an end. However, if relations have been established, partner develops a habit to contact you for advice on matters in which you have demonstrated your competence.

I'm still trying to understand their reasoning:

* *




The reader, perhaps, is surprised to see new types of intertype relations - reverse request and reverse supervision. Two reasons substantiate their existence. First, there should be sixteen types of intertype relations, not fourteen as with Aushra (request-fulfillment as audit-report are two sides of the same relation). Second, as was demonstrated in practice, in involutionary rings of socioprogress the rules are inverse, making benefit and supervision in involutionary and evolutionary rings be different types of relations. If evolutionary supervision consists of suppression of any deviations, then involutionary supervision is demand for more precise formulations and additions. Involutionary benefit (social request) is an attempt to find the right receiver for your information, while evolutionary benefit is the selection of a transmitter who would supply you with valuable information.


----------



## superwaffles321 (Sep 6, 2013)

I mean, that's why I got the impression from what I see. Is there some sort of hierarchy in these asymmetrical relationships? Supervisor? Benefactor? I went and defined asymmetrical. Pardon me. I get it now. I didn't know and think any better. Nothing is equal, nothing is exactly or necessarily more favorable, just come into some sort of agreement or whatever and I like it because there's a lot of cool things in these types and that's what makes em very interesting. So no. I don't like to see the terms used with "supervisor" and "benefactor" so I don't care about em, somewhat sorta. I think it works both ways to each type benefaction and supervision. It just seems, off with the terms with how they're used in socionics. I feel that it shouldn't be called that with those two words. The relationships are truly interesting and that's the beauty of it because I really appreciate em. I think it's really cool and now I don't feel like calling it "asymmetrical". I just don't care anymore. These types are cool as they are. 

I've already read plenty of information in socionics. Lots of things are whacked and hard to understand. Too much details that looks very unnecessary. It's too much that my head is like "screw it" . I just go with my gut that it ain't right. I won't explain all of it into details. Just go with your gut. I don't like how on the socionics page with the relationship chart, the rings of benefits and supervisor relationship. I know there's no ring. It looks just, off. Even my aunt says we have a special relationship. Pretty cool. So I finally understand these relationships and I think I will leave it at that. Of course, I'm still gonna keep studying all 16 types. I wish it would stop. I think way too much. Lol. 

I may have missed something. I think MBTI is a lot more simplistic. I like it that way. Socionics just goes way too far to the point where I don't get it and I feel I'll never get it. I think the more simple the better or really, I don't know, a bit ironic. We all start somewhere. Maybe simplicity is best or whatever. People are quite something else. I think a lot about em.


----------



## Typhon (Nov 13, 2012)

@Schweeeeks

No offense, but I dont think those are very clear. It doesnt give examples, and when it does, it doesnt explain how the hierarchy works, it just says "both partners are sensing types, hence the relation has some problems". I havent seen any socionics description explaining with examples how this hierarchy works. It isnt clear to me, and if its not clear to someone else, I understand that because I dont think the fault is my inabaility to understand so much as the explanation not being clear.


----------



## Draki (Apr 4, 2014)

haha, that is the first time that I realize that supervisor really means something. Sorry I'm not an English natice speaker, I always just took it as a random title (often titles in socionics are misleading so I don't care about them).

Well, I think that I understand it because I have this real life example with my sister. I know what it feels like, and the theory makes sense to me. I don't have the feeling that superwaffles321 is describing this relationship because that really doesn't sound asymmetric rather symmetric which means both profit from it. 

Supervision - Wikisocion
The introduction part explains it very well, and in my posts I gave you the real life example which is exactly like in the description. 

You especially should understand your vulnureable function which makes you really uncomfortable and then imagine a person who wants to help you, or are interested in you but often helps you with the function you feel uncomfortable around. So as it is uncomfortable you're kind of shying away from this person. 

A symmetrical relationship would be when both feel the same about their relationship.


----------



## Draki (Apr 4, 2014)

What about this function break down. Every function is explained there:
Functional Breakdown-- Supervision


----------

