# Supervision: Thinking you know someone better than they know themselves?



## Mostly Harmless (Oct 16, 2011)

I know supervision is supposed to be one of the most tense relationships in the socion but I don't know if I feel that way exactly. I have a handful of ENFP friends whom I like very much and whose company I enjoy.

There's one thing about them that irks me though. It's the tendency to act like they know me better than I know myself and advise me accordingly. When I try to tell them that actually, no, I'm not like that, they turn it around into an explanation of how what I just said fits perfectly with what they thought about me all along. There will be a caveat, of course, about how I probably know myself best but I don't feel like they really believe it. I feel like they see me as they want to see me rather than how I actually am. Which probably helps them like me better? I don't know though. 

The funny thing is that an LIE can also do this whole "Actually, this is how you are" thing to me and while I might initially have a kneejerk negative reaction, it's usually followed, often quite quickly, with that puzzle clicking, "Oh shit, that's totally it" feeling. Rather than "Oh my gosh, you didn't listen, do you even care who I am?"

I don't know if it's a socionics thing or an ENFP thing or just a me thing but there it is. Has anyone had similar experiences with their supervisor?


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Mostly Harmless said:


> When I try to tell them that actually, no, I'm not like that, they turn it around into an explanation of how what I just said fits perfectly with what they thought about me all.


Don't forget you will misunderstand your supervisor easily because they reason through your weakest function. For example, my supervisee frequently thinks I'm making judgements when I'm actually making observational statements. That said, I think it's just Ne. Their dynamic thinking means they never really have a single view of you. It's a giant jumbled mess with no internal consistency because Ti is their vulnerable function.



Mostly Harmless said:


> The funny thing is that an LIE can also do this whole "Actually, this is how you are" thing to me and while I might initially have a kneejerk negative reaction, it's usually followed, often quite quickly, with that puzzle clicking, "Oh shit, that's totally it" feeling. Rather than "Oh my gosh, you didn't listen, do you even care who I am?"


An LIE is in your quadra, so they understand you much easier. Plus, IxEs always seem delusional to me. Not enough Te and Sensing to ground them to the realistic plane.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

I've heard something like this from a person of Supervisor type who has studied Socionics -- that he knows "my type" through and through and therefore he already knows if not everything then a lot of things about me. On practice it turned out to be different. I felt like he was frequently misinterpreting my motives and just not getting them, giving too much attention to things that didn't matter or were of minor importance to me, and was wary and suspicious of me for reasons I could not comprehend.

But yes I did get this "I know you!" - "no you don't!" impression of our interaction.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Fried Eggz said:


> Don't forget you will misunderstand your supervisor easily because they reason through your weakest function. For example, my supervisee frequently thinks I'm making judgements when I'm actually making observational statements. That said, I think it's just Ne. Their dynamic thinking means they never really have a single view of you. It's a giant jumbled mess with no internal consistency because Ti is their vulnerable function.


Seeing that your type yourself as ILI, your supervisee's vulnerable function is actually Ni, while Ti is their ignoring. If internal inconsistency was dependent on Ti, then what you said above goes for all dynamic Ti rejecting types, including ILI.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

cyamitide said:


> Seeing that your type yourself as ILI, your supervisee's vulnerable function is actually Ni, while Ti is their ignoring. If internal inconsistency was dependent on Ti, then what you said above goes for all dynamic Ti rejecting types, including ILI.


I was not talking about my supervisee using Ti. I was talking about IEEs using Ti.


----------



## cyamitide (Jul 8, 2010)

Fried Eggz said:


> I was not talking about my supervisee using Ti. I was talking about IEEs using Ti.


In that case they would have static thinking, IEE is a static type.



Fried Eggz said:


> Their dynamic thinking means they never really have a single view of you. It's a giant jumbled mess with no internal consistency because Ti is their vulnerable function.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

cyamitide said:


> In that case they would have static thinking, IEE is a static type.


I was not referring to the Socionics dichotomy. I was just using the word dynamic, which I have seen quite a few IxEs use to describe themselves. Sorry for causing confusion.


----------

