@Lunar somehow magnetically attracts my attention and I seek her approval. Weird huh?
This is one of the biggest reasons that I believe in Socionics; their depiction of the Supervisorial relationships, which is the way they characterize the ENTP Looking up to the INFP, or any of the relationships in which your dominant function is outclassed by your “Supervisors” because she (lunar) has it as an Auxiliary, with a softer and more artful touch, while further, that Supervisor has a tertiary that is better than your inferior, (Si in this case) and that Supervisor overvalues Si, probably thinks the world totally demands Si, and thus is liable to look at the supervisee over time (me) and be like “That is cute but really you do have to grow up at some point; this business of Ne, it’s important, but it’s nowhere near as important as Si, and if you get another vehicle repossessed, I don’t know man. You just don’t fucking do that. People Don’t Live That Way. never in my life have I ever seen anybody think it’s okay to live that way.”
So @supernokturnal I am gonna submit that the dynamics of this relationship are more defined by the supervisors (the one who is looked up to) Tertiary obsessions, which cause them to be a bit nitpicky with regard to their supervisee (the one who looks up), because the Supervisee has as their inferior the Supervisor’s Tertiary. And it’s a tough spot to be in because the Supervisee is embarassed and sensitive about their inferior weakness. So its like:
Has Dominant function
Has the same function but more elegantly.
Lacks in the region of the inferior – is objectively worse here than the supervisor who has it in the tertiary
Overestimates their own competency in the same function, which is their tertiary, and really hates to see people sucking at it, because we want to get everyone around us to make our Tertiary Their Problem Too. The Motivating Function; we wanna motivate others and shit. So Supervisor is hyperaware of Supervisee’s weaknesses here.
Meanwhile, Supervisor is like: “I love you to death supervisee. You are so talented. It’s very clear to me that if you would tone down all the (insert their dominant function here) and put more energy into (insert their inferior function here) you would pretty much be a rock star, like, I mean, really, you could be so great and you are shooting yourself in the foot.”
Supervisor sees the way forward for the supervisee and wants to mentor them. But they are wrong, instinctually. Totally fixable but it hurts to fix it.
I know because I have to fix it with ISTPs all the time, whom I supervise. I have their Ti in aux, and I have their inferior in Tertiary.
The last bit not yet mentioned is how your supervisor has this last trump card: they have as dominant function something that makes you squirm, something you don’t really see, something you miss, that seventh function, which is basically an unknown unknown and then later a known unknown or an unknown known perhaps. And Unknown known: something lurking either all the time or never, you just can’t figure it out. Can’t go over it, can’t go under it, can’t go through it. At least if it’s Fi, lol. I imagine the deep terrifying sensation that Fi causes me (part respect, part envy, part anger, part confusion, part rising anxiety, part animal fight or flight at the knowledge of an invisible force at work, part stubborn Ti being like Are You Fucking Kidding Me How Does This Count As Real, I Am Going To Speak Some Thinks I’m Thinking Out Loud Really Soon, part dread at how that always go, part sore back from sleeping weird places) might be different than the sensation that my own Supervisee, ISTP, would feel toward me when growing exhausted/annoyed/flabbergasted by Ne. Also, i vs e attidudenal differences likely could cast these relationships in a specific way dependent on whether the Supervisor is the Extoverted Dominant or the Introverted Dominant.
Anyway I know it’s hard as a supervisor to let go of the vision for the ISTP because in many ways when you do the relationship ends. A lot of the relationship is based on the tension that comes from this imagined future day in which the supervisee has improved to this degree where the supervisor is excited to see them being this epically phenomenal human being, Objectively Speaking. And then when it becomes suddenly clear that is never gonnna happen, it’s like, “oh, wait, I’ve been pretending you are someone you aren’t ISTP. And I’ve been pretending Im someone I’m not, INFP.” And collapse probably follows.
Better not to build the relationship on that fantasy.
I’ve only done this thinking for ENTP/INFP ISTP/ENTP so I am not sure if I have it right for everyone even from a socionics perspective.