Download Episode Hereright click link and select Save link as…

PHQ | QUESTIONS FROM COMMUNITY: In this episode, Joel and Antonia answer a question from a listener about using all the cognitive functions equally in our personalities.

In this episode, Joel and Antonia answer a question from a listener about using all the cognitive functions equally in our personalities. #cognitivefunctions #myersbriggs

To subscribe to the podcast, please use the links below:

Subscribe with iTunes
Non iTunes Link
Download The Android App
Subscribe on Soundcloud
Subscribe with Stitcher

If you like the podcast and want to help us out in return, please leave an honest rating and review on iTunes by clicking here. It will help the show and its ranking in iTunes immensely! We would be eternally grateful!

Want to learn more?

Discover Your Personal Genius


We want to hear from you. Leave your comments below…


  • Jouni Sakari
    • Jouni Sakari
    • May 8, 2019 at 9:30 am

    Hi Steve , just today found your comment here … I’ve been so much in so many places , lost track of some , but so happy to find back to the traces … more information , I guess you’ve found some already ? Individuation is a life long journey , I say it is a sacred journey ( smiles ) . Perhaps you could find something in my blog ?

  • Jo
    • Jo
    • June 16, 2016 at 11:23 am

    This may not be the best place to ask, but as I don’t have Twitter or Facebook I thought I’d try. Whilst not signed up I do read your Facebook page, and in every weekly update it says you have PHQ ‘which has been coming out each Thursday’. This was the last one though – 6 months ago! Please could you give us a hint about when they are actually coming back?!

  • Matt
    • Matt
    • December 30, 2015 at 6:36 pm

    I’d also be really interested in this as a male INFP. We have such a cultural expectation for men to be analytical, action-oriented people, and emotion, compassion, empathy, etc. seem to be completely overlooked parts of decision-making. I know Joel has touched on masculinity and feeler types a bit, but it’d be awesome to hear you guys explore that topic.

  • Steve
    • Steve
    • December 28, 2015 at 10:55 pm

    Hi Jouni.
    I’ve only been into personality theory for 1 year and finding it very interesting. I’m also INTP (at least that’s it right now). I also like investigating different ideas and takes on things, so I’d be interested in finding out more about the model you mention. Especially as coming from an INTP/INFP.
    Can you give any reference or something to read more about it?

  • Steven
    • Steven
    • December 21, 2015 at 9:35 pm

    I work in a field which has been highly demanding of my introverted thinking process. Even though I have INFJ preferences I tend to use introverted thinking quite often. I feel as though I’m fairly good with my “accuracy” process: like it is a 17-year-old rather than 10-year-old; fairly knowledgeable; somewhat experienced; but with occasional rebellious fits of ‘know-it-all-ism’ —which I am still working on fixing.

    I work as a software developer, and although the field doesn’t seem like a good fit for Fe (at a glance), I’ve found ways to use it, such as:

    Ensuring that code is well-documented with usage examples for future developers. Semantically readable code. My wife can read my code and have a gist of what it does without having any knowledge of programming. Sneaking in the little fixes that annoy users, but got tossed into the “ToDo list graveyard”. It gets me into trouble sometimes, but I feel like it is worth it. They don’t get priority because they aren’t “revenue generating” changes, and they don’t ruffle peoples feathers enough for them to be overly vocal about it. I really think that management underestimates how valuable ironing out even the little things can be though. Even though people may not be overly vocal, little things add up, and something major that happens in the future might throw their patience over the edge whereas if this were an uncommon experience (no little issues popping up places), they might be more understanding of our mistakes. When I hear my co-workers cursing at their code (happens quite often o.O), I usually ask them what is wrong, and either offer my ear to their frustrations or help look it over with them if it sounds like something I can help with. I value my co-workers greatly, and comment on the unique gifts that that some of them bring to our team. A lot of the other guys dislike our lead developer (an ISTJ). He gets very picky about quality of code: not taking short-cuts by just hacking things in. He also has a very set in stone way of doing things (that whole SJ stability thing is extremely important for protocols). I make sure to tell him how much I value his experience and insight (I don’t think he hears that often enough, a lot of my co-workers just get mad at him or dread having to run things past him).

    I really love our lead developer though. I run my code and ideas by him all the time because I love his perspective on things. I’m very concerned about producing quality code, and he helps make me better at doing that. It’s not like he is saying these things just to be a stickler, he is truly concerned about stability and consistency (very valid concerns!). He has very vast, very detailed knowledge which I love to pick out of his brain – and I think he enjoys sharing it too, so it is a win-win.

    I guess what I am trying to get at is to reinforce your guys’ point that the co-pilot can always be used (even in unlikely situations) by relating it to my own personal experiences and observations. Though, I am not a professional, and I know my observations are prone to misunderstanding, so I might not be relating these things accurately.

    Thank you again for the podcast. I think I’ll probably cave-in and get iTunes so that I can leave you guys good reviews… I have/had reservations about using it for personal reasons. Might be time to set those aside though. .

Leave a comment

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.