In this episode, Joel and Antonia dive deep into the rising wave of existential dysregulation affecting individuals and society. They explore how personality type, through the lens of cognitive functions and the four regulation channels (somatic, emotional, cognitive, and existential), can offer a powerful map for navigating uncertainty, identity crises, and cultural upheaval. From AI and generational theory to the roots of intuition and spiritual evolution, they lay the groundwork for a revolutionary framework to understand and manage personal and collective transformation.
- by Personality Hacker
Existential Dysregulation & Personality in a Changing World | Podcast 610
- by Personality Hacker
Share:
When Motivation Fades — Rethinking Energy, Drive & Personality Type | Podcast 609
The Third Entity in Every Relationship | Podcast 611
2 comments
Hi Antonia and Joel! Thanks for a thought-provoking podcast!
I’d be very interested in your thoughts about this model for tackling existential dysregulation:
If the dysregulation is occurring because Ne is offering overwhelming possibilities, maybe Si can be used to ground Ne, and Ni can be used to challenge and/or support Ne.
For example, analysis of patterns in history suggests that:
• Change doesn’t happen linearly. If something grows or improves very rapidly soon after it first appears, that doesn’t necessarily mean it will continue to grow or improve rapidly. Often, that particular change stalls after a while, and the next big change comes from a different direction.
• Failed predictions are usually forgotten or mocked rather than being assessed and understood in context.
• Con artists prosper in times of uncertainty about opportunity, especially if they are skilled at telling convincing stories about the future. Some very intelligent people are fooled (Isaac Newton probably lost a large amount of money in the South Sea bubble). Sometimes the con artists fool themselves as well as their marks – this often seems to happen to people running Ponzi schemes. No matter how plausible a narrative is, there are benefits to asking yourself: how much am I risking if this story isn’t true? (And the risk isn’t always financial.)
The world-building ability of Ni (supported by knowledge from Si) can also be useful. Some predictions seem plausible in isolation but cannot occur sustainably in any self-consistent possible world.
Flipping the attitudes gives a model for tackling existential dysregulation due to a one-sided use of Ni becoming overconfident that a particular predicted future is inevitable. Here, Se can ground Ni by keeping us aware of what’s happening in the world right now and helping us to ask: are recent changes still consistent with the future I’m predicting, or do they now suggest that something different is happening? And using Ne to challenge a single prediction offered by one-sided Ni allows us to stay alert to alternative possibilities, so that we can adapt more flexibly if things don’t turn out as we expect.
Thanks again!
I agree with your excitement about a map to regulate oneself.