Podcast – Episode 0372 – The Paradox Of Each Judging Function

Download Episode Hereright click link and select “Save Link As…”

In this episode, Joel and Antonia talk about the idealism and paradox of each Jungian Judging Function.


In this podcast you’ll find:


  • Why there is contradiction mixed into each judging (decision-making) cognitive function.
  • What the judging functions are: Introverted Thinking (Accuracy), Extraverted Thinking (Effectiveness), Introverted Feeling (Authenticity) and Extraverted Feeling (Harmony).
  • How are there paradoxes in these functions?
    • What each judging function is dealing with.
    • How these functions are influencing us.
    • Are each judging function’s ideals even attainable?
    • When obsession or compulsion strikes the judging functions.
  • What is Introverted Feeling (Authenticity) contradictorily seeking?
    • Joel’s (ENFP) Introverted Feeling ideal and what corruption means to it.
    • What are the realities of Authenticity?
    • What makes Authenticity feel like being on a hamster wheel?
    • How the paradox affects Authenticity in the 3-year-old position (ExTJs).
    • What Authenticity can really obtain in the end.
  • Introverted Thinking’s (Accuracy) contradiction:
    • Antonia’s (ENTP) Accuracy challenge.
    • Why Accuracy has to make choices.
    • Why bias is such a bother. 
    • The true gains Accuracy actually gets.
    • Why the 3-year-old position of Accuracy (ExFJs) should know this paradox. 
  • What is Extraverted Feeling’s (Harmony) paradox?
    • The trap it faces.
    • Why prioritization plays a role in Harmony.
    • How Harmony users can understand the purposes of pain in life.
    • When Harmony seeks impossible outcomes.
    • The magic Harmony gains through its paradox.
    • What disruptive technology is available to Harmony?
  • The contradiction inherent in Extraverted Thinking (Effectiveness).
    • What Effectiveness is obsessed about.
    • Why perfect systems don’t really exist.
    • What happens to Effectiveness when corruption hits?
    • The outcome that transcends Effectiveness.
  • Why these function paradoxes are so worth experiencing.
    • Finding the incredible emergents that come through these contradictions. 


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

Subscribe with iTunes
Non-iTunes Link
Google Play
Radio Public
Listen Notes

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…

Recent Posts
Showing 11 comments
  • Kylie

    I always like your work, Antonia and Joel, but this episode is next level brilliant. Thank you.

  • Kat

    What a great episode! I loved your comment about fact checking being done wrong if you can tell the political leaning of the fact checker- what a great Ti insight.

    I’m an Fi user (INFP) about to make a career change, and I’m feeling the paradox of authenticity strongly. On the one hand, I’m trying to change careers into a position that feels more authentic (more Fi and less Te). On the other hand, the way there requires networking, which feels inauthentic to me. So it feels like there’s no fully authentic way—either I stay in my inauthentic job, or I take inauthentic steps towards an authentic job.

    Thank you for a great episode and podcast in general!

  • Amanda

    Very insightful! It paints a really good picture of all the judging functions. I really enjoyed this podcast. 😁

  • IxTx?

    Probably partly because I’m thinking about it more because of the context, but still, yes. A few more “indication points” toward Te. Thanks!

    I have now brought out my E-book reader (itself over 10 years old and still working fine btw 🙂 ) and started to continue reading Jung. Provided suitable comment fields, I’ll probably come back later, hopefully with conclusions.

    • IxTx?

      This was supposed to be an answer to Antonia Dodge answering my initial comment.

  • Justine G

    Thanks Guys,

    I am very concerned with the ideal of ‘perfect’ communication, wherein others grasp what you were intending to convey, and this isn’t just about word-choice. I have to communicate company policies, via web-page and print, and recently circulated a very tricky policy mentioning criminal liabilities, thinking this time I’d done it ‘efficiently’ (i.e. quickly, without too much pondering), only to regret it as being badly arranged and lacking sufficient clarity (someone’s query helped me realise this). I would later ‘fix’ the issues and re-distribute it, after having something of a meltdown at a team meeting!

    It would have been more ‘efficient’ and ‘effective’ to get it right the first time.

    To me the details of word-choice, arrangement and emphasis are very important, and I approach even composing relatively ‘dry’ company documents as if a form of creative writing – the words should ‘dance’ on the page, not fall down like lumpen corporate lead that people can barely remember 10 minutes later! Okay so people will probably still forget most of it either way, but it could be the difference between 10% and 20% retained!

  • James

    Being and INTJ, my judging function is Fi it can be more authentic then moral per se. I like being who I am. One of things I had to get over was allowing people to shame me for being authentic. If I’m a weirdo I’m a weirdo, I don’t care so much what other’s think as long as I’m not breaking any laws I’m OK with that.

    For those that don’t know your judging function is the co-pilot in the car model or your auxillary function.

    • Antonia Dodge

      I suspect you meant that, as an INTJ, your Fi is your tertiary. Which still means it’s highly influential.


      • James

        Right it is, Te is my judging function and is my auxiliary. I had Fi on the brain and was expressing my last thought from the podcast via Te or rather my thoughts were trailing down a rabbit hole. Good catch! Your Ti is well refined, based on your Ne input, I respect how much more experience you have than I do in typology.

  • IxTx?

    This episode have increased my “suspicions” of having high Te. Thanks!

    I love systems that Just. Keep. Working. Of course, as you say, nothing lasts forever, but there are at least physical systems (i.e. machines) that come close. For example clocks that’s over 100 years old, just wind up once a week and give it a few drops of oil every few years and it shows the time and chimes the hours like when it was new. That I find truly impressive, and I wish more things were built like that. It’s not necessary in every case as the functionality itself sometimes becomes outdated, but there are plenty of things that have unnecessarily short lifespans. See “planned obsolescence” (an attempt to keep the factory system viable for longer by keeping the products themselves viable for a shorter time…).

    I’ve heard of your government being really cumbersome with all their papers and forms, and complicated old legalese terminology, which I of course wouldn’t like, but I really understand why they don’t want to digitize too much: the digital systems of today is anathema to sustainability. Operating systems, standards and security change faster than they can be implemented. EVERY program and service is unfinished when we get it, needing to be updated on an (ir)regular basis in order to just be secure and not leak information or be susceptible to it being unauthorizedly changed. And those flaws are usually not suddenly introduced, but discovered. They were there from the beginning, just waiting to be exploited.
    Services are suddenly cancelled as the companies behind them go bankrupt or just decide that the product is too old and want to sell the new one with more bells and whistles and a COMPLETELY different user interface which everyone needs to learn to use. Quickly.
    A government needs to have reliable communication channels, and a system that is in constant, more or less un-thought-through, flux can’t be reliable on its own, without frequent sudden emergency fixes, which can’t be guaranteed to work.

    Also, probably quite biased, it seems to me when you describe it that (poorly used) Fe is the cause of almost all the steeply increasing tension, polarization and hate towards pretty much everyone that is today’s discussion climate. If that says more about me than society, I suppose it’s another point towards high Te, Fe being low shadow.

    • Antonia Dodge

      Please don’t take this as some sort of diagnosis, but your entire comment sounds very Te to me. (I know discovering your type preferences has been a struggle, and I suspect any nudge from a source you follow is helpful.)


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Contact Us

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Not readable? Change text. captcha txt