Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.: Phil Coulson (ENFJ)
Phil Coulson from Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. is usually identified as some kind of FJ. Surprisingly, I saw theories for all four: ESFJ, ISFJ, INFJ, and ENFJ. After studying the character, I believe the case is strongest for Coulson being an ENFJ. I strongly considered INFJ for Coulson as well, but I think ENFJ makes more sense. Youโre welcome to share your thoughts in the comments! If youโre interested in other characters from this show, be sure to check out Grant Ward and Leopold Fitz.
Fe:
โLook, I know you two like to work alone, settling scores that are personal to you, but thatโs not how we work here at S.H.I.E.L.D. We work together to keep everyone safe.โ
โTry no strategy. Stop thinking like an operative. Start thinking like a person. Maybe Skye will let that person help herโฆ Help her start thinking like an operative.โ
โI have faith in my team.โ
โI should have listened to you. Trusted my team the way you insisted.โ โ Akela Amador to Coulson
โTheyโre good agents. Try to see it from their side.โ
Phil Coulson focuses on the impact that his actions have on people. He believes that everyone has value and everyone should be saved. Coulson is willing to risk everything to save people, some of which donโt even want to be saved. At one point, Ward disagrees with Coulson for risking everyone, including his team, for a โnobodyโ who had become a threat to everybody. Coulson responds by saying, โNobodyโs nobody, Ward.โ This mentality of Coulsonโs also creates conflict with May, on occasion. For example, in reference to Skye, she questions his actions, explaining that: โโฆyou are defending this girl at the expense of the team.โ
Coulson is a team player, constantly emphasizing that they need to protect their own and trust each other. This is something he preaches during his early years, which is revealed by Akela who expresses regret over not trusting her team the way Coulson had always insisted. Similarly, he rebukes Daisy Johnson and Robbie Reyes for not being team players and always focusing on their personal scores. He informs them that โthatโs not how we work here at S.H.I.E.L.D. We work together to keep everyone safe.โ Coulson then essentially gives them no choice but to help, by saying: โSo you may want to be solo, but forces beyond our control are driving us together. You donโt need us? Fine. Right now, we need you.โ
Coulsonโs approach to his team causes him to naturally build close, emotional ties, which is why Skye becomes like a daughter to him. He easily expresses empathy, and often offers advice to members of his team. For instance, Coulson gives Ward insight on how to get through to Skye, telling him that he needed to start thinking like a person. He often pays attention to their emotional states or interpersonal issues, attempting to prevent any problems or help resolve conflicts.
Ni:
โIโm looking for an objection I havenโt already anticipated.โ
โThis means something! It has to mean something!โ
โHe may seem lost at times, but heโs always got a plan.โ โ Antoine Triplett
โThereโs an idea, a symbol. That must continue no matter what. A shield.โ
Coulson is future-focused. He strives to anticipate the future and prepare accordingly. Throughout the series, he often always has some sort of plan, whether or not he shares it with those around him. One of those ways this is demonstrated early on happens when heโs arguing with Ward over bringing Skye on as a consultant. After Ward shares his various objections, Coulson essentially says that he had already anticipated everything that Ward had said.
Coulson tends to make unconventional decisions, that seem impractical or even risky. However, for him, they are often calculated and well-thought-out. For instance, there are many concrete reasons to view Skye as risk. As Ward points out, Skye is an unknown variable, a member of Rising Tide, and had hacked S.H.I.E.L.D. twice. However, Coulson sees the potential to turn her into an asset. In fact, he views the very things that make her a risk as advantages. The members Coulson chooses for his initial team also seem to defy logic, according to Maria Hill, who says, โAnd itโs not just Ward. Your whole roster is sketchy.โ
When Coulson gets an idea in his head, he follows it wholeheartedly, no matter the risk. In other word, Coulson trusts his intuition, regardless of proof and no matter who around him is arguing against it. For example, when a few numbers on his S.H.I.E.L.D. badge light up, Coulson is convinced that theyโre a message from Nick Fury, or more specifically, coordinates. In spite of the current crisis, he has them use the last of their remaining jet fuel to fly out to the middle of nowhere. The rest of the team questions his decision, essentially seeing it as a last ditch act of desperation.
Coulson values symbols, which is what he sees S.H.I.E.L.D. as. He explains to Fitz that symbols are important because people need something to believe in. Just prior to this, he tells Daisy that S.H.I.E.L.D. is an idea, a symbol, that must continue no matter what.
Se:
โSometimes you have to just jump in and figure things out.โ
โBut right now the reality is this, Eli Morrow just wiped out an entire S.H.I.E.L.D. TAC team with a few shards of carbon that he created out of thin air.โ
Coulson doesnโt struggle to improvise when necessary. While he often plans ahead, heโs also able to adopt a present-oriented focus, for the sake of solving the current problem. In other words, while heโs aware of the future problems a decision might create, heโs willing to take things one step at a time, in an attempt to prioritize the most pressing issues. For instance, Director Mace dislikes the idea of working with dangerous criminals and known vigilantes, pointing out the potential future issues and risks. However, Coulson responds by explaining how critical things were in the present, and that theyโd deal with future issues as they happened.
While I did seriously consider INFJ for Coulson, I canโt rationalize inferior Se, because of his willingness to improvise. Of course, any experienced agent would learn how to handle himself in the field. However, at one point during season 4, a flashback is shown of Coulson during his younger years as an agent. Coulson had been sent to a Russian mining base to get an 084. May shows up and then mocks him when she realizes that his plan was merely to persuade the guard to let him in. Of course, Coulson states, โYou know how persuasive I can be.โ
Ti:
โWhen it comes to May and Daisy, you canโt be objective.โ
โYouโre gambling with our lives because of one agent. The security of S.H.I.E.L.D. far outweighs the safety of Skye.โ
โI pull the trigger because you order me to. Youโre the Director. I didnโt ask for the kill switch to Lincolnโs vest. You gave it to me. Because somehow sacrificing him is okay with youโฆ Iโll do your dirty work, Phil, but donโt you dare pretend your hands are clean.โ โ Melinda May
Coulson possesses a never-ending loyalty to S.H.I.E.L.D., becoming whatever he needs to for the sake of it. When he first takes them to the Hub, Coulson adopts a completely different persona, based on whatโs expected from his as a S.H.I.E.L.D. agent. Skye continually mocks him for this, calling him a robot version of himself. Meanwhile, Coulson continually emphasizes to her that she needs to trust the system. This all indicates an inferior identity function, like Ti, due to basing his identity on an external group like S.H.I.E.L.D.
Coulson prioritizes protecting his team to the extent that his thinking will become inconsistent, warping to support his Fe goal. For instance, when Hive turns Daisy, Coulson prioritizes saving her, almost to the detriment of others. Before embarking on a mission, May asks whatโs expected of her, implying that she might come across a situation in which she has to shoot Daisy. Coulson then accuses May of being trigger-happy. However, May points out that she kills only on his orders, and that while heโs unwilling to consider eliminating Daisy, heโs willing to put a suicide vest on Lincoln.
Generally speaking, Coulsonโs focus on people can make it difficult for him to make decisions in which he has to sacrifice others. This is why, in spite of knowing that the Fridge escapees are a distraction, Coulson states that itโs their duty to recapture them, and that this wasnโt the time to stand on protocol. Similarly, heโll put everyone at risk for the sake of one person, refusing to walk away until circumstances give him no other choice.
Hi there, reader! If you enjoyed that article, leave us a quick comment to encourage us to keep writing. In addition, if you've found our content helpful in some way, please consider Buying Us A Coffee to support our efforts and help keep this website running. Thank you!
Yo, this is insanely way off topic and I donโt know if this is the space to say it but Iโm going to ask something maybe crazy: Theoretically and practically speaking, can you actually KNOW your type or do you just have โbad guessesโ and โgood guessesโ? As in, I probably wonโt ever know for certain these functions are in my brain for sure because this ainโt scientific, itโs just theory. However regarding everything within the theory, these functions make the most sense on balance for my life, the situations Iโve lived, my experience and circumstances, so X, Y and Z are the best โguessesโ for my type with A, B, C and the rest being bad โguessesโ. This question, Iโm asking because Iโve overthought what type I am and what I would do after knowing my type way, way, way, way too much. I ran in way too many circles. And because I havenโt been able to settle on a type due to the extreme overthinking, itโs caused me to contemplate often if I shoud just ditch this whole mbti world entirely because I canโt see a way in which I can improve my life via this perspective and the sutff maybe doesnโt apply to me so I should just leave it be (part of the reason Iโm not leaving immediately is because at times, typing the more complicated people is sort of fun and I like this site and also because thereโs some hope of me finding an insight/perspective I havenโt thought about before that will change things). Any thoughts? I just wanna see what other people thinkโฆ
Hey, some people spend a long time settling their type, or never really do. There can be several reasons for that, but it is extremely common for NPs. Now, as for whether you should ditch Myers-Briggs, it depends on what youโre hoping to gain from it. If youโre looking for self-improvement or personal growth, then you obviously canโt gain anything unless you can settle on your own type, so it might be worth looking into other systems or methods. (Maybe it seems odd for me to say that, given that Iโm all about this system, but if it isnโt working for you, donโt let it hold you back.) If your goal is more about understanding others, then you might potentially have something to gain from this system in spite of not being able to figure yourself out.
Perhaps it might be helpful for you to pull in someone who knows you well in real life to help you figure out your personality type. Someone who can objective.
The original reply I was about to write was long asf. I know because I wrote this in a journal. I had to cut down a fuck ton because of the character limit. Hereโs what I wrote but cut down.
โWell, I think there are 2 reasons that are hard to explain (so hard I wrote this in a journal so I can get more clarity. I donโt journal often.) why the extreme overthinking started in the first place and I havenโt settled for so long. The first reason is because of my fear of bias or the inability to know exactly how the essence of a certain function can be applied to my life, even with evidence (and Iโm not seeing said evidence). I fear that my thinking and conclusions will be skewed or Iโm misinterpreting things. Itโs not exactly because I know lots of sites will have bias and stereotypes (that will often be the case unfortunately), because even if I read better descriptions like the ones on this site, Iโm still not exactly sure how itโs applying to my life or Iโm thinking I might be biased so thereโs no way for me to conclude with certainty.
This is the reason why Iโve longed to go back in a time where I didnโt know anything about the functions and the first thing I did was go look at the Exploring cognitive function series on this site (because I think this site, out of everything Iโve seen, has the most comprehensive articles and theory while looking at Carl Jungโs stuff.) instead of 16personalities.com or reddit because those โsourcesโ are so all over the place in my opinion and there are so many people who donโt even have the same idea of what a function actually means. If I didnโt know anything, it wouldโve been easier to type myself naturally becauseโฆ I donโt know anything so thereโs no chance for bias. So essentially, fear of bias or fear of being too certain about something I may be wrong about has kept me in the dark for a long while.
The second reason is kinda even harder to explain but if I had to try real hard to simplify things down, itโs that Iโve tried for a long time to frame this system towards something beyond just self-improvement or personal growth. Without telling too much, Iโve always felt that my life was overwhelming and veryโฆ confusing (this kinda sounds dumb, I mean a lot of people think this right?) and there are lots of things in my life Iโm trying to fix and by finding this system, I was hoping to apply all this stuff to a much bigger scale where I could somehow, some way figure out all the problems. But in trying to do so, I failed. Because I failed to realize Iโve been subconsciously denying this whole time that MBTI will not solve everything and Iโm very much delusional if Iโm thinking it will. Iโm now realizing this is probably the main reason for why Iโm contemplating ditching the system, because Iโve come forth and now Iโm confronting the feeling that maybe this system will not solve it all. Iโve been recently attempting to explore some concepts and things that are actually backed up by science (like watching Dr. K for example. Healthygamergg on youtube.) or some heuristics that make way more sense. I wonโt say Iโve had much success with those things unfortunately. So to address if I should use other methods or systems, yeah well Iโve tried that but itโs not easy especially considering I think of concepts outside of MBTI in the context of the functions way too much as a habit and itโs hard to get rid of.
And also, I donโt really care about understanding others anywhere near as much I care about understanding myself in actuality. I donโt think I have anyone that knows me well like the back of their hand unfortunately. But moving on, this is mainly about the original question. You think scientists will eventually look at this stuff and say โok this might be cool, letโs investigate this and maybe not consider the cognitive functions childโs playโ? Maybe the question isnโt too relevant because we canโt sit and wait. We have a life to live, even if living it isnโt easy.โ
Wellโฆ I think you have Ne somewhere in your stack at the very least, judging by your post. We tend to simultaneously consider if weโre wrong or right at the same time a lot like your post. I donโt think Se-Ni users are necessarily immune to that but I think theyโre generally more sure about things. I could be wrong about that, though. (โฆsee?) Ti could also contribute to that since you want to make sure your subjective (which isnโt necessarily a bad thing. Objectivity has its limits, too.) framework is well-built and wonโt come crashing down sometime in the future. Iโm just guessing, but ultimately, you probably know your mind best.
If Iโm right, I think a useful way I found of โtamingโ my Ne when it comes to MBTI stuff is to try to see the cognitive functions in action and compare them to the way you think. EVERYONE is at the mercy of their biases to some extent, so I think a healthy approach is to just accept that youโre probably not going to be 100% accurate and unbiased but try to do your best (thatโs all we can do, a lot of the time) to leave your feelings out of it so you can think clearly and be at least 99.98% accurate and unbiased, haha.
I find studying fictional characters useful for trying to whittle down what a cognitive function looks like. Though, you can use real people, too, just make sure theyโre being genuine and not putting on a mask or some other adaptation that would make looking at how their cognitive functions work difficult. Fictional characters can do stuff like this, too, but since theyโre in a work of fiction you generally have more context to figure this stuff out.
Studying the 8 cognitive functions might seem sort of overwhelming but they come in pairs so itโs kind of like you only effectively have to study 4, since if youโre studying one part of a pair youโre probably getting good data on the other part as well. While youโre doing this you should also keep a look out for which functions DONโT seem like a good fit for the way you think as well as the ones that DO.
As for your second question, wellโฆ regardless of if itโs considered scientific or not I think there is some truth to the MBTI system. There are certain patterns in the way that people think (Some people are REALLY goal-oriented for instance, Some people tend to reference the past a lot when making decisions, Some people are really in touch with their emotions and self-identity, Some peopleโฆ arenโt etc.). I personally think itโs a good way to know what your starting strengths and weaknesses are (STARTINGโฆ not saying they canโt be improved). And knowing what cognitive functions you have can be pretty useful. For instance, Iโve been trying to use my Auxiliary Ne (INTPโฆ probably. ๐ค) to come up with creative strategies for doing things lately. Plus, I wouldnโt necessarily regard everything the scientific community says as being ABSOLUTE truth. New discoveries are always being made, after all.
Iโm going to be honest, me being a high Ne user is not something I ever thought about seriously and the thing you mentioned is something I think a lot of non-Ne people probably do as well so I wonโt count that as actual Ne evidence, though I could see how that might be Ne. In my previous comments, I was careful to not mention what functions or what type I lean towards because Iโm genuinely not sure and not being able to get feedback on if Iโm right or wrong is a little frustrating (like for example, on a math exercise/exam, you will get feedback on if your answer is right or wrong. Even if thereโs multiple right answers to a question, there is still right or wrong. This doesnโt exist in MBTI.) but I know I gotta accept that. All I know is Iโm not extraverted (even then Iโm not sure 100%, I just think itโs unikely). Also, comparing functions in action and thinking about function pairs, Iโve already done those. I know I gotta do more though, I didnโt mention this earlier but Iโve been overthinking my type for well over a year and half. So Iโve done some good research I think, itโs just disappointly hard because stereotyp/biases are almost everywhere.
I was in pretty much the exact same headspace as you a couple of months ago. Fair warning, this will be long, but it may be what you need to find a way to type yourself to your satisfaction.
My experience spanned several years, flitting between being relatively sure. To completely lost and giving up to non-committally saying that โthis type fits the dataโ without actually believing it.
The way I got out was resisting the temptation to ruminate on the same data and experiences I have of myself (over and over and questioning what type evidence I may glean, if any), and spending that same effort and scrutiny toward trying to accurately type other people. Some people are pretty easy, so I use those are frames of reference through which to compare myself.
I met a few people, who I came to type as very clear Si Doms, and knew I definitely wasnโt Si dominant.
I found a few people who use Ne higher than Si, and the way that presents, and saw a lot of correlations with my own behavior, while I found that people who really โwerenโt on my wavelengthโ tended to use Se > Ni. This made me realize that I definitely am on the Ne โ Si axis, and that Ne must be higher than Si.
For the judging functions, some of the traits of both thinking functions seemed right, but I leaned toward Ti. I wasnโt sure, though, because I have often worried about โhow I come acrossโ or if I was leaving a positive impression. I was also pretty outgoing and talkative as a child, sharing stuff about my interests with just about anybody whoโd listen. Later I mellowed out and share less to avoid making people uncomfortable. This made me think that maybe I had Fe > Ti due to the extraversion and willingness to interact.
To test this, I waited to find a clear example of an Fe dom, and I eventually did. I realized my concern for people did not even come close to matching their incredible drive to bring people together and increase morale. My best efforts and concerns mostly only leave people with a positive impression of me personally, and donโt leave a wider impact on the group and harmony as a whole, like the Fe dominant does (through consistent and excellent use).
I later found some people with Ti as their clear dominant function, and realized they had the same concerns and similar approches as I do, without us having met before.
Therefore I concluded I could only really conclude two types were possible at this point. ENTP, and INTP. Theyโre the only ones that fit the criteria. I leant toward INTP, but I couldnโt be sure, so I tried to find an example of each in the world to confirm.
The Ne dominants I had already met to conclude I had Ne > Si had a spontaneous and freewheeling (somewhat irresponsible) energy about them, which I couldnโt really identify with in any stage of my life.
With those examples, it became more clear that itโs unlikely that I have the temperament of an extravert perceiving dominant.
INTP seemed very likely, but I still needed more convincing. Maybe I have just suppressed my natural tendencies toward that sort of extraversion having grown up in a small town.
So I continued to look for positive Ti evidence. Over time, with more examples and comparisons, meeting some clear Te > Fi examples, (and even meeting one person who has Ti > Ne), it became clear that this was my preference.
My presentation feels quite unique to me, and it is, but the motivations and overall outlook fit INTP over any other type, based on my application of the theory in world, and turning that inward toward what it means in the context of my own experience.
So, thatโs how I broke out of that loop.
I know this is a lot to read, but if youโre in the same place I was, youโll be willing to read it.
Enjoy the journey!
I appreciate this reply a lot. I have nothing else to add, I know that it wonโt be a net negative if I donโt ditch this system at the very least. Itโs just so disappointing how unrigorous the MBTI community is, with stereotypes and bias stemming from all places and not many people discussing issues and situations that actually matter, like for example how does a person of a certain type develop through trauma and other complex circumstances (oversimplification i know but itโs just an example, that is the point Iโm trying to make, these real things gotta be discussed more)? How would you type them? How do the functions fit in within bigger frames? In the end tho, I know I have to be fine with this because not everybody has the right foundation/fundamentals to go off from so it is what isโฆ
โ How do the functions fit in within bigger frames?
I consider functions as starting with very broad labels, and winnowing it down.
Perceiving is a box, and Judging is a box.
These generic attitudes are further specified into their direction of action.
(If you need details, check out their introversion/extraversion article)
With that explanation, itโs takes less effort to understand the base process of each function beyond its generic โfocusโ (S, N, T, F)
Thinking of them in this way has helped me to isolate and understand each one.
Then, understanding theoretically what it means for a function to operate within a stack is crucial to be able to use any of this knowledge, and is often neglected since it may seem obvious what the specific positions mean.
For me, it wasnโt.
They have great articles describing what each function axis looks like rotated to various positions in the stack, which were invaluable to me.
One thing to keep in mind, is that the dominant function determines most of the individualโs focus.
The other functions mostly serve to compliment and expand upon what the dominant function is already seeking.
An example is my own stack. In various situations in life, I run into something that my system of thought that I have intro-verted (turned inward), does not understand or believes to be false.
Poor development of my stack might mean it ends there every time. I didnโt understand it, therefore it must be meaningless or false.
Better development might aid Ti in understanding the thing, since one of its goals/focuses is to understand the thing in context of its own system.
Ne is usually where I go first, expanding on different ways this idea could possibly fit, but occasionally Si suggests a datapoint previously experienced.
How would you type them?
Typing other people was extremely difficult before I knew my own type, since I felt I couldnโt be sure about how a system I couldnโt fit myself into could apply to others.
Since you already have a basic idea of where you lie, (saying you may not use Ne) you can use what you do understand well, and apply that to others in order to expand your working knowledge of how this theoretical system maps onto reality.
An example of how to do this is one of the Ne dominants I mentioned earlier.
In the beginning, my only way to type him was to use the tendencies that practical typing and other resources have noted Ne users to have.
Actual cognitive process evidence (as described in PTโs typing process article โ good read) often is hard to come-by with people you donโt know as well.
One way you can confirm your hypothesis of what function, or even a broader category a person is in, is to try to predict their behavior/problems (or even their strengths!) before you otherwise would.
As an example, I predicted that, as an Ne dominant, he wouldnโt find it easy to stay connected with his physical environment, specifically, that he was unlikely to have good sensory environment consistency, (likely to lose things, lack of consistent placement of items (messy), lack of consistent process in his work/poor quality control โ all things you can learn theoretically) due to low Si.
I later confirmed most of these predictions, enough to confirm itโs not chance, but admittedly not all (I found no evidence for his losing track of items specifically, but the rest did prove to be true).
After going through this, I can now add his person to my own working knowledge of what an Ne dominant may present as.
Having real-life examples was invaluable to applying any of these concepts to myself in any meaningful or sure way.
It allows one to make distinctions with greater certainty.
Sorry for the long read in a mere comment section, and for any formatting issues. I hope this aids you! ๐
I remember several people saying, that when Coulson got back to SHIELD, that it is too early for him and he might wanna take a step back. Coulson always claimed, that he basically wants to be back in action, which imo could also be a nod towards tert. Se.
I wonder if this applies to his film appearances too or if his characterization changed between the movies and Agents Of S.H.I.E.LD?
I think I remember him having a good amount of Fe in how he interacted with the heroes so probably? Either way, good to know he lived on since his death was pretty sadโฆ except that I just read an article that said that an episode of โLokiโ confirmed he stayed dead in the โmainโ timeline, so I guess thereโs some multiple timeline stuff going on. So much to keep track of in the MCU, haha.
His personality seemed consistent between this series and the main movies.
Good to know. Thanks for answering, Mara!