#type spotting

[mbti-notes]

What is meant by "realism" when it comes to Se doms? Sometimes I get stuck on this point when typing characters because I equate realism with pragmatism. But aren't Se doms capable of having dreams of being a rock star or astronaut as much as anyone else? And doesn't Se merely perceive, not judge? And an Se dom would inherently have an introverted judging functions as their auxiliary function. Would it be accurate to say it's realism in perception, and may or may not be so in judgement?

This is already explained in the study guides. Realistic means grounded in concrete facts and details. It's very easy to have hopes and dreams and anyone can do it, but are they believable? Do you have full confidence that they can be achieved? If you are fully grounded in reality, then hopes and dreams are only believable once you have fully taken into consideration the realities of the situation.

I don't really understand the logic of your question. If you are realistic in perception (dominant Se), you will also be realistic in judgment (auxiliary Ti/Fi). How could you come to an unrealistic judgment if your perception only gathers the concrete facts and details of reality, i.e., if that is the only kind of information you are using?

It seems you are still at the stage of trying to understand each of the functions, which is important. I suspect your question comes from two issues: 1) you yourself are N or don't use Se and thus don't understand Se because it is too far out of your experience, and/or 2) you are not yet at the stage of understanding the complexities of how functions work together as an entire stack. The first point is remedied through your own type development.

The second point is remedied by understanding type dynamics and the basic fact that people are always using all four of their cognitive processes. No matter how well you use your information gathering functions, a human being can never be omniscient. There will always be gaps in knowledge, things you don't know that you don't know, or things you can't know about until they happen - which is why we need N functions for speculation. If a particular Se dom is ever unrealistic, it is usually due to trying and failing to use their N function, i.e., they fill in the gaps of their knowledge with incorrect speculative information and then make bad judgments/decisions as a result.

[dearmbti]

Type Spotting

Do you want to find out someone else’s type but don’t want to ask them to take the test?

In the spirit of this blog, let’s continue to stay indirect and do the typing ourselves.

(Just for future reference, this is now a dedicated page on my blog.)

* * *

Spotting by temperament:

How do they seem from the outside?

ExxJ: Friendly, helpful, and conscientious, although a little bossy and overwhelming.

ExxP: Adventurous, high-energy, and uninhibited, although a little impulsive and unpredictable.

IxxJ: Reserved, introspective, and responsible, although a little obsessive and uptight.

IxxP: Flexible, individualistic, and non-conforming, although a little aloof and indecisive.

If they had to give someone advice, are they most likely to tell you to:

xSxJ: Proceed with caution, remain patient and learn from experience.

xSxP: Don’t think too much and just do it.

xNxJ: Reflect carefully on implications and what it means for your future.

xNxP: Consider the big picture, embrace change and be optimistic.

How would you describe their learning style?

xSxJ: They prefer to learn with the appropriate method that relies on tried-and-true procedures.

xSxP: They prefer to learn by using hands-on or first-hand experiences.

xNxJ: They prefer to learn by taking a holistic approach to achieve intuitive understanding.

xNxP: They prefer to learn the “gist” of something before moving on.

What kind of personality traits seem to annoy them the most?

xxTJ: Indecisiveness, self-pity and wishy-washy behaviour.

xxTP: Dogmatic, overemotional and manipulative behaviour, as well as unwillingness to admit error.

xxFP: Lack of authenticity, intrusiveness and living by the book.

xxFJ: Impoliteness, aloofness and inconsiderate behaviour.

In conflict resolution, would they encourage you to:

xxTJ: Face the facts (and display frustration if you remain indecisive or self-pitying)?

xxFJ: See if there is a way to achieve a win-win situation (while potentially being a little overbearing about it)?

xxFP: Listen to your inner sense of what is right vs wrong (while avoiding influencing your decision-making)?

xxTP: Try to get a clear view of the situation, admit your shortcomings, and remain sensible (while avoiding influencing your decision-making)?

* * *

Spotting by dichotomies:

What tends to bother them more?

Loud and boisterous people who are too intrusive (I), or reserved people who are aloof and hard to engage with (E)?

Detached from reality, fantasising, and vague people (S), or stuck in the present, impractical, and blind to the future people (N)?

Detached reasoning and emotionally cold environments (F), or decision-making reliant on (gut) feelings and environments where emotional displays are common (T)?

Ambiguity, no direction, and lack of preparedness (J), or rigidness, unchanging environments, and lack of options (P)?

In conversations, are they:

Avid listeners who might monologue at length once the topic they’re passionate about comes up (I), or are they generally very expressive regardless of the conversation topic (E)? I.e., self-contained (I) vs conversational (E).

Most engaged when discussing events and personal experiences in fine detail (S), or when interpreting meaning and speculating about possibilities (N)?

Most convinced by impersonal reasoning or empirical data (T), or by general consensus or whether ideas align with their personal experience and values (F)?

Easily taken by the flow of a conversation, easily straying from original topic (P), or do they make sure to remain on topic and receive closure (J)?

When pressed to be active in the world, do they:

Tend to burn out quickly and become dissatisfied (I)?

Remain energised and are happier for it (E)?

When teaching someone a new subject, do they:

Emphasise crucial details and include anecdotal examples (S)?

Begin by giving you the big picture or supply you with context (N)?

Would you rather describe them as:

A little cold, even if well-meaning (T)?

Oversensitive, even if sensible (F)?

On average, are they more comfortable when:

They have a sense of direction or know the right procedure by which to act (plans being certain) (J)?

They are free to explore and deal with things as they go along (plans being open to change) (P)?

[mbti-notes]

hi, i've been having some issues with Fi vs Fe, especially when I think of Aang in ATLA. I know he is typed as ENFP including by you. and i can understand the Ne dom view but the Fi is so confusing. I thought Fi was internal moral/values and doing what someone thinks is right according to themselves but in the show Aang kept saying stuff like 'the monks taught me revenge isnt good' etc. it always seems like his morals come from others in this way and not from himself? how does it work?

This confusion is common for newbies. It sounds like you're reciting a simplistic and stereotypical description of Fi that doesn't tell you anything about the many possible ways Fi develops in real people or how it actually operates in response to real world situations. There are several problems to address:

1) Applying imprecise and/or incorrect definitions: Fi is basically using your subjective feelings to make value judgments. That's all. It doesn't determine exactly what your moral beliefs will be or whether your moral belief system is valid. To understand how people come to adopt and justify their moral beliefs, you have to introduce the concept of moral development. Moral development and personality development are separate, though they have a complicated relationship.

In short, you're conflating cognitive functions and moral development because you haven't really understood what cognitive functions are and how to define them properly.

2) Not distinguishing well between cognition and behavior: How old is Aang? Physically and mentally, he's a preteen (10-12). Preteens do not have a well-developed auxiliary function, nor would they be very far along in their ego and moral development. He hasn't had the time and life experience required to develop a sophisticated awareness and nuanced understanding of his feeling life. Thus, with his "primitive" Fi, he only knows when things don't feel right, at best.

On top of immature Fi, a preteen isn't capable of refined moral reasoning, either. He doesn't yet possess the necessary intellectual tools for articulating his moral judgments and decisions. Thus, when pressed, what else can he do but call up some words from his mentors and teachers, as all children do at that stage of moral development? He's picking and choosing their moral arguments as necessary to help explain and justify his own strong but fledgling moral instincts.

Additionally, remember that people fall into inferior grip when they have too much difficulty coping with stress, and he was pretty much under constant pressure to carry out his mission efficiently. He's not repeating what authority figures taught him because he likes to and he takes personal pride in possessing authoritative knowledge (high Si). Rather, he's only doing it during times of moral confusion when he sees no other method of grounding himself (compensatory Si).

Grasping for scraps of old knowledge and/or remnants of one's old self when feeling lost is a sign of inferior Si and it happens when Ne doms are under stress. They easily get tangled up in trying to reconcile the disconnects between past, present, and future. Don't forget that his case is quite extreme because there is a gap of over a hundred years in his knowledge of the world.

In short, you're only looking at what he does (behavior), but you haven't understood WHY he's doing it (cognition). This is a common pitfall in type assessment. You need to understand The Why, otherwise, you run the risk of taking behavior at face value and then getting misled by crude stereotypes.

3) Not accounting for the whole functional stack: The reason he was frozen (in time) for so long was mainly because he was running from his responsibilities. If I recall correctly, this was a recurring theme and related to the developmental challenge he had to meet in order to grow and mature as a character.

Resisting duties and responsibilities aligns perfectly with the ENFP tendency to take dominant Ne to extremes and resist the call to develop auxiliary Fi in adolescence, eventually leading to Te loop and Si grip issues. Other functional stacks wouldn't fit as well. For example, if he was ESFJ, he would be taking Fe to extremes and have difficulty developing Si, eventually leading to Ne loop and Ti grip issues. Is there any evidence to support this reading? Not that I remember.

All of the functions of the stack have to fit properly. Are you using the evidence to discover the right stack, or are you trying to twist and force the evidence to fit the stack you want? Many people prefer to start with a hypothesis and then look for confirming evidence. The problem with this approach is that it tends to overlook better possibilities as well as important counter-evidence. My method of type assessment is more neutral in giving fair consideration to all 16 types at the start, then gradually narrowing it down through examining counter-evidence (see the Type Spotting Guide).

In short, you're trying to isolate and identify a particular function without taking into consideration its exact stack position, how it relates to the other functions in the stack, and how its expression is influenced by individual developmental factors.

[mbti-notes]

Hello there! I've been making my first attempts at typing through the cognitive functions, but I've been noticing that I seem prone to interpret Fe paired with Si as Fi, or vice versa with Fi-Se seeming like Fe to me. I'm an INFP myself, and I was wondering how this might affect my typing bias? Can the personal experiences embedded in Si combined with the service-oriented Fe appear to be Fi? Can Fe appear to be Fi when the person is drawing from personal experiences to project onto others to imagine what they must be feeling?

I don't think you're asking the right questions. I need to know what exact criteria you are using to identify each function. Are you able to list them? Do the criteria stop at surface-level observable behaviors, or are they designed to lead you to deeper knowledge of a person's cognitive patterns? Do you have a system? Unless you detail your type assessment process to me, there's no way for me to pinpoint and correct the flaws in the process.

Repeated use of the word "appear" indicates that you are probably too focused on appearances. Since appearances can be deceiving, you have to be able to reach beyond them, i.e., look inside the book rather than judging by its cover.

For instance, anyone of any type can be service-oriented. Some of the most service-oriented people I know are ESTJs. "Service-oriented" is just a simple and factual characteristic/trait. By itself, it doesn't tell you much about personality type. You won't get very far until you probe much deeper into things like: WHY exactly is the person service-oriented, how did they come to develop this trait, and what purpose does this trait serve in their psychology? Have you gone that deep?

1) Functions behave differently in different stack positions due to serving different psychological purposes, so can you tell which stack position a function is in (through knowledge of type dynamics)? Are you able to discern what the function is being used for psychologically? For example, when you're looking for Fe in ISFJs, are you looking specifically for how auxiliary Fe serves dominant Si, or are you just using generic/vague/stereotypical dominant Fe characteristics which could easily lead you astray?

2) It's necessary to collect sufficient evidence of all four cognitive processes (SNTF). For example, functions operate in oppositional pairs, so the high Fi or Fe mix-up could be remedied by making sure that there is also sufficiently strong evidence of low Te or Ti.

Generally speaking, no matter what type you are, when observing and evaluating other people, projection is always something to be taken into consideration, especially if you are at low levels of ego development. Projection is the unconscious attribution/application of one's own ego contents onto others. In other words, when you look at others, most of what you "see" is just a projected image of yourself, as opposed to the reality of who they are.

FPs are quite prone to projection because Fi automatically seeks points of personal relatability, which can seriously interfere with objectivity. One way to remedy this problem is to take yourself out of the equation as much as you can by understanding how other types think/feel very differently than you (i.e. try to put aside Fi+Si's search for similarity by doing the opposite). For example, if an INFP and an ISFJ are both service-oriented, what makes this trait different for them when compared to you? The behavior looks roughly the same on the surface, but how is the cognition different underneath the surface?

As a newbie with limited knowledge, you might not be able to identify cognitive differences through observation only. A big part of learning about the cognitive differences between the types comes from experience, specifically, talking to people and taking more time to understand the details of how they think differently. My Function Theory Guide already outlines the theoretical principles and it's up to you to look for the concrete examples in people.

[mbti-notes]

Anon wrote: Hi, I want to ask your opinion on a character you probably don't know. I'll try my best to describe her. She was introduced as intelligent, successful, elegant, organized, assertive, decider. Like ExTJ. But later revealed that she had toxic family with serious trust problems. She reacts extremely to feeling betrayed, afraid of being bad just like her family, walls her emotions away. These problems are always there, she can't escape. She's creative and good at solving problems, except about her personal life, a history of painful relationship drama and pushing people away. Looks more like unhealthy F now? Her own words, she wants to do good in the world. She persists with her idea even though people tell her it's bad. Ni? She really has many interesting and big ideas, but they are not successful at last. Ne? I believe she is unhealthy xNFx but I don't know how to go on. I know it's not enough but do you have any thoughts? Thanks!

-------------------------

It's not enough, but you've managed to highlight some very useful points that should help narrow down the options.

Having a messy personal life does help somewhat to rule out Te dom. When Te doms are aware that they're not good at relationships, they're likely to avoid, ignore, or neglect them. Due to inferior Fi, they don't really know how to get deeply embroiled in ongoing emotional conflicts the way that Fs do in their relationships, unless they are deeply in love, have very good reason to target hatred at someone, or there is some other (ulterior) motive for engagement. Te doms are likely to throw themselves into work and prioritize activities that better allow for mastery and control. They have no problem with psychological compartmentalization and generally benefit from that coping strategy until someone close to them objects to it. Even then, they only engage as minimally necessary, as opposed to keeping issues alive and burning.

In terms of the overall story, is she generally meant to be portrayed as heroic (aims to do good but falls short) or villainous (knowingly embraces dark traits)? Villains should be assessed differently. If she struggles with the idea of being bad like her family, then are we to assume that she is fundamentally a good person, despite poor decision making? If that's the case, I would agree that "troubled" NF is more likely. As for which type exactly, ask: What does the story require of them to grow and/or be redeemed? Some common NF character points:

Troubled INFP and Te resolution: Being very single-minded AND very organized in follow through helps to rule out INFP. They are easily weighed down by personal issues and often have difficulty keeping the bigger picture in mind due to immature Ne, which seriously degrades their ability to carry out grand plans. While they can be very determined when they have something to prove to themselves, if they're on the wrong path, they tend to realize it sooner than the other NF types due to the natural honesty and integrity of dominant Fi. As a result, troubled INFPs are more likely to redeem themselves before they reach the end of the bad path they were originally on. They essentially come to a realization like "I don't have to do this" and willingly change course.

Troubled ENFJ and Ti resolution: If she is Fe dom/ENFJ, one of the things she might struggle with is keeping up appearances. You have not specifically mentioned this as one of her main motivations - it being absent would help rule out ENFJ. Keeping up appearances happens because dominant Fe has a strong desire for love and connection. Troubled ENFJs often struggle to maintain a public facade that wards off hurt/loss/shame or curate a lifestyle that brings in a steady stream of love, acceptance, and validation. However, underneath the surface, things aren't very rosy, and the situation will eventually reach a critical point where public life and private life collide in dramatic fashion. At that point, they either have to demonstrate growth by standing proud and confident in their own truth, or reinstate the pretending and continue to live in fear of public reckoning.

Another point that helps rule out INFP and ENFJ: It's very difficult for F dominants to wall off emotions for a long period of time and still be functional in life. They usually suffer from being too emotional rather than emotionally detached. The dominant function can't be denied for very long before fatigue sets in and inferior grip dysfunction surfaces. You haven't said enough about inferior grip, which is required for narrowing down the types properly. Emotional detachment is easier for INFJ and ENFP since F is auxiliary. And it's easiest for INFJ because it's easier to wall off from the world (Fe) than oneself (Fi). Both types are good at denial and fooling themselves into believing that they're being "rational" (tertiary T) even when confronted with the results of disastrous decision making (inferior S).

Troubled ENFP and Si resolution: It sounds like she is able to function quite well despite all the personal issues constantly bubbling just beneath the surface. This could help rule out ENFP. While Te loop can appear commanding and allow ENFPs to achieve some superficial gains or success, especially for the more intelligent ones, they will still suffer a lot of self-doubt and confusion due to immature Fi - the outward hustle is compensating for inner vulnerabilities. However, Te loop decision making comes at the expense of careful/ethical planning. Ne enthusiasm coupled with Si blindness means that ENFP grand plans are at great risk of falling apart (and then abandoned), due to being too eager, desperate, or egotistical to think things through properly. Thus, determine the exact cause of her failures and whether poor execution is a major problem. Troubled ENFPs usually have genuinely good ideas or wholesome aspirations but choose the wrong methods of realizing them. Later, as part of their growth, they agonize over what they should've done instead and, hopefully, learn a valuable lesson in the process.

Troubled INFJ and Se resolution: Walling off feelings and emotions because of being unable to cope with all the surrounding negativity is indicative of Ti loop (Fe resistance) - the cool exterior guards an extremely fragile interior. The result of being very skilled at walling off for a long time is being stuck for a long time in a distorted fishbowl of unresolved emotional issues, which makes troubled INFJs appear to others as impenetrable, complicated, and often hypocritical in terms of rationalizing away anything they don't want to confront. They often struggle with defining their identity as well as intense guilt about not living up to moral expectations. They tend to believe in high-minded, even pretentious, ideals that are merely a proxy for fighting their own internal battles. This might fit with what you noticed as Ni intensity or grandiosity, in terms of having an ambitious vision for world betterment and being successful in carrying it out... only to end up disillusioned? Due to persisting with illusory Ni perceptions of the world, troubled INFJs often require a painful slap back to reality/humility in order to grow and find the right path.

This should help you rule out the types she is not. Also see the Type Spotting Guide since much of this info is already in there.

[mbti-notes]

Anon wrote: There are a few things that makes me wonder if katniss is Si-Te: (1) she has ptsd because her dad is killed in a mine, causing her to have flashbacks about the past. (2) si-te is known to be a type that thrives under structure. At the start of the book, i read about katniss hunting in an illegal area. (3) katniss is portrayed as having a dislike for the capitol. I have seen some arguments that this dislike for the capitol indicates a dislike for new env (si-ne), but im quite aware that some istp can also dislike a regime that's trying to kill them. The question i wanted to ask is: how would an istp vs an istj act if they were faced with the threats katniss did - extreme poverty, war, their loved ones getting killed? My suspicion is that Ti-Se will find smart ways to buck the system (what katniss is doing) but Si-Te will either rise within the system or become resigned. What do you think?

-----------------------

Your question is off-base. You shouldn't ask what this type would do in that situation. Type alone cannot predict all behavior because every person has their own unique experiences to take into account. This approach to type assessment is backward because you're basically creating a fake "model" of a type that is far too narrow and rigid to apply to a real person. Type assessment must be grounded in the facts in order to avoid the errors of too much speculation. Begin with the facts of what she actually does and then examine whether the ISTJ or ISTP functional stack better explains her decision making and overall development arc (as explained in the Type Spotting Guide).

PTSD is a separate issue, not sure what it has to do with Si-Te. Are you arguing that her focus on the past is due to PSTD rather than Si? My case for Si wasn't based on her flashbacks, since I didn't even remember that she had them. There are other important elements of Si other than the stereotypical "past" orientation, aren't there?

Point #2 is incorrect. It is Te specifically that thrives with structure. ISTJs aren't Te doms. It is the nature of introverts to define their own terms; it is the nature of Si+Fi to live life strictly according to what is important and right to oneself. Also, even with healthy and mature Te, "thriving" under structure is only possible when that structure is actually designed to encourage and enable thriving. The "structure" that she lives under would starve her to death, so survival instinct alone would force her to defy it, no matter her type.

ISTJs are tough and capable. Si is good at biding time so that one always lives to fight another day. Until totally cornered, ISTJs will generally choose a subtle way to make a big point when they disagree with what's going on. Since Te is usually fully aware of the consequences of open defiance or destructive behavior, actions tend to be very precisely targeted at a particular detail that is causing grief to their Fi. ISTJs tend to be good at dealing death by a thousand cuts because they have very detailed knowledge. They can use that knowledge to serve the system or systematically take it apart.

The key is that ISTJs need a legitimate reason to act against the status quo. Isn't being a firsthand victim of an extremely unequal and unjust system (with no real opportunity to "rise from within it") reason enough to revolt? Isn't watching people get abused, exploited, and slaughtered reason enough to revolt? Living in a tyrannical state, one hardly has the freedom to openly revolt without getting killed, so rebellion must take many different forms. Living under constant survival pressure produces a lot of defensive coping behavior that needs to be peeled back to reveal the true type.

Ti-Se will find smart ways to buck the system? Define "smart" because I don't know what you mean. Are you implying that Ti-Se is "smarter" than Si-Te? I would vehemently disagree with that. Intelligence isn't inherent in type. You're saying that her way is "smart", but you've not done the work needed to prove that her way is reflective of Ti-Se. I don't think Ti is obvious, other than the fact that she nimbly uses her skill set to survive, which any T would naturally do. If there are other signs of Ti, list them, since you are the one claiming ISTP. With regard to Se, sure, it's adaptable, but you forget the fact that it also makes ISTPs careless, cavalier, and volatile. These aren't words I would apply to her.

As far as I can tell, you don't have a good enough understanding of the dominant and auxiliary functions and their major differences. The auxiliary is much more complicated because you should give a wide range of examples of healthy, overindulgent, and resistant behaviors, which you haven't done to convince me of auxiliary Se. You also haven't addressed the entire functional stack, so your case remains very weak. Simply refuting ISTJ isn't equal to proving ISTP.

One of the major sticking points in the plot was her reluctance to get fully involved, wasn't it? It's correct to say that Si-Te is more likely than Ti-Se to be "resigned" to a system, usually out of hopelessness. But this isn't a useful statement. Both types are quite capable of resignation. Thus, what is the underlying source of hopelessness?

Underdeveloped Te contributes to hopelessness when reductive or rigid thinking habits block you from discovering successful strategies. Underdeveloped Se contributes to hopelessness when you lack the will and patience to confront anything you consider the teeniest bit unpleasant or difficult.

Underdeveloped Ne contributes to hopelessness when you lack the imagination to envision better possibilities. Underdeveloped Fe contributes to hopelessness when you adopt apathy or indifference as a defense against hurt and disappointment.

She's not the most expressive or communicative person, which means that we have to speculate about her motivations.

[mbti-notes]

I have a question I hope you don't mind answering. My niece is 13, and she is turning 14 this year and says she is an INTP, and she knows her personality type (by functions). Is her age too young to know her type? I would appreciate if you could answer it. Thank you.

There is no answer because it's not the right question to ask. Every individual is unique, with their own unique circumstances and psychological issues to take into consideration during the type assessment process. Different people mature at different speeds and, thus, vary in their degree of self-awareness. Some people might have enough self-awareness to type themselves at that age, some might not. Not to mention that whether one arrives at the right type is largely dependent on their method of assessment. You say she typed herself "by functions" but that doesn't tell me whether her understanding of functions is correct. I've encountered plenty of people who have mistyped based on misconceptions. I’ve encountered plenty of people who claim to have studied functions “for years” and still don’t understand them.

My method of type assessment accounts for self-awareness problems because I also analyze the person's process of ego development (consult the Type Dev Guide). Adolescents have a very primitive concept of identity, which means that they are very likely to be incomplete in their self-understanding. Generally speaking, compared to adults, adolescents are: less self-aware, more emotionally unstable, more erratic in decision making, and much more susceptible to peer pressures. Adolescence is the time of life when people are just starting to figure out who they are. Therefore, it is very important to contextualize their idea of identity and take into consideration how the environment is influencing their personality expression.

[mbti-notes]

hi, is it okay if I asked why you typed sersi as an INFP? I honestly can’t tell Fi & Fe when it comes to the helpful people loving and focused characters trope. I initially saw her as a Fe user bc of it.

This is a very common problem. Generally speaking, I would advise against identifying complementary functions by merely pitting them against each other. This crude method overemphasizes and exaggerates their differences while completely forgetting that Fi and Fe are both F functions and thus share basic similarities. It also completely ignores stack position and type dynamics.

All healthy Fs have a strong interest in people, relationships, feelings, care, love, etc, don't they? If that's all you've got, it isn't enough, barely even the tip of the iceberg. Are there not other criteria that have to be met? If you don't know of any other criteria, it's a sign that you're probably relying too much on primitive stereotypes. Exaggerating the differences between Fi and Fe is how you get to absurdly simplistic claims like "Fi is selfish" and "Fe is conforming", as though Fi types never worry about fitting in and Fe types aren't human and incapable of selfishness.

Where complementary functions like Fi and Fe differ is the HOW, e.g., the perspective through which or the manner in which one approaches people, relationships, feelings, care, love, etc. You're merely observing "helpful" behavior but haven't dug deep enough into the person's COGNITION, in terms of understanding things like: what motivates them in relationships, why they care, their method of caring, why they prefer that method, what they actually hope to achieve when helping and why, etc. Refer to Part V of the Function Theory Guide: You've only grasped the superficial trait of "agreeableness" while, to truly understand someone, you have to grasp WHY they're that way.

As I explain in the Type Spotting Guide, my method of type assessment is holistic. One function isn't enough to prove anything. I require compelling evidence of the whole functional stack. The four functions must fit together perfectly like pieces in a puzzle, with all their interactions laid bare. You're trying to isolate Fi/Fe as though stack position doesn't matter and as though they don't interact with the other functions of the stack.

If you insist on differentiating Fi and Fe to begin with, what stack position are you assuming and which types are you comparing? When people don't specify a position, they usually assume the dominant position, insofar as they use the most "normal" or "typical" (read: stereotypical) expression of the function that they know. For the sake of argument, let's say that in the case of Sersi, you've narrowed the types down to INFP or INFJ. Comparing "dominant" Fi and "dominant" Fe would lead you astray, since, all else being equal, INFJ would not be anywhere near as good with their Fe as INFP would be with their Fi.

INFP and INFJ are very different, aren't they, once you get past the surface traits of being kind or helpful? As I often say, type differences are generally most apparent in the missing, lacking, or dark side of the personality. These two types suffer from very different type development problems, since the functional stack differences are many (Fi vs Fe; Fi vs Ti; Ne vs Ni; Ne vs Se; Si vs Ni; Si vs Se; Te vs Ti; Te vs Fe).

What are Sersi's type development problems? And does your type allow you to see them? Type development problems reveal which functions are immature (in need of attention and growth) or unhealthy (in need of change or correction due to misuse).

Sersi seems psychologically healthy, in that she doesn't display much problematic behavior or mental health issues. Therefore, the dominant function should be in good form and exhibiting mostly strengths and advantages. However, being psychologically healthy isn't the same as being psychologically mature. It's easy to be healthy when life is going well. But healthy individuals can still be immature, in that there are still missing parts, blind spots, and sore spots in their personality that they're unaware of. Even a mature individual will show some dysfunction when they're under very heavy pressure, which is why it's very important to observe how people behave under stress.

Immaturity is primarily a result of lagging auxiliary development. As far as I remember, Sersi does not exhibit any problems associated with immature auxiliary Fe whatsoever, stress or no stress. This easily rules out IxFJ. Process of elimination leaves you only with INFP, but this doesn't mean that you've succeeded in proving it beyond a doubt. For that, you need evidence of every cognitive process and its stack position. Is it possible that Sersi's immature function is auxiliary Ne? Would this account for the majority of the problems she encountered in her character development? Does this fit with the other functions of the INFP stack? I don't remember the details at this point, so you'll have to work out the rest on your own.