# Fe Explained



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

I've frequently seen people reference Lenore Thomson's definitions of Fe, and I feel that I need to clarify something (as Fe is want to do). Lenore Thomson is self assessed INTJ, and from what I've read of her work, I would agree. She's a brilliant INTJ with an amazing amount of insight about cognitive function theory. However, as an INTJ, she has no native understanding of Fe, and therefore can only understand it as an external concept through her observations, and furthermore her filters of Te and Fi. This leaves her in a position where her understanding of Fe comes only from observing Fe in others, usually SFJs, and therefore her descriptions of Fe are not entirely well defined and rather biased as an outsider.

Therefore, I feel compelled to clear up some misconceptions about Fe. 
*
Fe is at its core a system of reasoning based on how it feels things should or should not be.*

Let's analyze this statement. *Fe is at its core a system of reasoning* - meaning that it is in fact a process of analysis, deduction, and assertion. *Based on how it feels* - denoting an emotional, philosophical, and ideological bias. *Things* - external concepts, people, places, systems, etc. *Should or should not be* - denoting an expression and assertion of expectations.

Combine all of these factors, and you now understand Fe. Values and judgments applied to the outer world.

However, all of these factors create very common behaviors. Fe users often have a great deal of emotional investment in people, even strangers. Fe users often have a great deal of expectation in social arenas and emotional interaction. Fe users often engage in what could be called emotional currency. All of these behaviors are the result of Fe being applied to these situations, not Fe itself. This is such an important distinction to make for people who are not native Fe users. Fe is not the sum of its expressions because its expressions are half Fe half situation, and most importantly not all Fe users have the same expressions of Fe.

For example, a stereotypical Fe dominant would use their Fe to adapt to others and create harmony - because they feel that's how things should be. However, another Fe user could just as easily create conflict with others because they feel that the others are not doing things the way they should be done. This proves that Fe is not the 'get along' function so much as the assertion of values function. Fe users often prefer harmony, because they often feel that harmony should exist not because Fe inherently seeks harmony. Fe inherently seeks to exert the individual's values with respect to the external.

A classic example of this is how obnoxious some ENTPs and ESTPs can be because their inferior Fe feels things should be a certain way, as led by how their Ti understands things to work. I've known several ENTPs and ESTPs who very much felt that harmony was a waste of time. However, this is still a manifestation of Fe.

Therefore, as much as Fi is a function of one's internal values. Fe is a function of one's external values. This is evidenced by the fact that most Fe users know exactly how they feel about things, but are often unable to discern how they feel inside. Fe users have strong opinions, but are often a mystery to themselves - assuming they bother to question their own feelings (Fi) because Fe tells them how they _should_ feel. An Fe user can convince themselves that they should feel things or in ways that they simply cannot, and this can cause a great deal of internal emotional conflict. On the other hand, an Fe user can convince themselves that they should feel something and thus be motivated to greatness. For example an ESTP who convinces themselves that they should be tough, fearless, etc. or an ESFJ who convinces themselves that they should be benevolent, kind, and patient. In both cases the individual is applying an external ideal to themselves, and is thus using Fe rather than Fi.

The idea that Fe is inherently based on how others feel is incorrect. Fe can be swayed by the opinions of others, but it is just as capable of bolstering itself against the opinions of others. What matters is whether or not the Fe user feels they should be swayed by the others in question. For example, a religious Fe user would likely feel that they should adapt their views to match their religion, but would not at all feel compelled to adapt their views to match another religion when around people of a different faith. This person may feel compelled to be polite and harmonious, and therefore respect the other faith's right to its traditions, but would feel strongly that they should not also practice while in the presence of it. However, an Fe user who feels antagonistic to another faith might well be disruptive if they felt this was what should be done. Fe is one of the biggest reasons for religious clashes. Clearly, Fe users in wars of ideology are not feeling compelled to be harmonious. In fact, some of the most heated arguments come from two Fe users who have differing views on how things should be.

Therefore, while Fe is _usually_ motivated to be harmonious, and many other things attributed to it, because it is a function of external values, it must be noted that Fe is simply that - a function of external values, and as such it is much more diverse and applicable than most definitions give it credit.


----------



## Herp (Nov 25, 2010)

Excellent post, Nobleheart.

I think that adding the concept of opposing functions also help to understand these functions a bit. Being the opposite of Ti, Fe is a function that is inherently attuned to objective (As in extroverted) values. It's a function that encourages engagement in the values of a group or person. It gets clear when you compare it to Ti, which detaches from group values and expectations in order to achieve a clear logical definition.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

Leaves said:


> Excellent post, Nobleheart.


Thanks!



Leaves said:


> I think that adding the concept of opposing functions also help to understand these functions a bit. Being the opposite of Ti, Fe is a function that is inherently attuned to objective (As in extroverted) values. It's a function that encourages engagement in the values of a group or person. It gets clear when you compare it to Ti, which detaches from group values and expectations in order to achieve a clear logical definition.


Keep in mind that Fe and Ti are two sides of the same reasoning approach. Fe can't decide how it feels things should be without Ti's understanding of their intricacies and how they function. Ti can't understand how things work without Fe's strong sense of how they should be to establish norms and constants. In many ways the foot of Ti is Fe and vice versa, and this proves just how much of a raw abstraction of externalized values that Fe really is beneath the descriptive behaviors associated with it. While they are 'opposites', they are also interconnected and the degree to which each is developed reflects on the other.


----------



## Herp (Nov 25, 2010)

Nobleheart said:


> Keep in mind that Fe and Ti are two sides of the same reasoning approach. Fe can't decide how it feels things should be without Ti's understanding of their intricacies and how they function. Ti can't understand how things work without Fe's strong sense of how they should be to establish norms and constants. In many ways the foot of Ti is Fe and vice versa, and this proves just how much of a raw abstraction of externalized values that Fe really is beneath the descriptive behaviors associated with it. While they are 'opposites', they are also interconnected and the degree to which each is developed reflects on the other.


Yeah, sorry. I've expressed myself poorly. Ti and Fe are compensatory functions, not opposing. Despite having opposing preference and attitude, they're part of the same axis of judgment, and often work together towards a goal.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

Leaves said:


> Yeah, sorry. I've expressed myself poorly. Ti and Fe are *compensatory* functions, not opposing. Despite having opposing preference and attitude, they're part of the same axis of judgment, and often work together towards a goal.


I really like that word, compensatory. Thanks!


----------



## ItsAlwaysSunny (Dec 17, 2010)

This is an excellent description of Fe.

I remember when I first started learning about the cognitive functions I was actually so repulsed by some of the descriptions of Fe that I became convinced that I must have strong Fi (which I later realized was completely untrue). Its sounded very Stepford wife/sorority girl to me. Some of the Fe explanations I've read make it sound like Fe users can't think for themselves. Fe isn't just about jumping on bandwagons and conforming to other's values. I think Nobleheart's description is probably the most accurate one I've read so far.


----------



## teddy564339 (Jun 23, 2010)

I think this makes a whole lot of sense. As an ISFJ (though partly also because I'm a type 6), I've always felt a certain...trust in authority. Ever since I was a little kid, I've enjoyed pleasing authority and doing what I was told. This relates to that notion you mentioned of letting feelings of external situations kind of dictate my personal feelings. But this same thing also leads me to resist outside ideas. It's very similar to the religious situation you mentioned in the last paragraph.


----------



## UncertainSomething (Feb 17, 2010)

This is an excellent post Nobleheart and I too like Leaves' "compensatory" definition. I think the Feeling function both introverted and extroverted is very misunderstood and under-represented in its capabilities, its so much more and you have pointed out some good examples. I'd say it is a function for quantifying the human condition, specifically, in a innate way.


----------



## TaylorS (Jan 24, 2010)

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!! :laughing:

This post describes my though processes PERFECTLY, right down to my internal conflicts!


----------



## SnnyYellow (Jun 18, 2010)

Thanks (again) for another wonderful post! As an ENFJ is irks me how no one really understands the Fe function and dismisses it as shallow. Many people believe that people who use Fe as their chief function are nothing but people pleasers whose values change readily for harmony. I find that because of this belief, people believe the values of me and others Fe users are shallow and fickle, and that's certainly not the case. I do seek harmony in general as a person, but in no way do I change my values to do so. And like you said, if I feel I should act in a way, I try doing so, such as when I decided as a person to be more accepting of others and not impede my values on their decisions. 
Thank you again!


----------



## spook (Dec 16, 2009)

Yeah I feel a strong sense of what “should be,” especially regarding the social values/consensus I have to be hyperaware of to no bugging end when I interact with the external world. I don’t relate to not knowing how I feel, but I do feel the pressure to conform to how I should feel. It’s just that bc I’m quite introverted and have strong beliefs about certain things, I don’t always go along with that.


----------



## Nitou (Feb 3, 2010)

Excellent, thank you.



> Fe users often engage in what could be called emotional currency. All of these behaviors are the result of Fe being applied to these situations, not Fe itself.


Yes. Fe is rational. More than other functions, it is concerned with maintaining or altering social infrastructure. What I mean by social infrastructure is relationships between people and group values. Fe filtered through Ti wants the social rules to be logically sound by the individual's reasoning. "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" is a social rule we might believe in and expect people to abide by because it makes sense; it is strategic for building social infrastructure. If people are obeying the rule then we are content, but should someone refuse to reciprocate or offer gratitude then it violates the rule and is offensive.


----------



## intjdude (Feb 21, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> *
> Fe is at its core a system of reasoning based on how it feels things should or should not be.*
> 
> Let's analyze this statement. *Fe is at its core a system of reasoning* - meaning that it is in fact a process of analysis, deduction, and assertion. *Based on how it feels* - denoting an emotional, philosophical, and ideological bias. *Things* - external concepts, people, places, systems, etc. *Should or should not be* - denoting an expression and assertion of expectations.


Boy did you bomb this. 

And then you go as far as saying Lenore has no Fe as if you know she's 100% INTJ or biologically defective?

The functions are universal to EVERYONE. It's just that some use more of some and less of others. Think of it like a computer monitor/TV. A computer monitor uses 3 colors of light which is RGB (red green blue). With these three basic colors (which are like MBTI functions), you can create the impression of millions of other colors. Well, with 8 functions, you can create millions of individual personalities. Although we categorize them into 16 major categories, that doesn't mean you are missing functions. Nor is Lenore missing any of them.

Fe is not a 'reasoning or analytic' function. It is a feeling function.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

intjdude said:


> Boy did you bomb this.


 Consensus disagrees, especially among native Fe users.



intjdude said:


> And then you go as far as saying Lenore has no Fe as if you know she's 100% INTJ or biologically defective?
> 
> The functions are universal to EVERYONE. It's just that some use more of some and less of others. Think of it like a computer monitor/TV. A computer monitor uses 3 colors of light which is RGB (red green blue). With these three basic colors (which are like MBTI functions), you can create the impression of millions of other colors. Well, with 8 functions, you can create millions of individual personalities. Although we categorize them into 16 major categories, that doesn't mean you are missing functions. Nor is Lenore missing any of them.


At no point did I claim Thomson had _no_ Fe. I claimed Fe is not a native function for her as an INTJ. Also, she is a self assessed INTJ, and this is also clear in her writing style. Your inability to see this implies that you're not actually an INTJ, as does your focus on details and argumentative approach. I would highly suggest you re-evaluate your type. You are likely an INTP.



intjdude said:


> Fe is not a 'reasoning or analytic' function. It is a feeling function.


Also, I would highly suggest you study cognitive function theory in more detail before you attempt to contribute to conversations on the subject.


----------



## FreeSpirit (Jun 1, 2011)

Fe sounds bangin'. Where can I get me some?


----------



## Zmp (May 22, 2011)

*This is an excellent description of Fe.

I remember when I first started learning about the cognitive functions I was actually so repulsed by some of the descriptions of Fe that I became convinced that I must have strong Fi (which I later realized was completely untrue). Its sounded very Stepford wife/sorority girl to me. Some of the Fe explanations I've read make it sound like Fe users can't think for themselves. Fe isn't just about jumping on bandwagons and conforming to other's values. I think Nobleheart's description is probably the most accurate one I've read so far.* 

I agree, likewise


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

FreeSpirit said:


> Fe sounds bangin'. Where can I get me some?


As an ENTJ, you will have to enlist someone else's. However, as an ENTJ, I'm sure you will be able to.


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

hmmm... could Fi and Fe, and Ti and Te not all have some universal overlapping of "truths"? 

in other words, is anything universal, and if it is, then why would you need to *mirror* your surroundings to formulate your personal truths, instead of *being aware* of the dynamic in order to formulate a truth?

this may sound like Fi, but hear me out...

how i understand Fe is that you are aware of the dynamic of the group on an emotional level, not necessarily that you will adapt yourself to it at all times... what if you don't agree with the group? what if person A tells you not to do something you should be allowed to do, say, speak your mind, because it will make person B mad? i'd say person B should grow up, although i (hopefully) would realize that doing that would be aggressive on my part so i could start a fight that i knew i could win, instead of actually trying to fix the problem. 

basically, Fe isn't automatically a "sheepish" function, and it's not automatically a "noble, humble, self-sacrificing" function either--it's an awareness (to varying levels of degree) of the emotional atmosphere around oneself (a gray line between this and Fi), and what one does with that and how well one does it is up to the individual... i'd also like to say that, in my opinion, it should be paired as well as one can with Ti to fish out the truth of a situation and to not be automatically swayed by the signs one is showing.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

celticstained said:


> hmmm... could Fi and Fe, and Ti and Te not all have some universal overlapping of "truths"?


Yes. By nature, these are all J functions, and therefore share a great deal. There is a lot of functional overlap. In trying to define the distinctions, I think many people lose sight of the similarities.



celticstained said:


> basically, Fe isn't automatically a "sheepish" function, and it's not automatically a "noble, humble, self-sacrificing" function either--it's an awareness (to varying levels of degree) of the emotional atmosphere around oneself (a gray line between this and Fi), and what one does with that and how well one does it is up to the individual... i'd also like to say that, in my opinion, it should be paired as well as one can with Ti to fish out the truth of a situation and to not be automatically swayed by the signs one is showing.


Correct. If Fe were automatically sheepish, then it could never survive contact with any other J function. For example, if it automatically harmonized with everyone else, then it would become Fi when it encountered someone who used Fi, and stop being Fe. This is a logical proof against some of the misunderstandings about Fe.

Another reason for this misunderstanding could be that many Fe dominant and secondary users (SFJ and NFJ) are Enneagram 9s, 2s, and 6s, giving them motivation to go along with the wishes of others and accommodate in order to avoid rejection, gain love, or feel secure. These types are applying their values externally with Fe. It just happens that their values include harmony and getting along with others often to an extent that puts others before themselves. However, other Enneagram types use Fe to further motivations that may or may not include these things. For example, 3's use their Fe to get ahead in life. 1's use their Fe to apply their values of how things should be reformed as well as their sense of right and wrong externally. 8's use their Fe to convince others to follow _them_, rather than the other way around.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

So Fe are Non-questioned driving Values in contrast to Fi?


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

Zero11 said:


> So Fe are Non-questioned driving Values in contrast to Fi?


From what I understand about the INTJ perspective - especially the Ni + Fi loop, I would say this statement is correct. Just keep in mind that these values are applied externally, and then to ourselves as if they were external. It's as if we create a values globe and expect everything to line up with it, even ourselves.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

FreeSpirit said:


> Fe sounds bangin'. Where can I get me some?


You don't need any. You are already awesome as you are!


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

Zero11 said:


> So Fe are Non-questioned driving Values in contrast to Fi?


couldn't you technically argue that all functions are not "non-questioned" driving modes? if you really wanted to break them down you'd be left with a question that is just as unanswerable. 

couldn't you say that each function isn't directly coming from yourself, even one's that are supposedly unconscious, since even your unconscious functions and perspectives would be influenced by _something_.


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

@_celticstained_ 



Nobleheart said:


> Fe users have strong opinions, but are often a mystery to themselves - assuming they bother to question their own feelings (Fi) because Fe tells them how they _should_ feel.


This was my reference and it means that external applied values are stronger than introverted ones. Cause they are not build up internally.


----------



## Nobleheart (Jun 9, 2010)

celticstained said:


> couldn't you technically argue that all functions are not "non-questioned" driving modes? if you really wanted to break them down you'd be left with a question that is just as unanswerable.
> 
> couldn't you say that each function isn't directly coming from yourself, even one's that are supposedly unconscious, since even your unconscious functions and perspectives would be influenced by _something_.





Zero11 said:


> This was my reference and it means that external applied values are stronger than introverted ones. Cause they are not build up internally.


You are both right, but each of you is approaching this from your own perspective. To an INFJ, Fe is inherent. To an INTJ, Fe is foreign. It's going to look different to each of you, considering INFJ has an inside perspective and INTJ an outside perspective. Neither of these changes the nature of Fe, and you are both correct. However, this difference of perspective is often the reason for confusion in the description of functions as we are using the same words to describe different points of view.


----------



## Muser (Jul 17, 2011)

Could someone please compare the manifestations of a dom-Fe, inferior Fe and shadow-Fe?


----------



## Donovan (Nov 3, 2009)

Muser said:


> Could someone please compare the manifestations of a dom-Fe, inferior Fe and shadow-Fe?


that would be pretty hard to do since an "unhealthy" person could be Fe dom, but could present it in a way that implied an inferior Fe, or a "shadow Fe", and vice versa throughout... sorry i can't help more than that... you could go and look through the sub forums that have Fe dom (ENFJ/ESFJ), those that have shadow Fe, and inferior Fe to get a better picture.


----------



## Muser (Jul 17, 2011)

celticstained said:


> that would be pretty hard to do since an "unhealthy" person could be Fe dom, but could present it in a way that implied an inferior Fe, or a "shadow Fe", and vice versa throughout... sorry i can't help more than that... you could go and look through the sub forums that have Fe dom (ENFJ/ESFJ), those that have shadow Fe, and inferior Fe to get a better picture.


Thanks for that, celticstained. I guess, more than anything, I was putting that request up as a challenge to see if anyone could do it. It'd be difficult for the reasons you described, I agree.


----------



## zenity (Nov 6, 2011)

> Could someone please compare the manifestations of a dom-Fe, inferior Fe and shadow-Fe?


It may not be exactly what you're looking for, but the PerC thread "Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type" offers John Beebe's interpretation of Fe-manifestation from user Eric B's perspective. I'm ripping it out of context and much of this is direct quotes, but here is the gist of the role Fe plays:

Hero (dominant process)
Fe (ExFJ): The environment must be socially friendly

Parent (auxiliary process)
Fe (IxFJ): Instructing others on group ethics or values

Pueur (tertiary process)
Fe (ExTP): childlike when connecting with others

Anima (inferior process)
IxTP's might feel inferior in humane (personal) matters (including one's standing in social groups).


----------



## Muser (Jul 17, 2011)

zenity said:


> It may not be exactly what you're looking for, but the PerC thread "Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type" offers John Beebe's interpretation of Fe-manifestation from user Eric B's perspective. I'm ripping it out of context and much of this is direct quotes, but here is the gist of the role Fe plays:
> 
> Hero (dominant process)
> Fe (ExFJ): The environment must be socially friendly
> ...


Ah, I forgot about Eric B's essay. Thanks for picking this out...it's pretty much what I was hoping for. 

By the way, a pretty in-depth analysis of Fe in INTPs by Dr. A.J. Drenth, posted by SilverRose.
http://personalitycafe.com/intp-articles/75930-present-intps.html


----------



## intjdude (Feb 21, 2011)

Nobleheart said:


> Consensus disagrees, especially among native Fe users.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What you don't understand is that Fe is a choice and your use of 'native function' makes us sound like static computers. Honestly, I wouldn't care if I were actually an INTP... but perhaps you don't realize that an INTJ can act like an INTP too...


----------



## alionsroar (Jun 5, 2010)

intjdude said:


> Fe is not a 'reasoning or analytic' function. It is a feeling function.


How are you defining Fe that makes you consider it a choice?
When you say 'feeling function' what do you mean by that?


----------



## Karen2011 (Oct 4, 2011)

zenity said:


> It may not be exactly what you're looking for, but the PerC thread "Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type" offers John Beebe's interpretation of Fe-manifestation from user Eric B's perspective. I'm ripping it out of context and much of this is direct quotes, but here is the gist of the role Fe plays:
> 
> Hero (dominant process)
> Fe (ExFJ): The environment must be socially friendly
> ...


I appreciate this read very much. It is helping me make up my mind about the small question in the back of my mind. I don`t think I`m a ISFJ because while I will share my beliefs and values I`m not intending on "instructing" them. People imagine this sometimes probably because they are imaginative or perhaps something set them off and they are in neg mode? I`m unsure why they do that. I will not tell people how to live but I`m not going to hide under a rock if I think someone disproves of me in some way. 

I never have told anyone what to do unless it was my job. I would only council or explain group ethics if it was in my job description or part of my job being successful.

Outside of a work environment I`m not wanting to be in a "group" or tell everybody how to live. That is just not me. I might share or advise but not in way like I`m telling them they have to do things a certain way. I might suggest or try and suggest things if they Ask me point blank but I will not be holding my breath waiting for them to "conform" to me.


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Karen2011 said:


> I appreciate this read very much. It is helping me make up my mind about the small question in the back of my mind. I don`t think I`m a ISFJ because while I will share my beliefs and values I`m not intending on "instructing" them. People imagine this sometimes probably because they are imaginative or perhaps something set them off and they are in neg mode? I`m unsure why they do that. I will not tell people how to live but I`m not going to hide under a rock if I think someone disproves of me in some way.
> 
> I never have told anyone what to do unless it was my job. I would only council or explain group ethics if it was in my job description or part of my job being successful.
> 
> Outside of a work environment I`m not wanting to be in a "group" or tell everybody how to live. That is just not me. I might share or advise but not in way like I`m telling them they have to do things a certain way. I might suggest or try and suggest things if they Ask me point blank but I will not be holding my breath waiting for them to "conform" to me.


I was able to tell easily that my ISTJ friend was not an ISFJ (and he saw for himself) through Beebe's analysis via Eric B.

I think it's fantastic as a guidepost, and yet another component that made me realize SFP over NFP.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

FreeSpirit said:


> Fe sounds bangin'. Where can I get me some?


Lead. If you are leading the group, then Fi IS Fe.


----------



## alionsroar (Jun 5, 2010)

Karen2011 said:


> I appreciate this read very much. It is helping me make up my mind about the small question in the back of my mind. I don`t think I`m a ISFJ because while I will share my beliefs and values I`m not intending on "instructing" them. People imagine this sometimes probably because they are imaginative or perhaps something set them off and they are in neg mode? I`m unsure why they do that. I will not tell people how to live but I`m not going to hide under a rock if I think someone disproves of me in some way.
> 
> I never have told anyone what to do unless it was my job. I would only council or explain group ethics if it was in my job description or part of my job being successful.
> 
> Outside of a work environment I`m not wanting to be in a "group" or tell everybody how to live. That is just not me. I might share or advise but not in way like I`m telling them they have to do things a certain way. I might suggest or try and suggest things if they Ask me point blank but I will not be holding my breath waiting for them to "conform" to me.


Yes, according to EricB Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type (Beebe model),
the description for auxiliary Te is (IxTJ): Directing others to efficiently organize the environment.
and for auxiliary Fe (IxFJ): Instructing others on group ethics or values

Although, I have read of many ISFJs here having the same sentiments as you. I imagine that is, because like ISTJs, they are introverts, and their dominant function is a perceiving one, Si, they are less focused on their conclusions of the external world.
Because TJs have Fi, they don't always go with what makes sense objectively but can make decisions based on their personal feelings.
And FJs have Ti, so they may make decisions on what makes sense to them personally instead of how they feel things should be.


----------



## Karen2011 (Oct 4, 2011)

pc3000 said:


> Yes, according to EricB Understanding the Archetypes involving the eight functions of type (Beebe model),
> the description for auxiliary Te is (IxTJ): Directing others to efficiently organize the environment.
> and for auxiliary Fe (IxFJ): Instructing others on group ethics or values
> 
> ...


Knowing these facts will help avoid the negative stereotypes or even perhaps give people confidence in putting their type letters in their profile. I like knowing my type and also having the facts in detail so it isn`t like I`m being crammed in a mold that doesn`t quite fit.

This is excellent information.


----------

