This is going to be an odd topic because it's about the tertiary and it's hard to nail that sucker into place. I can't quite tell if I'll be over-stating the case, or under-stating it, or choosing drama because the very simplicity of the tertiary makes it call out for overblown expression. Nonetheless...
It seems like it might make sense, the idea of the supreme pragmatist having a quite simple, but rigid moral code. It seems we are for the most part quite permissive, but at the core there's definitely some rules about what other people can and cannot do with respect to us. And when those lines are crossed, the person who crossed the line IS WRONG!! In a complete and quite encompassing way, that person is known to be wrong, quite wrong, and will be treated as such. I don't think we particularly seek revenge, for that often takes too long and exhausts the demand for simple moral rectitude. Rather we excise people, remove them from our consideration. Or we aim to.
The INTJ Fi Demand is that others will know our brand of right from wrong or they will not be considered objects of our true concern.
What say you guys?
Disclaimer: I really couldn't tell which section to post this in. If there is an INTJ Demand that We Be Respected and its source is the tertiary, then making it available for open discussion will automatically provoke some defensiveness. So, should I choose a potentially safe though demanding haven where there might be hugz too, or should I choose the cold hard light of other NT assessment knowing full well that they have their own simple-minded, likely unacknowledged feeling demands making then about as expert on feeling as I am? So I said, screw it, whatever, post.