What always confuses me about these threads about Fe is that it's always emphasized how Fe is "conventional/societal morality" and how Fi is different because it's concerned with being true to one's own conscience. I agree that Fe-users are aware of the external dynamics of things in morality and generally have an automatic awareness of how others will feel (to their best knowledge) based on what they do (although what each person chooses to do with this inclination is up to them, whether out of good motives or bad). And yet . . . I have internal baselines inside myself that I can only describe as "values." And these are not concerned with whether everyone around me is doing the same thing or whether I would be accepted or extoled by other people for acting on them. Yes, I would take into consideration the external dynamics (I can't not), but these internal values are separate from all that. And there are times when I will speak up in favor of unpopular stances, or work to try to change the way things are normally done, if I feel that it is important enough to do so. It's important to note that Fe-users are not solely "users of Fe" (they also use Ni, Si, Ti, etc), so of course not everything that Fe-users think or do will be based on Fe (and plus people just do things that are outside of being explained by MBTI), so I could be thinking of another cognitive function when I'm thinking of these "values," but . . . I don't think so, although I could be wrong.
Also, these descriptions of Fe being about "conventional values" (I'm not singling out any poster in particular; many people say this) just don't ring true to me. It sounds as if Fe-users, when trying to figure out the right thing to do in a situation, just think to themselves, "What does everyone in my community do?" and that's the end of it. Fe is far more complex than this. Fe-users on this site have said many times that this is an inaccurate description, and yet many Fi-users still use these descriptions for Fe. Does this mean that this is simply how Fe appears to the Fi-users who see this externally, and from their perspective, this may be a way of describing it for themselves in comparison to Fi? Does this mean that Fi-users are looking at Fe with incomplete information and so form an incomplete concept of Fe? I don't know. I'm not saying that Fe has nothing to do with the external . . . but it's really not the "enforcing social norms police" (see above paragraph).