Fi seems very good at connection with people one on one. Basically, Fi uses a personal investment with others in order to convince them of one's motivation.
Meanwhile, Fe uses a socially agreed-upon "language" or context to convey feelings of commitment and goodwill -- or the opposite, I suppose, if one is trying to be very clear publicly of their disdain for someone.
(Example: Someone will purposefully break etiquette -- the accepted rules -- in public in order to show purposefully disdain for someone else. It could be showing up for a dinner party with obviously inappropriate clothing. Or using a particular comment during a public political debate to "call someone out." Etc. The whole point here is to embarrass or snub. But it's still Fe.)
Because Fi is so personal, it's easier to embrace than Fe, which is more impersonal and detached. Fi also "stays the same" -- you can usually tell when someone is very fond of you or cares about you -- but Fe can change as society changes. What is appropriate in one time period sometimes becomes inappropriate as the years pass. Thus, Fe seems more arbitrary (because it actually is) and impersonal and fickle, in some ways.
These are a few of my thoughts on it...
That sounds reasonable and right, but Fe is supposed to be my second function and the descriptions here don't fit. Fi sound much more familiar in your context. So much so that i have completely restructured my professional life to insure that i can interact with people one on one. That is a huge driving force in my life. I do think i am an INFJ, but i grew up with an INFP. These are some contrasts i notice:
1.
Empathy:
Fi empathy is very focused, intense and personal. It tends to single out certain individuals and lavish this understanding on them. This selective empathy is constant, never ending. Limited personal resources results in focus on the few.
Fe empathy is more diffuse, equally distributed amongst people regardless of their reactions. It could be compared to the distinction between a panic attack (Fi) and generalized anxiety(Fe), only applied to the concept of empathy instead of anxiety. When Fe resources are low, the entire switch flips off and feeling is placed on hold until the inner self is filled up.
2.
Projection vs. Internalizing: When encountering a person the
Fi sense of their inner world and feelings is so clear and intense, that the only error Fi is apt to make is to project their own innocence and passion onto the external person.
Fe inner world is in more flux emotionally and readily absorbs whatever emotions are in the environment. Fe error is to mistake the attributes of others as their own, while Fi is to mistake their own attributes as belonging to others.
3.
Emotional convention:
Fi will respond to emotional contexts within the extensive framework they have create deep inside themselves. The concept of convention can be quite strong, but is in a profoundly personal context. This internal sense of convention can be broadly developed to include multiple scenarios, but will tend to all be linked to a single inner vision of how people ought to value emotional responses and communication. Fi strives to maintain this inner consistency and peace projecting it outward.
Fe is more aware of external conventions and is willing to alter their own sense of expectation to fit the specific scenario. Their value lies in terms of maintaining external peace and consistency, but use a variety of means to achieve this goal. Their inner assumptions about how people will interact emotionally is not as well developed, and so they more readily accept various strategies based on the context.
4.
Connecting to others:
Fi has the ability to draw people into their rich world of meaning and compassion. They are like a beacon, a lighthouse on the shore. There can be constancy, stability. When no one responds to this beacon, there is longing.
Fe searches outwardly to connect to the other person on whatever terms are presented. They have a treasure map and are searching outwardly for the buried treasure. Fe hopes to find meaning and compassion by offering a reason to be let into the world of another person. When this does not occur the isolation aches. Edit: It's possible that Fe tends to be more self critical because it's measure of attaining an ideal is based on the external world which is in flux. It is pretty easy to feel a sense of failure since achieving peace in the external world is much more of a lost cause than that of the internal world, generally speaking. [/edit]
Both are equally sincere. Both can hold the value of wanting the greatest peace, meaning, and benefit for all involved. Perhaps in their ugliest scenarios Fi will fall into blind narcissism, while Fe into hypocrisy and lies? Once again MBTI is not a determinant for morality. Forcing it to be disrupts the path to achieve understanding.
(hello from wyoming folks :hi: )
Most societies (including ours) need some type of scapegoat to bring everyone together. The lack of Fe in this one means that we need several: sensors, extraverts, people with a strong Fe preference, etc.... The thinkers have to use their vaunted intelligence to determine the "worst" judging function, and they have "logically" decided that it is Fe. 
. I am still a work in progress in trying to better understand how to interact with them. 
