I think that these physical innervations that jung is talking about is what gives rise to the activating/deactivation dimension in that theory of emotion that i posted.
I dont really agree completely with what you said about the strength which the feeling evaluation gets comes only after the judgment, not before it. I think that the process might get strong signal to begin with and thus often produce a strong judgment, or it might get a smaller signal and get stronger in the process. Other regions might amplify or repress the signal based on personal complexes, F might do that aswell or it might go through F then be amplified by other regions and get back to F.
Well, as an F-dom I will tell you that these passive feelings (often called "feeling tones" also by people, whether or not Jung meant that) are generally considered like an emotion, as far as a recognition they are not rational. They are dealt with similarly - as signals to be reasoned on. It's not unusual for them to be signaling a feeling-concept already created - that's why perception is a part of it. It's recognition of a manifestation of a value.
I experience a contrast between this & active feeling, which is what I consider my "thinking".
Frequently, F-dom do speak of "reasoning in reverse", or starting with a "whole feeling" and then considering what it means, if it can be made sense of, how it relates to existing feelings, etc. The final feeling is then one formed with reason, with the initial feeling dealt with similarly as a pure emotion.
What F-dom tend to recognize is that short of wacky hormones & emotional illness, most emotional responses have a reason. Whether or not it's a good reason or in proportion to the strength of the emotion is to be determined by analyzing it.
Once you have built up a base of what all these things mean, how they connect & relate, then you more quickly process passive feelings by simply "plugging" them into a mental model of sorts. This is the "value system" spoken of, which in itself is not Feeling but a product of it. This allows for faster processing of what is consistent with existing & finely tuned concepts of what is necessary/significant/good/etc.
Do not Ti types quickly note when something is illogical or logical? Do you always have to break it down, or do you sometimes just KNOW immediately and then proceed to break it down? I'm going to presume the latter because it's said you have a sort of inner "framework" you compare things to to keep logical consistency.
Jung says Fi does the same thing, but it "feels" instead of "thinks", aka - it defines & assigns value instead of impersonal classification.
I dont agree that active feeling is dom F. I mean dom F types use active feeling more often and naturally than those with inferior F for example, but dom F types are also REALLY heavily influenced by their passive feelings, maybe not as much as F aux types often are, but definitely more than T types usually are. I think that when undeveloped F is used in T types, its most often passive F, not active as active F requires some differentiation, but T types with developed F are capable of doing active F, but it requires more effort and the whole process doesent start so easily.
I would agree about the T types (or any type) using active F at times, but not to the degree a F-dom does.
In day to day life, people use passive feeling all the time for non-crucial decisions, such as "What do I feel like eating?". Sometimes they'll use active feeling to consider why or how an option is more beneficial than another, but many don't bother to or only sometimes. When they bother to, it is often because they have linked it to a larger value - something reasoned on already & decided as crucial.
This is kind of feeling is not a good representation of how Feeling as a mindset in Jungian theory operates. This is the kind of thing that makes people misunderstand what Feeling is, how it works, and how a dominant Feeling type experiences it. That misunderstanding leads to invalidation of Feeling & Feeling types' opinions.