Sort of ... but it's not "senex Ni" so much as it is "trying to reach Ni-style conclusions using Ne and Si" (and not a little bit of Ti
). Why does it seem to miss the mark? It misses because Ni doesn't look for a trajectory of where the data wants to go beyond the map. It's more like having a treasure map with landmarks, but it's totally unfamiliar - the map is useless. So you pull out all your maps and photos that you do know, and start comparing them with the map, and eventually you spot a photo with a location where the landmark looks correct from the angle on the treasure map and *boom*, you know how to map your maps to the treasure map and back. (The treasure maps in Skyrim work like this, which is where I got the idea for this analogy.) Ni fills in what is missing not by following through on all possible logical paths (that's Ti-Ne!), but by trying out different maps, different "boxes", different "explanations", until one finds a map/box/explanation/archetype that points out where to look for the missing element. From your explanation, I read that you aren't trying out different maps/boxes: it's always the same map/box, but you're trying to look beyond the edges using pure reason.
So you're following a normal logical path, namely that if you include some things (in a category or set or whatever), you necessarily exclude other things. This is your Ti doing its normal duty. The negative stories always exist. The proper question, however, isn't whether they are true (is the glass half empty or half full? both are true). The proper question is, "What does it mean?"