Fwiw, I've found another reference to this (in that peanut gallery called the internet):
from Pierce Presents: INFP (he lists it in the INFP description, but not his INFJ descriptions *shrug*)
...the INFJ is problematically unaware that their intuitions are entirely subjective. An INFJ may be inspired by a droplet of water to ponder on how it represents the true nature of the cosmos, and then develop a grand vision, forgetting that their only real-world evidence for said vision is a droplet of water. INFJs have trouble realizing the subjective origin of their seemingly objective visions.
from Pierce Presents: INTJ
Like the INFJ, the INTJ represses Se, which results in similar difficulties and reservations. The INTJ’s perception of the real world is very unreliable; they are so focused on what could be that it takes concerted and unpleasant effort to focus on what already is. As a result the INTJ often misses or ignores even large amounts of data in the conception of their vision, always drifting away from reality before managing to review all the evidence, a mistake the ISTJ hardly makes. This is another reason why the INTJ should not be considered logical or scientific in the regular sense: because their focus is not on logic or data, but on ideas and visions of the possible future, which, while appearing logical, are very often self-contradictory or paradoxical. The INTJ may hold passionately to ideas and theories that have no real evidence to support them at all. For example, Friedrich Nietzsche’s supposedly logical concept of the Eternal Reoccurrence, which represents a beautiful and compelling idea and seems validly logical, does not rely on any concrete facts or observations and makes many unproven assumptions which discredit both its inductive and deductive validity. The idea of Eternal Reoccurrence is just that, a beautiful idea. In these instances the INTJ’s expression of Te is rendered a mere illusion that doesn’t actually grasp at anything.