Tovlo, now your post is making the Ni/Ne divide more fuzzy again for me. Ne is certainly more "out there" and undoubtedably Ni likes to visualize the interconnectiveness of everything. So you can think of it as Ne asking "What if the conditions changed?" whereas Ni asks "Can this work? Is that correct?" But what happens when you switch the questions asked? I somehow feel Ni can be used to answer "Ne questions". Hmmmm how to phrase this? [Ni thought experiment] I can go by the initial assumption that I have no Ne. In that case any connect the dots I make will arise from Ni. I can still just as easily do what you say Ne does by making random connections of things I see. Only in this case you need to invoke mental representation of various objects you see as you go along. Therefore Ni can mimic Ne... just not very efficiently. Would the reverse also work?
Hmmm...a few thoughts after having read the remainder of this conversation:
1. In function use I rank Ne, Ni, Fi, Fe, so a little Ne derailment is lovely to me as well. I was feeling a bit bad for talking Ni in an Ne thread, but if I've got a bunch of other rebels to make trouble with, then I'll keep going until reprimanded as well.
2. Nightning, I also tend to test INFP more often than INFJ, but still believe myself INFJ. As my function use test results indicate I use with some ease the dominant and auxiliary functions of both INFP and INFJ. I do suspect this situation affects the clarity with which both Ne and Ni are experienced in someone who exhibits comfort with both introverted and extroverted N and F functions.
3. I don't think that anyone has only Ni or Ne. My understanding is that people use all eight functions. It is rather a case of, at least in part, what they use most naturally, with the least energy taxation, and most consciously.
4. I read with interest the explanation that Ne as well as Ni is finding patterns already existing, which does contradict a bit my exploratory differentiation of Ne and Ni posted earlier. Despite apparently employing and feeling some level of comfort with Ne, I admit freely that it is not my most natural engagement with intuition, so I defer to that correction.
I wonder then if the distinction is more in the method of travel rather than the destination. I noted the different imagery that started this thread on Ne, with totem poles and string or hopping across ponds on lily pads. It was not imagery that had natural resonance with me, however elsewhere on this forum toonia recently discussed her imagery of intuition as a mountain you can only see from limited vantage points and some level of drive to explore many vantage points to gain the fullest possible experience of the mountain. That had immediate resonance with imagery I had developed within myself over the years to try to explain my perceptive sense.
So perhaps Ni and Ne both have the travel destination of uncovering the patterns and connections already existing (sounds right to me). Ne perhaps sees the space to be journeyed as a wide field or ocean to be hopped across and explored through short little trips, one destination leading to the next without a specific plan, but having confidence that in the end all the little trips will fill out enough information to get a sense of the charted map of existing connections. Ni perhaps rather sees some central space to be traveled around (not necessarily sequentially), but always with the whole to be charted in mind, the goal to gather as much information from each limited vantage point as possible to eventually fill in as completely as possible the picture of how the land is laid out.
The end result is ultimately similar, there is an understanding of the land already existing, but Ne hops from one connection to another charting as serendipity takes them, trusting that eventually the picture will emerge. Ni also allows serendipity to take it where it leads (what choice do we have?), but takes a more deliberate attitude, keeping always a focused eye on the whole they are trying to build a picture of?
I don't know, just playing a bit with thoughts. I recognize that my perspective is naturally geared to my own expression of Ni (which I do think is expressed somewhat differently than other INFJ's perhaps because of the strength of Ne use in me) and that slant in perspective keeps me from being able to see either Ni or Ne without prejudice of my experience. So taking into consideration that slant, I'm just trying to throw out my experience and assimilation of what people here have said to try to help make some sense of it with you. Hope what I offered aids rather than making things more fuzzy, nightning. I will be curiously watching to see how this conversation develops.