This is good. I like hearing what kind of explanation works for non-Ni people.
You probably won't like me for this, but there's an extra twist to the "one conclusion, outcome, resolution." The conclusion "wiggles."
We don't know what the "right conclusion" is, yet, so we kind of fire "tracer bullets" and see where they land. (This is totally inside our heads, but occasionally our friends will hear this stream of consciousness thought pattern if we feel safe enough to share.) When the bullets miss, it looks like we just totally changed topics, or that we're going after a different goal, which isn't the case at all. Rather, the goal itself is very simple, usually along the lines of "any concrete resolution that satisfies the following conditions," which can be any of several disparate targets.
It's why INTJs have the reputation for "contingency planning": something happens to make a target unachievable. We already have (or can quickly conceive of) several other targets that will satisfy the conditions, and we pick whichever one of those that looks most favorable and head towards it.
Oh, and the goal can wiggle even more, due to other possibilities. E.g., given the list of conditions, we aren't above deleting a condition and checking whether it makes easier targets appear. This is no different than noting that of, say 10 requirements, 9 of them take all of 3 minutes to accomplish, but the 10th would take about a week. Is it worth a week to achieve that last requirement? Is that requirement totally necessary? Is a 3-minute, 90% solution satisfactory? Very often, the answer is "yes." And, sometimes, the answer is no, and we're stuck slogging our way to the goal for a week.
I see. That helps. Thanks for expanding on the topic. I was going to say, "As an Ne user, I totally relate to your example of choosing 9 out of 10 requirements because 90% is good enough for a given task" - but, the more I think about it, I think that's a Ti thing that I do. Ti would think something very similar: "Dude, you can be done in 3 minutes with a very high quality outcome...don't even bother with requirement 10...it would take you all week. That would be stupid and inefficient. Now get to work, you bum!" And, certainly, Ti would go ahead and complete requirement #10 if not completing it would greatly sacrifice quality or compromise the overall goal.
And I also relate to the "quickly seeing a new target" - kind of. What Ne/Ti do, is they get together and have a meeting.
Ti: OK, Ne, we're going back to grad school. We need to find a good program. 1. Affordable, 2. decent reputation, 3. Coursework that we're interested in and that will help us with the direction we want to go, 4. In a place with good weather.
Ne: I'll begin a nationwide search of all institutions and report back to you tomorrow morning, sir.
Ti: Make it happen!
*******
Next morning:
Ne: OK, there's several good programs out there. But, I've narrowed it down to the top 5 based on your parameters. There's a good program in California - weather is A+, a little expensive, close to family.......
Ti: Yeah, we already lived in California. We're moving on to bigger and better things. What's next on your list?
Ne: Texas. Good school, good reputation, affordable...
Ti: Yeah, and what's the weather like in Houston right now? I didn't think so. Next?
Ne: Florida.
Ti: Next.
Ne: Oklahoma.
Ti: Continue.
Ne: Good school, good reputation, fairly affordable, decent weather.
Ti: Hmmm...not much to do in Oklahoma these days, but tell me where #5 is located.
Ne: Virginia. Good reputation, good program - been gaining more notoriety in the field in recent years, very affordable, decent weather, fairly close to other northeast metro areas.
Ti: OK. Give me the link for Oklahoma and Virginia so I can investigate. Now get out of my hair and leave me alone for a month.
*****Ti spends the next 1 month dissecting every single thing about the programs in Virginia and Oklahoma. Makes numerous phone calls, talks to friends, colleagues, etc.
1 month later:
Ti: Book it, Danno! We're going to Virginia.
Ne: Took you long enough!
Now, if Virginia fell through, then Ti knows that Oklahoma is plan B, Texas is plan C, etc, etc. But, we do a lot of investigating, researching, thinking, pondering, considering until we know the programs like the back of our hand - we do all that investigating on the front side - before we ever make a single move. 85% of the excruciating research and in-depth analysis is done "up front". Now it's all done - everything we need to know has been "found out" - and now we can move into action with 99% certainty that it's going to go very smoothly, just how we expected it to. More times than not, it ends up being a breeze because we did our homework. When Ti does it's due diligence, does it's homework on the front side, it is extremely confident that it comes to the right decision based on the wealth of information that it took in on the topic. It's like showing up for a test knowing that you're going to ace it. You left no leaf unturned, so there is absolutely no way you'll get a B on the test. A+ is almost guaranteed. A- is worst case scenario. Only if Ti doesn't check everything out do things sometimes fall apart - because there are holes in the analysis - there are "unknowns" that will be revealed as surprises later on.
But, if something doesn't go right, then Ne simply goes, "No problem, Ti. We've got lots of options. Do you want me to go back and do more searching? Search in Canada maybe? Europe? Hawaii? Alaska? Back to California? There are millions of options here, just let me know which direction you'd like me to go in!"