I wrote in a post on r/mbti that some accepted pieces of common wisdom are not actually universal, but are type biased. Don't let them get you down with their ENTPhobia fam.

Here's what's really cool about Ne, or being a jack of all trades, based on my actual experience primarily but communicated in MBTI terms:

See a topic from multiple themes I like to think of it like this: there are topics and then there are themes. A theme might be something like Physics which we are taught in school to use to interrogate different topics (motion, electricity, fluids...). Most people learn one theme and are limited to the 'topics' which that theme can approach - "I'm an economist". Ne allows you to, instead of being an "economist", take a subject like 'water' and look at it though the lens of Law, Economics, Culture etc... This is a perspective that is surprisingly lacking in general populations because our undergraduate degrees are thematic with only relevant topics included underneath. Here's an example of what's called a multidisciplinary MPhil which is trying to tackle 'space' from all different lenses (http://www.spacelab.uct.ac.za/mphil-specialising-space-studies-0). In a way it makes more sense - because the real world doesn't respect your disciplinary boundaries.

Apply one theme to multiple topics Ni could probably do this well too. It's about generalizing principles and problems until you can cross and overlay radically different approaches. Think of how algebra allows you to study almost anything once you've got 'algebra'. In my experience, Ne (or Ni depending on how you want to see it) has helped me come up with or be attracted to these incredibly general models - it's like learning algebra again for the first time. You're not as good with the details, but the thing is this is a whole different world from the details - you're not in competition with the details. You're being asked to understand the system broadly so that someone else can fill in the details.

Broad foundations are useful People over-estimate how much prior knowledge is useful. Prior knowledge is useful only if you know what you're about to get into. Otherwise, you can spend years doing a botany project on one specific species and then end up moving to another biome where it doesn't grow. A jack of all trades has a broad foundation such that, given sufficient warning, they can get up to a useful level of skill and then do the job. It can be more economic depending on how you look at it.

General knowledge is useful If you've ever been on a team with people from different backgrounds you would know how people get surprised when you bring up even the most drearily obvious idea from your field - they've never heard of it before ("Is that a thing? Wow?"). Using a unique lens of analysis has the same effect. Wide general knowledge allows you to bring new perspectives to a problem as a kind of one-man-band.

BUT THE MOST IMPORTANT THING:

Jack of all trades is not 'dabbling' You have to take it seriously. Our stereotypical image of hard working genius is the NTJ, in my mind - poring over a single problem and focusing the gravity of their intellect until they crack it. NTP types are either portrayed as just naturally 'gifted' and a jack of all trades moreso - there doesn't seem to be an understanding of how much work should go into it. Being a jack of all trades should really mean being comfortable with the beginner textbook on the issue - not Googling trivia. I would push and say, in a handful of topics you should even get to the intermediate level. If you're just 'skim reading' that's not being a true jack of all trades. Push harder.