Regarding high dexterity, I don't possess it at all. I can be an exception but then why am I an exception? 🙂
I thought of some possibilities (keep in mind this is just an exploration of what could make a person have high Dex and why some Se users have it and some don't) :
- Se combined with another function is actually connected to high dexterity;
- People need a certain...gene/mental pattern (?) to have high dexterity and because Se users are more attuned to the senses, if they also have this certain pattern, they develop their artistic skills fully and become famous => they get into the database and confirm the theory that Se is connected to high dexterity;
- enneagram combined with type reveal more (I know almost nothing about enneagram but I could see many reasons for which a 9 Sp like me would not invest very much in building up skills for artistic self expression or in sports and stunts - express what exactly and why take risks? :)) ).
- beside development levels there is something else, some functions within the functions or some connection patterns between them. (I just visualized the tree of life in Kabbalah :)) ) I have no evidence in support of this theory, of course, I don't know how it would work or show vultologically.
I really doubt that I could develop high dexterity. It feels like from the very start I was a clumsy person. Like it's a biological thing, not just a lack of experience in activities that require high dexterity. It's not just about my hands, it's also about my feet and my tendency to not know what to do with my body. Where to stand in a room or how to sit in front of the camera. I think I am way below average in all these things but it never affected me a lot. I can see it as being Pe... Oh, another hypothesis :
- maybe some people have high Pe energy that doesn't fully act specifically as Se/Ne, so only some psychological traits of Se or Ne are active? No idea why this would happen though.
This is all just Pe exploratory ramble :)) All these theories can be wrong, maybe it's something else.

Oh ! I didn't think maybe I have higher standards for not being clumsy ! :))
But I also get bruises on my legs all the time and have no idea where they came from ! Usually from table corners and then there is Cat...:))
You might be right about introversion being connected to it since my ego fixation is Fi and I used to be socially introverted. I don't even think I am socially introverted anymore though.
I maintain my opinion that there is the Se clumsiness alternative but how to prove it...:)) I should make a video of myself trying to do my nails or dancing. :))

yus.. my clumsiness and space cadetidness has been a defining part of my life and character.
in my youth and throughout my twenties, i struggled a lot with just being able to be present enough to actually know what people around me are saying. so i could sit in a room with a group of friends of mine for an hour, and then realize i remember/heard nothing of what’s been said… if suddenly the conversation turned to me.. it would become apparent that i have not been listening to what’s been said.. sometimes it would be embarrassing lol, and it became a joke among my friends and suddenly call out to me “hey bella, why are you quiet?!” .. not as a question but as a teasing 🙂 .. this would also happen in work meetings, which would be even worse (my Ne improvisation skills would come handy in these situations.. i’d just.. make up something and pretend to have a clue what everyone is talking about).
this would happen because i would often feel i have more “important” things i want to think about in those times.. so i would often be contemplating some question that’s been on my mind philosophically, and then just bring my attention the conversation around me in for splits of seconds.. pick up a word thrown here and a word thrown there, and try to fill in the blanks the best i could. so it was basically, giving my attention to the conversation at the most minimal amount required in order for me to be able to contemplate other things.
but even if i didn’t have important things to think about, my mind just couldn’t keep itself in the reality around me. the world sometimes felt very distant, viscerally.. and “I” would feel very deeply sunk within my own subconscious, and because my words would feel as though they are coming out from this place.. it felt like they had a long travel -- they had to travel all the way from within me to outside reality -- which felt as distant as a flight across the world away.
i still get like this when i’m on introversion mode, but i think its become easier to stay attentive, to some degree, and to manage the shift between the two modes - I/E.
staying attentive to reality can sometimes feel almost “physically” painful to me. like i am being forcefully pulled out of myself, and forced to focus my mind (i.e me) on.. limited, none-infinite, technical, things.  stripped away from essence, from infinity.
my mom’s nickname for me for years has been “Afifon”, which means “kite” in Hebrew.. (as to say, your mind floats and drifts away all the time, and you don’t live in reality..)
the above has resulted in consequences such as..
*going to school with a new backpack full of new books on the first day of school.. only to return home with no backpack (and not even realize it until my mom asked me “where is your backpack?”)
* going to the grocery store to get only 1 or 2 things.. forgetting what those things were and coming back with nothing (or calling my mom to ask what that one thing she asked me for was)
*constantly dropping things. like. always. (when i was younger it was to an extreme.. i’d pick them up, and they’d slip out of my hand a second time right after.. so it would take several attempts to gain the object back into my hands)
* not being able to find things -- even when they are right in front of me. “huh.. where?!?...?”
*bumping into street polls/lamps
* a very common one that remains true today still to an extreme -- i don’t notice building around me… so they could be building a new store/bridge/building right outside my house or on a street i walk on every day to get to work -- and i will not notice it. even when its all ready.. i may still not notice it.
*big blue bruises on my legs (constantly) which i can’t remember when/where i got.. (and several times in which i broke/sprained my hands)
*forgetting laundry in the machine, washing it again, only to forget it in there again
* leaving bags of newly bought stuff on taxi cabs, or in the store itself right after paying (the latter especially happens a lot)
*never having notebooks throughout all of my college years, cause i couldn’t stay attentive enough to actually write things down -- so i just gave up in advance in all the classes (nor could i contemplate on what was being said critically if i was forced to write down the lecturer's words)
*typos.. i get clumsy when i type, and too lazy to correct (but not too lazy to be accurate in what's being said -- no way)
*i almost always walk around with my bag open cause it feels too much of a energetic investment to close it up, so my appearance can also come across as clumsy..
oh and of course... (this has to be one of the more embarrassing ones o,o)

and much more.. but i am too much of a space cadet to actually remember many examples 🙂

.

@bera

I know almost nothing about enneagram but I could see many reasons for which a 9 Sp like me would not invest very much in building up skills for artistic self expression or in sports and stunts – express what exactly and why take risks?

Yep, those “edginess & stunts” aspects of the Se description wouldn’t resonate unless someone had 7 or 8 fix, I think.
On a personal note… I have 8w7 fix and I’m definitely “edgy.” I would climb any fence, literally cross rivers with my 1971 Gibson SG vintage guitar on my back - which is worth  at least 40k by now -  stepping on rocks in a rumbling river barefoot, and carrying my alter-ego’s outfits in a huge heavy bag… which could not only risk  me hurting myself, but also damaging my very expensive guitar… just to get the right shot for a photoshoot or video shoot.
I don’t do stunts or edgy stuff “just for the thrill,” but if I have a vision, I will cross, climb, or destroy absolutely anything that is in my way, and I will realize that vision. I even sang through my whisper and scheduled shows knowing my voice would come and go. I moved to a dangerous, undeveloped neighborhood in Brooklyn by myself, with a chronic illness and speaking in a whisper -  into an empty loft, where I had to hire builders to build rooms, something I never did before - and blew all my money on this and then rented out the rooms. Because I needed to live out my music dream — not for “fun” or “for the hell of it.”
There is no risk on the planet  that I won’t take for the sake of my art. I’d die realizing those visions rather than live without it.
So that is how my Se works with Sx/So 4w3 and 8w7 fix. The 6w5 is why I’m posting intellectual stuff on a forum now. 😀  Normally you won’t find 8w7  heavy people, or 4w3s (who are performers and “life is a stage” people) hanging out on a forum; but I got very very sick, so here I am. I never joined a forum til I was 32 and never played any video games. I was too busy making the world into my stage to play out my inner drama on camera or in music.

well,
i just gotta throw-in,
i'm a graceful mofo,
i've not gotten a bruise in memory, im too careful to, scratches and cuts are usually on purpose, too busy to care,
i dont fall or trip, i have perfect balance, dont injure myself accidentally, it's weird watching other ppl do so, im ahead rearranging objects so they dont faceplant them,
i wouldnt say my movements are calculated - but i always know whats going to happen and how things will interact with eachother (i cannot say 100 percent..that would be superhuman)..which the best option
i can control a vehicle or ride an animal faster and better than anyone i've ever been with, smooth ride too
i loved sports , right up until my condition prevented me from playing, those angles were good
basically im good at moving
altho i realise i look like an angry-starfish
idk how this fits, somewhere

.

@bera
You hit the nail on the head! I also don't think about 'the real world' as in "this thing, that thing" or sweaters and what people are wearing, or the chores I have to do. My mother does this, but she is absolutely not Pe. Her mind is very pragmatic.

Let me describe my experience to see what we can learn about Ni.  For me, everything I do has an element of eternal significance.  I relate everything I do and experience back to the past and project it into the future at once.  There is a significant sense of time and place wherever I am in my psyche, as though I am traveling cosmically through a very broad array of phenomena that still bear some sort of eternal significance.  I cannot help but think of how there may be an unbroken chain linking all of these psychic events together, which can be also seen as a deep stream, some sort of river, pushing towards a destination and acquiring tributaries along the way.  But it is still the same river, rushing down the same river bed, claiming everything for its one deep stream and pushing towards one final destination.  Because nothing else really has a significant pull other than the final destination.  Because that one destination pulls the tributaries towards it in an inexorable conclusion.  Because there is nothing deeper to collect the tributaries than the one river bed of the psyche.  Because it is impossible to resist the current of this terrible but powerful stream.  Because there can be only one stream in my psyche to accept all of the tributaries.  The current will not stop until it reaches its final destination.

The Se description now, feels like an attempt to draw a parallel between Ne and Se - but only written from the mind of a Ne user.
Se is actually in a continuum with Ni. This is why "volition" is so apt, in Socionics - because they actually pay attention to the continuum. Ni is the 'one path' and all the rivers flowing in a certain direction, and Se is the embodied volition that gets you moving along that path. It's not the same as Ne - open ended, divergent, 'possibilities and probabilities.'  And it's not the same as Si - 'experiencing sensations inside your body and liking the way things look and feel.'  It is in fact a completely different function that works on a continuum with Ni.  Much like Fi & Ti were actually treated as completely different functions, albeit both being Ji; and much like Si & Ni were treated as different functions, despite both being Pi.
The "exploration" and "hunter-gatherer" for Se must be linked to Ni, rather than just being seen as a 'parallel' to Ne which happens to be sensory in the exact same way that Si is.  To me the link between Se and Ni is hinted in the new section, "volition and vitality." This was the section Auburn added after I had brought it up, but then at the end of the paragraph it says "This is why Se leads do things like sports and stunts" - which to me undermines the point, and once again makes it a 'sports version of Ne.' It would be more effective from my point of view, to say "This is how Se links to Ni - " and explain that continuous flow 'toward' something that Ni provides.  This is a great opportunity, also, to bring up "holeism" and what it means.
And then, a section could be added on realism. The realism section could explain why so many Se users gravitate to sports & stunts, and also, music. It could explain how Pe is dynamic, and how that can pan out in Se users. It could also cover how many Se users gravitate to "woo"  or spirituality because of their draw to unconscious Ni, but usually, their fantastical thoughts are linked together, rather than being divergent "what ifs."

I have been thinking recently of the difference between knowledge that is embodied (S) and knowledge that is disembodied (N). In general I prefer knowledge I can successfully integrate into both categories, but if forced to choose I have a strong preference for embodied knowledge, with the caveat that I try to be ever-mindful that some forms of knowledge available to the mind are naturally inclined to start in either one of the two categories before spreading into the other. Ne takes an object apart and multiplies it by default, because the relationships and/ or function(s) of the object is what Ne is designed to apprehend (to me this is the simplest explanation for the Ne-user anxiety Auburn has mentioned before: everything is being looked at from too many angles at once, though I do think Se-users could experience a similar phenomenon, but I would imagine it would have to do with an Ni that is overpowering a native Se). Se takes things in its environment as is, and by continually refreshing itself and increasing the percentage of its absorption of the environment's details (63%-refresh-81%-environment's content changes-refresh, 45%-refresh, 73%-refresh; etc.) Se observes the changes that occur between different moments in different environments, supplying Ni with the data it needs to expand the channel of its river, to borrow Tberg's metaphor (as with both functions what is really at play is the individual user's perceptions; e.g. both Ne and Se can be applied to imaginary worlds, inner worlds, or "the real world"). Ni and Ne are the functions that form the bridges between levels of reality, Si and Se are concerned with the embodied experiences of life. Through the incorporation of these rich S data-points the architecture of each type's N web is strengthened and expanded. I do also believe that the N schemas generated by Ne and Ni could be used in reverse direction to enrich the awareness of S embodied experience (meditation comes most easily to mind as an example).
I realize much of what's written above might simply be a regurgitation of points Auburn has delineated clearly before, but writing it out helped me to flesh out and attempt to embody my understanding of the difference between Si-Ne and Se-Ni. Perhaps this is another example of N leading to S, by working through these disembodied concepts of Se-Ni I gradually learn how it might feel when integrated into a lived, physical experience (N disembodied knowledge leading to S embodied knowledge).
To represent the real, physical world, Ne must inherently rely on its pieces of Si to help it do so, as its native design is unfit for direct representation of the external object. Likewise, Se is unfit to directly represent the abstract relationships between objects, and must inherently rely on Ni to help it do so.