27 ms·

The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

• Vampiero 2y ago
  Well too bad ADHD makes me a fast thinker that talks over everyone else and writes code at 6x speed, but only sometimes, when I'm not procrastinating for hours at a time and when I'm not too mentally drained to engage with other people. It makes me an extrovert at work, but only sometimes, and a great team player, but only sometimes. These blog posts feel so dumb to me because they always assume that you're a neurotypical and that everyone around you also is a neurotypical. That if you just put in the effort, you too can do it! Well guess what? No, it's not like that. In fact, this mode of thinking is exactly the problem that makes my life hell. Fuck this. If I'm working remotely it's because idgaf about other people - not any more than strictly necessary to complete my tasks. Stop trying to gaslight me into thinking I'm wrong, stop trying to force me to go on trips and to delegate and to talk to other people - this is an adaptation for my own survival. I went into programming because I like writing code. That's literally the start and the end of it. It's not my fault the industry is 99% web development and 1% fun stuff for people on [a] spectrum. I'm here because if I weren't I would starve, not because I care about your company or the people you hired. Even though I'll gladly chit-chat with them from time to time, and even form friendships if I deem it worth it.
  • kkoncevicius 2y ago
    I think you are taking yourself too seriously.
  • mnky9800n 2y ago
    Can’t imagine this attitude makes work easier for you nor does it make working with you easier. People keep making these “I’m on the spectrum” arguments as if it’s a legitimate excuse for bad behaviour. Perhaps life is more difficult for you in some ways. Life isn’t fair, learning to accept this is much more rewarding than hiding behind some spectrum definition. ADHD doesn’t make you do anything. You choose your life.
    • zenethian 2y ago
      I mean, it literally does make you do things. That's why it's a mental disorder.
    • erinaceousjones 2y ago
      What, in the post you are replying to, would you consider "bad behaviour"? Seriously, give us some examples!
    • creaktive 2y ago
      Heyyy, take it easy :) Would you call it “bad behavior” when a mute person refuses to speak? Well, A(u)DHD kind of makes one deaf, mute and blind to the standard communication style. That’s why the afflicted prefer to WFH, and text instead of face-to-face. Some are always impaired so, while others, only when tired.
      • mnky9800n 2y ago
        I know. I’m diagnosed. I found that when I stopped using it as an excuse and started engaging my career and life in the ways I assumed adhd made them worse, I started succeeding in ways I thought I wouldn’t. My message is don’t become a person who identifies as a person with adhd. It will only hold you back in my experience.
        • creaktive 2y ago
          I understand your point better now, thanks for elaborating! I do relate to the experience of stopping using my diagnosis as an excuse for pushing people away. My life is so much better now. Yet, for me, a pair programming session (for instance) is something I prefer doing, like, once a month, or less. But I certainly do enjoy it, a lot!
    • int_19h 2y ago
      > ADHD doesn’t make you do anything. It literally does.
  • delichon 2y ago
    I was a fat little kid with a skinny friend who told me the secret to losing weight (which he had never had the need to do): just don't eat so much. He was not gas lighting me in any way. He was just communicating his internal experience that this thing that I found tremendously difficult was in fact trivially easy and I just had to try it. He wasn't lying, just telling me his truth which happened to be false. Don't attribute malice to obliviousness.
    • drowsspa 2y ago
      I'd attribute malice when this advice comes from supposedly grown-ups.
      • seba_dos1 2y ago
        Exactly. At some point, obliviousness itself becomes malicious.
  • creaktive 2y ago
    Was going to write approximately this, thanks for beating me to it. Just a bit of sparkling from my own (mostly miserable) experience: the disdain for “normies” comes from them, “normies”, forcing a square peg (me, atypical) into a round hole. There’s zero intention for accommodating for the differences. Predictably, as a result you get an extremely antisocial introvert. But guess what! If you just LEAVE ME BE, respect my silence and self-isolation… I will reach out and try to connect, on my own terms. Usually, by written text, since I don’t parse voices well, and don’t read facial expressions at all.
  • 0x1ceb00da 2y ago
    [dead]
• knorker 2y ago
  > What they don’t realize is - everyone is an introvert and everyone is an extrovert. Citation needed. > I looked into his eyes and saw the disgust for everyone in the room. That's not how human interaction or theory of mind works. This article is "not even wrong". It's just subjective bullshit (in the technical definition of the word bullshit). It's probably the most ill informed post I've ever seen on the front page of HN.
  • SecretDreams 2y ago
    > It's probably the most ill informed post I've ever seen on the front page of HN. Ever seen so far
• zenethian 2y ago
  This is a terrible article that reads like an AI generated LinkedIn post. Nevermind the fact that the author isn't using the terms introvert and extrovert correctly; the message is quite ableist. Not everyone can achieve this level of communication in a productive manner. Telling people that management will "prefer" one over the other when it's "budget time" is also dead wrong. I've fired more extroverts than introverts in my career, and it's likely only a coincidence. The author sounds like one of those "proud extroverts" that they made up into existence.
  • erinaceousjones 2y ago
    I think you have good points in your middle paragraph, but I disagree with your first sentence. I can see a growing trend of dismissive "this reads like it's AI-generated" when I frankly think it has been written like that. Author has a similar tone to me. That's my writing style. > Not everyone can achieve this level of communication in a productive manner. Correct, and it sucks. I feel like it's ableist at times too. 9-to-5 days of small-talk are so strangely exhausting t me. It's very frustrating I feel it's a mandatory part of my career if I don't want to be forgotten about. But? I don't disagree with the author. In my interpretation, they aren't saying "I'm an extrovert and I'm great", they're saying "hey, this is a thing you can choose to do or be, and you may find it benefits you, and the introvert/extrovert thing is a stupid distinction, but being extrovert in the right way is a means of making yourself visible". Because, let's face it, it is. There is some entrenched ableism, in a way. Last I checked like 10-20% of western population is some form of neurodiverse and a proportion of that just do not click with the predominant communication styles used by the majority population. It sucks and we are left feeling like we are not accommodated for and can easily fall into that exhausted feeling of resentment. But? So what? You can help make things incrementally better for yourself in the system whilst still "playing the game", if you consider it as something you are choosing to expend your energy on.
    • knorker 2y ago
      I held back a similar comment about AI-generated. I think the "AI-generated" accusation is overused. This article was incoherent nonsense, but not all incoherent nonsense hallucinations are AI-generated.
• card_zero 2y ago
  > No matter what role you play, you will always have to communicate and collaborate with others. If this is something you disagree with, you should go back to the drawing board and think deeply. Sounds good, that's what I wanted. > you should check out Thinking Fast and Slow. I checked it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow#Replication_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow#Replic... It was discovered many prominent research findings were difficult or impossible for others to replicate, and thus the original findings were called into question. An analysis of the studies cited in chapter 4, "The Associative Machine", found that their replicability index (R-index) is 14, indicating essentially low to no reliability.
  • brailsafe 2y ago
    Seems like you just did the most cursory of searches, found a negative pull quote about some studies in one chapter, and called it day. Much like reading the negative google reviews for a bar you were invited to instead of actually accepting the invitation and going, I'm not sure this qualifies as "checking it out"
    • card_zero 2y ago
      That's right, that is sufficient. Life is too short for me to investigate further, and the onus is on anybody who really wants to defend it to defend it. I may very well be wrong, some books of the pop-psych self-help kind turn out to be pretty good. I enjoyed How to win friends and influence people. Unfortunately there are approximately nine billion similar books. This is why cursory and aggressively dismissive investigation is the correct approach.
• vouaobrasil 2y ago
  One thing to me is fairly obvious: people who are introverts can be social, but only for limited amounts of time. For example, I like talking a lot, but I can only do it for limited amounts of time. Maybe only a few hours a week. If I'm pushed past that point, I just don't want to chat any more. It's like I'm full of food, but with socialization. After that I find socialization immensely distasteful and irritating. That's why a 9-5 workplace environment never worked for me. It was forced socialization past my limit. Maybe that's what happened to the guy in this article: they go into defensive mode because they are pushed past their limit. Extroverts don't understand this concept of limited capacity for socialization.
  • fnord77 2y ago
    > people who are introverts can be social not if they have social anxiety or are not NT > but only for limited amounts of time. but yes, this is true. And it is not something you can build up like a muscle or long distance running. In fact I think trying to build up the amount of time you socialize actually diminishes it
    • zimpenfish 2y ago
      > not if they have social anxiety I have (frequent) crippling social anxiety, am definitely an introvert, and I can be social -in the right circumstances-[0] (albeit for a limited period of time[1].) [0] eg. small group of people I know well, familiar surroundings, ideally without a lot of external noise. [1] 3-4 hours tends to be my limit even under the best circumstances.
    • michaelcampbell 2y ago
      Everything is true except for the edge cases where it's not; pointing this out I think is unnecessary.
      • fnord77 2y ago
        if something is true everywhere except the edge cases, it is not true everywhere.
• kubb 2y ago
  It’s quite treacherous to identify yourself with labels: introvert, extrovert, conscientious, conservative, liberal, empathetic, neurodivergent, etc. The act of putting a name on some traits that you have can seem liberating: I finally know what I am, and why I’m different from others, and that’s fine. On the flipside, once you commit to a label, you lock yourself inside it, and instead of describing, it begins shaping what you are. It doesn’t help that other people often try very hard to pin us down and assign labels to us forcefully, without considering if we’re OK with that. The trick is to describe your behavior and separate that from yourself. Instead of being an introvert you can just say that my behavior was introverted, and that was a function of my internal psychological state. Also, be open to experimenting with what affects that state, and reflect on it. That will remind you that you’re not a constant, you’re a function :)
  • hgomersall 2y ago
    Neurodivergence is a really useful concept in that it recognises that "typical" just means a certain cognitive profile. The problem I expect is that in certain fields (STEM?) it's actually more normal to be divergent from the mainstream. If you understand how your particular neural profile makes you understand and experience the world, you are in a good position to understand how it might be different to others. In a sense, attaching a special label to a particular neurodivergent profile is as problematic as assigning special significance to the "neurotypical" profile.
  • rors 2y ago
    I was diagnosed with dyslexia in my 40s. It's helped me understand why I struggle with certain tasks. Overall having a label has been a net positive. I'm hesitant to share my diagnosis with colleagues. I've been able to develop coping mechanisms and I feel like it doesn't impact my day-to-day. I don't want to cause disruption for those around me. I do have a friend with much more severe dyslexia and she does get the help she needs to be productive. I wish we could discuss these labels at work without baggage. It's all about consideration. Forcing everyone around you to change their behaviour around you to make yourself feel more comfortable is not being considerate. On the flip side enforcing strict working policies that prevent people from participating in the workplace is also not considerate.
• reedf1 2y ago
  These labels are quite obviously overused. Like most social characteristics, there is a spectrum. I can, and have, gone without seeing another person for months - and I've barely noticed. Now, I go into work five times a week. I do think I come off as odd to people; but I don't mind, I'm not proud of it, but I'm not embarrassed by it either. I am what I am. Earlier in life I put great effort into being "normal" socially, but with great effort also came enormous stress. I've not struggled with work or partners. There are lots of people who don't seem to mind the occasional oddity or silence in a group. Although, I do occasionally run into some self-righteous lot who try to "fix" me; but I find this condescending. There are lots of ways to be a person, and I am truly fulfilled with the way I am. Most friction this has ever caused is by someone wanting me to be some other way, usually theirs.
• impoppy 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • zenethian 2y ago
    I love talking to people. Unfortunately it's exhausting for me. I have no such attitude about it being a "waste [of] mental energy." I don't know any introverts that do. I would recommend taking a deep breath and just consider for a second that some people are just different than you.
  • reedf1 2y ago
    I love to waste mental energy on having a good time - chess, puzzles, board games, crosswords, programming. But spending time with people isn't like that. Talking to a group of people I half-know is like someone has slipped a hobby-knife under my fingernail and is slowly extending it. I can feasibly have a good conversation, or even notionally a good time; but it's hard to ignore the knife.
  • MattPalmer1086 2y ago
    You find it enjoyable to be with people you like all the time. Other people don't and reach a point where it becomes uncomfortable to continue. It's not because of some weird attitude about wasting energy on having a good time. Quite the opposite; once you reach your limit, it becomes wasting mental energy on not having a good time.
  • creaktive 2y ago
    Consider this: you can’t read facial expressions, nor the tone of the voice. Moreover, most people you interact with misinterpret your face/voice, assuming you’re joking when you’re dead serious (and vice versa). So, you come up with strategies to cope with your deficiencies. Basically, playbooks of what to say if you hear/see so and so, filling the gaps in your sensorium. What’s handled by an “autopilot” for most, is a very complicated manual procedure for you. I’m oversimplifying here, of course. There are nuances, but it always boils down to this switch to manual controls when one is tired, and then becoming even more tired and overwhelmed. Hope this helps!
• jasdi 2y ago
  Try framing it in terms of what you Need from people. Avoiding using "should" so much. It will help you become conscious of what your needs are. Confusing your needs with others needs is also a trap. We can only talk in terms of our Needs and why those needs are important to us. Anything else sounds like passing judgement and the reaction will be negative.
  • BeetleB 2y ago
    > Avoiding using "should" so much. I have two phrases I use often: "Should is not in my vocabulary" "Should is a lazy word" People use words like "should" and "must" to get around explaining their perspectives. I remember early in my career, I made a request for a feature to an employee in another team. Their SW was allowing users to specify parameters that made the whole model unphysical, and it was a burden on us users to always double check that parameter "X" was not negative. The SW wouldn't fail. It would simply not give correct results (and they wouldn't be wildly wrong that you'll quickly realize it). I requested that they simply not allow a negative value. We didn't always put one there - sometimes it was the output of another process, and I didn't want to continually check that our automation wasn't putting in unphysical values. The response? "The engineer should be diligent in making sure the value is not negative". Should is a lazy word. He didn't explain at all why he's rejecting the feature request. I would have preferred "Low priority - we simply don't have the time." Start counting how often someone uses the word as a way to avoid explaining him/herself.
    • jasdi 2y ago
      I am going to borrow that "should is a lazy word" slogan. Thanks!
• spzb 2y ago
  That's a very long post to say "I don't understand extraversion/introversion"
• HPsquared 2y ago
  For me the "energy gain" / "energy drain" question depends MASSIVELY on who I happen to be spending time with. So much so that recently I'm doubting if I even am an introvert. With the right people it's all good.
  • ambicapter 2y ago
    Yup, I've never bought into the intro/extrovert spectrum because it doesn't really seem to cover some pretty common cases.
  • jghn 2y ago
    This is me as well. For me it's not "socializing = energy drain" or the opposite. It's more about situations. In most situations I find talking with people, being in crowds, etc to be draining. But plop me into what is a relatively small list of "right circumstances" and it's the exact opposite.
    • Jensson 2y ago
      > In most situations I find talking with people, being in crowds, etc to be draining Then you are an introvert. They are talking about most situations, if there are some cliques you feel comfortable around then you are still an introvert. Extroverts has a small set of situations where they get drained instead. It isn't like anyone loves all human contact, its just some have an issue with most contact and others like it most of the time.
  • happytoexplain 2y ago
    I've always assumed people are largely the same, socially. I.e. we enjoy being with people we mesh with, and don't enjoy being with people we don't mesh with. The thing is, you can like people you don't mesh with. You might not have a single bad thing to say of a person, yet still have no interest in hanging out with them. And then, surprise, being forced to do things you don't enjoy is draining. Especially when it involves long periods of politely choosing your words and facial expressions to pretend you're not bored/frustrated. The only thing that makes an "introvert" is when the genre of person they mesh with happens to be more numerically rare. There is a ton of variety in humans. It doesn't mean anything significant that your "group" is small.
• noduerme 2y ago
  Like so many things, introversion can now be both medicalized as a disorder and celebrated as a lifestyle choice. This allows some people to pick whichever is psychologically soothing to them at the moment and use it to justify a lack of effort, as if socializing were not a skill that many people actually have to work on.
  • zb3 2y ago
    How about "shutting up and leaving people alone" as a skill that many people should have to work on? Let's distribute the effort.
    • noduerme 2y ago
      Ah yeah, I forgot. Being outraged that other people have opinions that offend you is a good fallback if soothing methods 1 and 2 fail.
• jmyeet 2y ago
  Articles like this are (IMHO) ableist and come from an extremely neurotypical perspective. "Just practice social skills" to me is like teling depressed people "just go outside and touch grass". There's not a single mention of ADHD or autism in here. My own understanding of this has evolved over the years. The first stage is to understand introversion / extroversion as simply to not like / like socializing, people, large groups or whatever. This is a shallow and pretty inaccurate understanding, one many people such as myself chafe against. I consider myself an introvert but like certain social activities so these labels never seem to quite fit. The next stage is the "social battery" understanding of introversion / extroversion. That is, social activities will either drain or charge your "social battery". After this you start to ask questions like "why does X drain my social battery?" and "what does draining a social battery really mean?" and you start to realize you're still describing symptoms, not causes. The key insight is that something drains your social battery because you're masking [1]. So-called extroverts don't need to mask. So-called introverts do. Yes, you can get better at following social norms and develop coping strategies for large groups, socializing with strangers, etc but all you're really doing is getting better at masking. That can be useful because it can change how other people respond to you but it's a bit like telling a depressed person to "just smile". [1]: https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/topics/behaviour/masking https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/topics/behavio...
• rors 2y ago
  I feel like a lot of these debates boil down dealing with discomfort. We seem to be creating a society where everyone feels they have the right to not feeling stressed and uncomfortable. The danger to never feeling challenged is that you don't grow. You get stuck in a rut and everyone passes you by. Part of dealing with discomfort is learning what your limits are. No one should put themselves in a situation with you have a breakdown. I find that a small amount of stress in my life is good and results in growth. But a huge amount is overwhelming which leads to burnout.
  • jrs235 2y ago
    I agree. While some people are uncomfortable in social settings and/or talking alot, especially "small talk", other people are uncomfortable sitting in silence. BOTH types of people need to work on be more comfortable being uncomfortable. However, it's seen as rude to tell overs to just "be quiet for a bit and enjoy the silence" vs "you're socially awkward because you refuse to talk to me"... My father in law seems unable to sit queitly in group settings. He performs too much small talk in my opinion. And it seems merely to fill the silence since they are often the same questions day in and day out. Either his memory is very bad, or he's not actually listening, just wanting to make noise. I've given up wasting my breath (re)answering the same questions. It seems he doesn't truly care about what others think, say, or feel... otherwise he might work on committing answers to memory. And even when folks start talking, he interrupts a lot... I truly hope it's not poor memory.
    • robocat 2y ago
      Maybe he's trying to "give" as per https://www.experimental-history.com/p/good-conversations-have-lots-of-doorknobs https://www.experimental-history.com/p/good-conversations-ha...
  • XorNot 2y ago
    This is the sort of take that just sounds entitled, because the person giving it is doing so from a position of not having discomfort created for them by the actions of someone else. Like let's put this in context: replace "being an introvert" for "your friend flies you out to the forest, and then happily announces we're going to be hiking 20 km back to town. You really need to challenge yourself!"
• niam 2y ago
  I mostly don't see the point in these terms anymore. They were presumably created to categorize people but suck at it because nobody agrees where the boundaries of the category are, and the resolution on the term is so low for how many domains of personality it touches.
  • blueflow 2y ago
    This is a general problem with language.
    • cdrini 2y ago
      Yes, but some terms have more trouble with it than others, and if the term cannot converge on a clear, repeatable definition over time, questioning the utility of the term seems reasonable. Eg the terms "red" and "green" have largely converged on specific, useful meanings over time. Even more abstract words like "freedom" have mostly clear definitions (although definitely also have variance!). Introvert/extrovert I would argue have a LOT of variance in meaning when people use the words. And if people using the words can't agree on what they're actually communicating about, that might suggest that other or new concepts/words might be more useful.
      • blueflow 2y ago
        Language is constructive, basically people make it up and the "definitions" are none, they are actually after-the-fact formalizations. Whatever humans do to the word "Introvert" now will be its "definition" in 20 years. Print out some rainbow and ask people to draw the line between "red" and "not-red". That would prove that convergence didn't happen and would nicely show why it probably never will.
        • cdrini 2y ago
          I would argue if you asked 100 random people to draw a red Vs not-red line in that experiment you described, short of colour blindness, you would not see very much variance in the position of the line. That is why I believe the terms have converged on a meaning. In fact, I think it would be very hard to construct an experiment where people did not use the term red in a consistent fashion. I agree with you that formal definitions of words come after the fact. But meaning of words are always present; everyone who uses a word uses it with some understanding if its meaning, that they want to convey. And as words converge on a shared meaning, they become effective for communicating meanings. I'm arguing introvert/extrovert have been around for a long time, and have not converged on a consistent meaning. The terms have too much variance in meaning to be useful at communicating. One person uses the word and means something very different from when someone else uses the word. In 20 years time this variance will likely still be a problem. If the definition of a word shifts over time, that's ok as long as the variance remains low; it just means it has a new definition. But if the variance is high, it means the word isn't very useful/effective for communication.
• j_crick 2y ago
  > They use introversion as an excuse to not grow. As if people who the author accuses of this sin have the same definition of, or feel the same about "growing" as the author...
• josefritzishere 2y ago
  Perhaps it has been said but can we agree that it's ok to be introverted?
• bravetraveler 2y ago
  Conversely, being too open/productive may also lead to burn out. The trap of participation
• nuancebydefault 2y ago
  To introverts I would say: just now and then try to get out of your comfort zone. Most of the time, it will feel liberating and next time it becomes much easier. Step 1. Regularly talk to strangers. Most easily it can be done at public transport or at a shop. Start with places where you are waiting for a short time. Just ask a silly question or say something about the weather. Step 2 speak up in small groups. Just say something funny in between. Or ask a really curious question about what someone is saying. Step 3 take the lead in organizing a Teams call that anyways need scheduling. Be the MC or host. Just state what the meeting is about, what is to be accomplished and listen and note some things for in the summary. Step 4 do a talk in front of an audience. That will need some prep and some rehearsal, this one is quite difficult for myself as well. Everyting worth the effort, takes effort.
  • bluefirebrand 2y ago
    All of your advice is for shy people, not introverts Being an introvert is not the same as being shy, and it is long past time that people stop conflating the two concepts You cannot "fix" being an introvert by practicing being social
    • nothrabannosir 2y ago
      could you humor me and exPlain why you think this? I’m neither shy nor introverted and I have only a casual understanding of either. If I take their comment literally, I guess the only part I would see being different is “it will feel liberating.” But aside from that I do support the advice of people going out of their comfort zone, even if they hate it. I read GPs advice as “go to the social gym.” For some people the gym ends up feeling good, others will hate it no matter what, but the advice is sound regardless. What do you think though?
      • rukuu001 2y ago
        Shy == social situations are scary Introvert == social situations are strenuous
      • 2y ago
• kstrauser 2y ago
  I regularly say yes to work dinners and such that I don’t personally want to attend. That sort of thing is far outside my comfort zone, and that’s exactly why I do it. It’s good exercise to pretend to be outgoing and chatty for an evening. Like any other skill, you get better at it with practice! And the author here is so right: almost everyone else at these things besides the salespeople are probably also introverts. I can promise you that you won’t be the only one there. I never am.
  • pizza234 2y ago
    As a person who was very introvert at social gatherings, and the polar opposite now, I'm now convinced that being extrovert is not a skill or an "area" (outside the comfort zone), but rather a state of mind. It's certainly an art and a science to be a good conversationalist, but being in that certain state of mind is "a lot %" of what's needed, and it actually takes no energy or comfort - although as other state, natural introverts enjoy this state for a certain amount of time. It can also take a lot to "get there", though.
    • Workaccount2 2y ago
      The core problem is that introvert/extrovert has little or no bearings on someone's social ability. Introvert/extrovert is the method that people use to recharge their energy. It has nothing to do with social ability despite the terms getting hijacked for that. Signed, an extremely introverted person who talks and interacts a lot in social situations.
      • zeroonetwothree 2y ago
        I don’t think it’s so simple. Brains are complicated and everyone is different.
        • yieldcrv 2y ago
          That’s fine but how people term introvert to be reclusive is inaccurate.
• jancsika 2y ago
  > While the reality is, it takes effort to communicate and drains energy for everyone. This is a low effort take that depends on the ambiguity of language to sound true. "Drain" for the author apparently means literally using up a finite amount of human energy, concentration, and willpower. That's a truism. "Drain" for an introvert can mean anything from starting a muscle tension clock that will eventually cause a headache to a straight-up panic attack that could take hours/days to recover from. It's probably even worse for young people who are introverts and haven't been taught how to say no or set boundaries. (I remember explaining to some college-age people that saying no is a skill, and they looked at me like I had just revealed to them that, with enough practice, humans can actually fly.)
  • xvector 2y ago
    > "Drain" for an introvert can mean anything from starting a muscle tension clock that will eventually cause a headache to a straight-up panic attack that could take hours/days to recover from. Unless you are being hyperbolic with your usage of the word "panic attack", having one during social events is not "being an introvert," it's a medical condition. I am an introvert and have also had unrelated panic attacks. Panic attacks effectively paralyze you, you feel a deep and uncontrollable sense of doom, often accompanied by palpitations. Sometimes you feel like you can't breathe. If caused by social interaction, that's not a normal thing to experience, even for introverts. That is in the territory of actual medical issues: panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, etc.
    • sabellito 2y ago
      Absolutely bizarre that you're being downvoted. Having panic attacks is not a normal reaction to any normal human situation, gp absolutely should look for medical and psychological help.
      • tapland 2y ago
        So if the person has, let’s say, autism, and will not be able to endure this for longer than a few hours before becoming completely overwhelmed. What do you want these people to do, since they aren’t allowed to respond how they might do? When and where are they welcome in society?
• xvector 2y ago
  > Ram learns about Shyam’s promotion and feels a bit disappointed. He goes back home and says to himself “I am not an extrovert”, consoles himself and moves on with life. I have seen this play out time and time again at nearly every company I've worked at and even every team I've TL'd. I used to be a "proud introvert" myself. The "proud introverts" often feel wronged in these situations, struggling to understand that communication is just as valid and critical of a skill as writing code. Accepting that I didn't need to make "being an introvert" my identity, and learning how to communicate, skyrocketed my career.
• cvoss 2y ago
  > “Hey man, what’s up? Why don’t you approach and talk to a few here? They are friendly, you know. You like Open Source, so maybe talk to that guy (pointing to a senior of mine) and ask him how he got started.” This is completely wrong-headed on the part of the host of this gathering. The correct move is "Hey, man, it looks like you don't have a lot of connections in this room. Let me introduce you to a friend of mine... [Friend], this is Aditya. [Say something interesting about Aditya to justify Friend's attention.] You two have [X] in common. Aditya, I have known Friend for [Y] years. Ask him about [Z]. etc." The host mediates the introduction for a respectful amount of time, and then walks away. That is the function and, truthfully, the responsibility, of a host at a gathering where not everybody knows everybody. Whereas, some people would find it impertinent for a stranger to barge in on a conversation and introduce themselves as if they were important enough to deserve attention. Maybe they are, but they may be supposed to let somebody else do that for them. And likewise, many people feel slimy going around putting on an air of self-importance. It is hardly fair to characterize this kind of sensibility as "pride" or a feeling of "disgust" toward other guests. Read some Jane Austen for more.
  • BeetleB 2y ago
    Fully agree. I read that intro section and closed the page. I didn't want advice from someone who could be so poor at this, and not even realize it. Instead of introspecting about his own contribution to the problematic interaction, he went ahead and made it the other guy's fault.
  • fluoridation 2y ago
    Honestly, I'm trying to put myself in Aditya's shoes, and I can't help but feel instant rejection at both the OP's and your approach. If I'm sitting by myself at a gathering it's probably because I'm overwhelmed by all the strangers in the room and can't (or don't feel like) figure out how to start a conversation with someone. The last thing I want in such a scenario is for someone to come and thrust me into a conversation with someone else. I can't see either myself or the other poor sap you involve in this enjoying the interaction. Now, if you want to come talk to me, by yourself, so I can get into a social mood, that's a different story.
  • deleted 2y ago
• englishspot 2y ago
  for me I've realized my problem isn't introversion/extroversion, my problem is just that I have trouble thinking on the fly. or even just speaking off-the-cuff.
• jexe 2y ago
  These labels do as much to hurt ourselves as they do to try and help. The truth (for me at least) is that whether I'm comfortable and energized by others depends on my level of comfort with the people, my familiarity with the situation, my mood, the general vibe, etc. "Being" one or the other feels like a limiting belief that we can hide behind if we're not aware of what it's doing to us.
• BhavdeepSethi 2y ago
  I often think about this post when people call themselves introverts. I wonder how much is this a function of who you are (genes, etc.) vs the environment a person was exposed to in formative years. I've never seen a study about this. (I've read Quiet, which is a book that gets quoted by introverts a lot) "A lot of you guys are not true introverts you were just expressive children who didn’t get the attention you wanted or deserved so you got comfortable at keeping everything inside and entertaining your own thoughts" Source: https://x.com/SchrodingrsBrat/status/1834583804016484637 https://x.com/SchrodingrsBrat/status/1834583804016484637
  • lolinder 2y ago
    For the record, we introverts get very tired of having to justify ourselves to extroverts who constantly question our existence. It seems to happen far more often with introversion than with other differences. People don't tell those who prefer cold to heat that it's just because of the way they were raised and that they should really build up their heat tolerance. People don't tell those who dislike cilantro that it's an acquired taste and they should really put in the effort. People who try to tell LGBT folks that they should just try to be straight get straight-up pilloried. But for some reason people feel that it's okay to tell introverts that they probably are just imagining that they have real differences from the average person that can't just be fixed by trying harder.
• ozim 2y ago
  Well, now, don't you tell me to smile You stick around, I'll make it worth your while. Sorry but fast thinking is needed for a lot of socialization. No one sticks around if you are not interesting and people judge harshly everyone who is taking time to build up response. I can throw in some jokes and in general be funny but with people that I am familiar with . Not so much meeting strangers.
• casey2 2y ago
  If someone believes that they have nothing to gain from interacting with a group then who are you to tell them that they should do it anyways for growth? You could make the same exact argument about any form of interaction. Don't want to interact with the node.js ecosystem? Why not? You will learn so much and grow as a person. Will I? Really? How about a book on group theory? Sure I will probably learn something, will it be useful? maybe, more so than the class I already took on it in college? who knows, certainly not you more than me. Also the idea that people just want to sit in front of the TV and not learn anything new or grow is completely insane and usually only comes up when they aren't learning the thing that you want them to know. If it appears like that it's only because they are stuck in some system, much like the one you propose, that wants them to learn unactionable knowledge What is the Appearance of Interaction? Just because it's very obvious that you are interacting with some group doesn't mean that you interact with that group more than some other group that you don't know about. If you go to a new website your browser runs some interesting scripts, much like a TV show this attracts your attention, eventually you decide JavaScript is important and you should learn about it. You have entered the JavaScript fandom, it doesn't matter to you if gravity acts on you constantly or a krebs cycle complete in your body (~10)^~21 times a second, JS is clearly more useful to know about, right?
• molochai 2y ago
  At the risk of sounding like a jerk, the Ram/Shyam story -- it sounds like one of those people is good at getting their job done and works well to solve hard problems independently... and the other person over-relies on other people via collaboration, and compensates by making excessive "high visibility" noise. One of those people is solving critical bugs, the other one is... doing demos for other teams. It's sort of telling Shyam prefers work broken down into small, digestible, predictable chunks. It's a shame management (in my experience) seems to consistently value Shyam's style. Too much of either working style leads to problems. Excess in the first leads to overlap, duplicated work, and incogruent pieces that don't fit together. Excess in the second leads to a lot of people talking quite a bit about work while nothing tangible or truly difficult gets done.
• sega_sai 2y ago
  I don't find this convincing as an introvert. Dealing with shyness or being an introvert required me reading a few books and techniques how to deal with it. In the end that helped, but it was not as easy as just 'try harder' and took a few years. I also wish I realised earlier that it was an issue that needed addressing, but no one told me that. Overall the article seems to trivialize the issue in my opinion.
  • azan_ 2y ago
    Can you recommend some books you’ve read? Struggling with the same thing
    • molochai 2y ago
      Not who you asked but: - Quiet - Susan Cain (introversion in general) - Cues and Captivate - Vanessa Van Edwards (business-focused social skills) - The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense at Work - Suzette Haden Elgin (I actually didn't enjoy this one too much, didn't finish it, but I think that was a personal mismatch) - How to Win Friends and Influence People - Dave Carnegie (a lot of the techniques are very, very dated and transparent when used today... but it's pretty foundational and worth a glance anyway)
    • sega_sai 2y ago
      Overcoming social anxiety and shyness by Butler was one of the books that was pretty good.
• 65 2y ago
  Dear God please scale down the size of this website. Everything is too big!
• paulmooreparks 2y ago
  > everyone should be an extrovert at work No, we shouldn't. I'm not an extravert, and I don't want to be an extravert. I don't ask extraverts to be introverted, so don't ask me to be what I am not. Being introverted doesn't mean that I'm anti-social or incapable of cooperating with others.
  • joe_the_user 2y ago
    Absolutely agreed. No one should be obligated to be anything at work. At work, you should accomplish things. You should be able to work with others but you shouldn't have any obligation for emotional or whatever other response.
• more_corn 2y ago
  I’m not an extrovert, but behaving in an extroverted way is hugely rewarding. Talking to strangers, befriending fellow travelers, commiserating with colleagues. If you’re a manager it’s literally part of the job. Asking how people are doing isn’t useless small talk, your job is to keep an eye out for things that might be hindering the effectiveness of your team so that you can catch problems early and respond to them. “How are you doing” suddenly becomes a serious and interesting question with real ramifications. Theres a common misconception that extroverts don’t like people or are not interested in people. We do and we are. Just in a different way. Every introvert has had a best friend, maybe a lover, maybe someone they were just comfortable talking with. The problem is that most social interactions feel shallow, banal and pointless. But I think that’s only before you look at it deeply. Buried deep in each stranger is the potential to be a best friend, a lover, a future colleague, a business partner, or just someone who teaches you something important about an interesting thing you’ve never thought to study. Your task as the introverted traveler is leave the door open enough to connect with each person enough to get at the deeply interesting stuff inside. Who are you and what makes you tick? What lights you up? What interest or knowledge do you have that I might find compelling? I assure you everyone has something even if they don’t know it. Approaching each social interaction with the faith that something important can be discovered is the introverts path to benefits of extroverted behavior. You’re welcome. You can thank me later when you meet me in person, but only if you’re able to figure out through conversation that I was the one who provided you this gem.
• bawolff 2y ago
  > On this one particular night, a lot of people were bonding, and it was amazing. But then I saw this young boy sitting in the corner by himself. Let’s call him Aditya. It was a bit dark and Aditya was trying to just get by, unnoticed. He looked overwhelmed and disinterested. I went up to him with a big smile and a lot of kindness, and said - “Hey man, what’s up? Why don’t you approach and talk to a few here? They are friendly, you know. You like Open Source, so maybe talk to that guy (pointing to a senior of mine) and ask him how he got started.”. > His response that day still echoes in my ear. It felt like a voice coming out of a closed heart. And my words had fallen flat on him. He said, with a smirk, “I am not an extrovert”. Maybe i am reading into this, but the author comes across as an asshole to me. You can see the condescension dripping from the prose. To me it sounds like the author was being a busy-body and came off as rude. Introverted kid wanted him to mind his own business.
• mattlondon 2y ago
  It always bothers me how people frame it as a binary either-or thing. I think the reality is way more subtle, with a wide spectrum that is highly context dependent. I don't think labelling someone/one self as one or the other or trying to "be an extrovert at work" or whatever is productive or healthy.
• ohsosueme 2y ago
  [flagged]
• thayne 2y ago
  This feels like the author has made the assumption that since they are an introvert, all introverts are like them. However, I think that introversion, like most things is a continuum, not binary. Take the characterization of introverts in the article: "They would rather sit in front of the computer than go out during the yearly college social fest." For me it isn't just a matter of "I'd rather be in front of a computer", going to a big social encounter is extremely stressful. And the idea of approaching and talking to someone I don't know fills me with terror. That isn't to say that I never go to such activities, or try to go out of my comfort zone, but it is much, much more difficult for me than even other introverts. If I were Aditya in the introductory story, telling me I should go talk to people would not be helpful, ot would just reinforce my insecurities and anxiety. What would be helpful is if someone, especially someone I at least knew a little came and said something like, "Hey, I hear you like Open Source, can I introduce you to <person>, I think they would like talking with you?" And then introduce me, and initiate the conversation. And there are also difference in how introversion manifests. One person might do fine in social interactions, but is terrified public speaking or giving presentations, and someone else is the other way around.
  • mp05 2y ago
    > And the idea of approaching and talking to someone I don't know fills me with terror. I think this is social anxiety and not to be confused with introversion.
    • thayne 2y ago
      Sure, they aren't quite the same thing, but they are related. And I used an extreme example. In general, among introverts, some have a high tolerance for social interactions, some have a very low tolerance and there are people everywhere in between. Or to use the terminology of introverts having to expend energy to interact with other people, you could say different people have different fuel efficiencies.
      • magicalhippo 2y ago
        My SO and me are both introverts, and we've talked a fair bit about it. We both enjoy social events every now and then, but we do need to recharge afterwards. The common theme for us seems to be that we expend a lot of energy when talking with others. We analyze what they say, in order to come up with thought-through responses or follow-up questions. We don't do "chit chat" as such. Before such events I dread them, because I know it will feel exhausting. Yet when I'm at them I have a good time. Afterwards however it feels almost exactly like I've been programming hard for a whole day, my brain is spent. I, unlike my SO, also has some social anxiety. I'm very likely somewhere on the spectrum, as I often feel difficulty getting social interactions right. So I spend some extra energy thinking about what the right response is to this or that, or how to interpret body language. Especially if it's a new setting or a lot of new people this can cause a lot of extra mental work. This part however has gotten better with the years, mostly because I've stopped caring so much what others think and just let myself be myself more.
• asdasdsddd 2y ago
  The whole concept of introversion is a regression in social skills which is only slightly genetic and largely environmental. The idea of burning social energy is mostly a skill issue, although it is worsened with new/weird people.
• tina_pen 2y ago
  I’m not sure if I’m an extrovert or introvert, but I struggle with two things: small talk and being stuck in problem-solving mode. Small talk: I often don’t know what to say and end up saying the wrong thing. Prolonged small talk makes my mind feel numb, like I need to retreat and recharge. So I try to avoid it if possible. Problem-solving mode: When I’m focused on solving a problem, I’m physically present but mentally somewhere else. I try to engage in the conversation but can’t fully tune in, leading to goof ups which I regret later.
• wcfrobert 2y ago
  I highly recommend the book "Quiet" by Susan Cain. It explores the trait of introversion in depth and makes many thought-provoking commentary about our cultural preference for extroversion. The poster can probably be described as an "ambivert". At the end of the day, none of these terminologies matter... These labels are just "models" of how we see ourselves. I agree with the sentiment that premature self-labeling is dangerous. Because they tend to become self-fulfilling prophecies. (e.g. I'm not good at math, I'm a nerd, I'm good at hockey, I'm INTJ, I'm an introvert).
• kstenerud 2y ago
  This is why I hate the words "introvert" and "extrovert": everyone can just assume that their personal makeup is "introvert" or "extrovert". This of course makes for easy straw man arguments to the effect of "Everyone is the same at the core" and "Extroversion is a skill" and "Everyone feels drained". If you honestly think that, then these words are meaningless. I had a similar conversation with a friend the other night about smiling, where she said "you just pull up things in your mind that naturally make you happy, and then that makes you smile naturally." Once again, not for some of us. For some of us, our natural state LOOKS very unnatural to others. Every interaction requires putting on a facade, because for some reason our natural pose, facial movements, body movements, how we talk, how we smile - ALL of it must be done in a very artificial way in order to "look natural". And THAT is why it's so draining, akin to squatting on one leg. Sure, you can train it so that you could even do it for 20 minutes instead of 4, but evenually it's just too much and you need to retreat to a safe place where you can relax your stiff muscles and behave normally for awhile (except for the small group of friends with whom you can just be normal). And if squatting on one leg were the only way you could emotionally reach those you talk to, you'd do it sparingly - only where it has the most impact.
• ternnoburn 2y ago
  This author is deeply deeply misunderstanding other humans. They are applying a "it worked for me, therefore it works for all" mentality. And worse yet, coming to the wrong conclusions. You do not need to be an extrovert at work to get ahead. Full stop. Does it help in some ways? Sure, but you can be equally successful as an introvert as long as you are able to communicate clearly when needs demand it. Plenty of excellent engineers speak to almost no one, but write excellently. I've been in this industry for decades, I'm extremely introverted (autistic), I make 750k+ a year and run large projects. I never once "went extroverted at work".
  • interludead 2y ago
    Success is about the skills, contributions and value you bring to the table, not about how much you talk
    • sweezyjeezy 2y ago
      This sounds naive. Most companies have some degree of 'politics' which is essentially people working in their own interests over the company's. This is somewhat unrelated to skills and value. Also particularly in large organisations, work is not a perfect information game - there is no easy way to assign a fair / public a "value" to people to let you compare two employees. Most people will need to sell themselves or have other people sell them to get noticed, and some degree of social bonding can go a long way with this.
      • interludead 2y ago
        I didn’t mean to dismiss the importance of advocating for yourself or building relationships. My comment was more about the foundation of success
      • red-iron-pine 2y ago
        > Most companies have some degree of 'politics' which is essentially people working in their own interests over the company's. This is somewhat unrelated to skills and value. as someone else put it: there are sides in office politics, and by choosing not to play you are picking a side by default, which is often the losing side. "you can't be neutral on a moving train"
• anon-3988 2y ago
  What I learnt from this post is that no one else is going to wait for you. If you are introverted, doesn't speak up, doesn't volunteer for anything; why are you surprised that you are not growing?
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• riversflow 2y ago
  It’s pretty shitty of you to not credit the creator of your image like they ask in their bio. > https://unsplash.com/@lighttouchedphotography https://unsplash.com/@lighttouchedphotography > https://unsplash.com/photos/brown-wooden-bench-PWxcv9hKOQc https://unsplash.com/photos/brown-wooden-bench-PWxcv9hKOQc
• xlii 2y ago
  I don’t find article interesting at all. I agree with others that it’s full of gaps and „sound advice”. Subject is interesting though and I, as person that naturally is introvert I can attest that avoidance doesn’t help. Negative effects doesn’t come suddenly, but after working remotely for 15+ years and mentoring many in similar situation I am sure that sooner or later bliss of solitude develops into non fun, hard to fix conditions. But then what author describes at start isn’t an introvert/extrovert/shy or anxious person. It’s an obstructionist, a naysayer. Someone who always have an argument for not doing something. I avoid such people and either remove from or leave teams where it’s impossible. Maybe they have reasons for being bad apples, but that’s not my job to fix it.
• jeffrallen 2y ago
  This is a profound misunderstanding of introversion. An introvert may choose to develop and use the skills of social connection that come naturally to an extrovert. But at what cost? If the situation demands extroverted behavior, then do it, fine. But the introvert pays a cost to recharge and come back to whatever equilibrium is normal for them. If the cost/benefit does not work out, an introvert can and should make the choice to exhibit introverted behaviors. Being an introvert who is capable of extroverted behaviors, I always felt confused about the question, "Are you an introvert or an extrovert?" It became clear to me when I read an explanation that went like this: After a dinner party where you meet some new people are you left energized or exhausted? If you're exhausted it is because you're an introvert.
  • cdrini 2y ago
    My issue is it just so greatly depends. Certain parties, if I have some sort of pressure on me, I leave tired. Other parties, I leave happy and contented. I might even be tired, but overall happy! When I'm going to a party, I might feel dread, or I might feel exhilarated! And that rarely has an impact on how I feel after the party/gathering. That's largely why I think the introvert/extrovert theory is not super accurate as a theory. In my experience, my energy after a party is not a constant that depends only on my personality. It depends almost entirely on external factors -- what my day was like, where my head is, who I'm meeting, what they're like, what we're doing, etc. And: I can often place myself in a state of mind that makes me more or less amenable to a social gathering, and helps me enjoy it more; which will generally make me feel less tired/more satisfied when I leave.
• megamix 2y ago
  Screw this. Guess my type.
• riffraff 2y ago
  > The second challenge is the misconception that communication should be natural and effortless. While the reality is, it takes effort to communicate and drains energy for everyone. Yeah, no. It's 100% effortless for me to communicate with people I'm familiar with, and a massive effort to talk to people I don't know or are mere acquaintances. For my wife it is not only effortless but a massive energy boost to interact with a person whether they know them or not. I think the author says some right things but vastly over generalizes.
• interludead 2y ago
  I think it's all about context and intention. We should embrace growth, not labels, and recognize the beauty in both collaboration and quiet connection
• Izkata 2y ago
  I'm seeing a fundamental misunderstanding in both the article and a lot of the comments here, that to me seems closely related to the "some people have no inner voice" / "some people can't visualize things" findings: People making the assumption that how you act defines whether you're an introvert or an extrovert because only the external expression exists, not the internal state. And so all their examples reveal they think introvert/extrovert refer to how social a person is in the moment, instead of what it actually is - a measure of how draining (or not) social interactions are. You really can't tell if someone is an introvert or extrovert in one instance in a setting, only in what happens later - it's totally possible to be a social introvert, for example, it just means you need alone time later to recharge before you can go again. When not given a chance to recharge it can come off in various ways depending on the person - often people describe it as getting tired, I've also seen snippiness, and I tend to get a headache.
• entropyneur 2y ago
  I'm not convinced introverts and extroverts even exist. All people have a need for company and a need for solitude. Depending on how well each of these needs is satisfied you may feel one or the other way. Most of the time I see people describe themselves as introverts they are describing shyness or social anxiety.
• Koshcheiushko 2y ago
  I get the message of this article. I feel like someone wrote it for me. Thanks
• HellDunkel 2y ago
  “Hey man, what’s up? Why don’t you approach and talk to a few here? They are friendly, you know. You like Open Source, so maybe talk to that guy (pointing to a senior of mine) and ask him how he got started.”. A very patronizing attempt at connecting people…
• vasco 2y ago
  Most negative self labels have this property, not just introversion. I know people that say "they are always late haha", people that say "they aren't good at math", people that say "they don't like art" and many others, and they just serve to hold you back. In almost every time I hear this, I just hear "I decided I don't want to be or do this". And even if you were truly bad at something that is expected by society, thinking of yourself as bad at it won't really help much. It's much more useful to just recognize your skill level for what it is and just understand that everything improves the more you try to do it better.
  • knorker 2y ago
    Not sure I would say introversion is a negative self label. > people that say "they are always late haha" No, that just means "I don't respect other people or their time, haha". > people that say "they aren't good at math" There are people who say it as an excuse to not try. But you know, some people are bad at math, so maybe let's have someone else on the team do that part? But what's the difference to "I don't want to do/learn math"? You don't have to. There's no guard rails on life, you can go out and eat dirt right now if that makes you happy, nobody's going to stop you. > people that say "they don't like art" I've not encountered this. Art, like any art? I think this is just not understanding just how much classifies as "art". > thinking of yourself as bad I'm not "bad" because I'm an introvert. I'm not "bad" as socializing. What makes you say introvert is some sort of insult? It's not "bad" of me to be perfectly happy not interacting with anybody for weeks. I don't actually do that, because research shows that this is bad for your long term health, but an extrovert would absolutely not like that one bit. I find it more "bad" if I'm in a waiting room or something and some stranger can't just STFU for 30 minutes while we're waiting. It says more about you than about introverts that you seem so hostile to it/them.
    • vasco 2y ago
      It is funny that you reply to a diatribe about not attaching yourself to labels to come across as very defensive of the label you've given yourself. My whole point is we're not anything, you're not an introvert is my point.
• kidneystereotyp 2y ago
  when will our benevolent overlords drop mind reading tech qualitative psychology is so exhausting after a point
• Tainnor 2y ago
  This article mixes up a bunch of different things. Being a good communicator doesn't mean you have to be an "extrovert at work". There are many different styles of communication. I tend to be the guy who prefers async communication, will write explanatory comments on my own PRs, documents the WIP state on my tickets (especially before weekends or vacations etc.). Others are the kinds of people that'll happily go over a PR in a call. You just have to find modes of working that sort of work for everyone.
• andhuman 2y ago
  I’m not good with words, but I’m good at thinking. That leads me to listen more than I talk during gatherings. To listen is to concentrate, doubly so for crowded events. You need to think about what the person is saying, and you need to filter out the noise around you. No, try to talk instead of listen and see how that feels. Change the equation. Let others come up with good responses to your ramblings for once. Of course, this can feel a bit egotistic. The other way around it is to stop caring that much what the other person is saying. We're all here talking shit. At the end of the day, what matters is if you were seen, if the other person felt seen and validated. That's what's great about talking to another person. You got seen by an animal that can understand you the most: humans.
• solatic 2y ago
  I really wish people could ditch the "introvert vs. extrovert" framing. As a label, it is not helpful for anyone's personal growth. People think salespeople are some kind of natural "extrovert". I hate to break it to you, but cold calling is draining for everyone. Salespeople may get particularly good at reducing the emotional expenditure involved in making cold calls, to be able to making a lot of them for long periods, but it is fundamentally a practice where one expends energy out into the world and gets absolutely nothing in return. I promise you, any salesperson making cold calls with no "nibbles on the line" eventually begins to doubt themselves and looks to make an exit. This is also why online dating is so draining for so many people, despite applications not inducing any "social interaction" like actual conversation - if you invest emotional energy into something that does not return emotional energy to you, then you will drain yourself if you are not careful. On the other end of the spectrum, there are specific, individual people in our lives who fill us with energy and joy, who we love to spend time with. These are people we "vibe" with, who are on our wavelength, so to speak. When you have someone, maybe even more than one, such person in your life, I doubt you would like to spend less time with them. Social skills are about finding more people who give you energy and resisting people who drain your energy. Finding more people who give you energy is, yes, a cold-calling skill, one where you take the risk of investing, from time to time, a small and limited amount of energy in the universe in the hope of finding a social energy return. But it is also about resisting people who drain your energy. Sometimes we need to interact with people in our families or at work who we can't just cut out of our lives, for one reason or another, who drain us. One can hardly be faulted for not having the energy, at the end of the day, to go network at some social function when they're already drained. But it is also that person's responsibility to learn to manage their emotional energy so that they will have some for the cold-calling that is necessary to find the people we vibe with. You do not need to vibe with everyone, and framing people with really good cold-calling skills as "extroverts" avoids the fact that such people do not actually vibe with everyone, they are just better at both the cold-calling skills involved as well as managing their emotional energy levels.
• gardenhedge 2y ago
  The author misses the mark completely with this post. I not sure if they even know what introvert means. I recommend the book Quiet.
• andycowley 2y ago
  Wow. This is an incredibly insular, and empathy devoid take. The author's binary assumption that introversion and introversion are choices are incredible. Go and do some research on neurodivergence, and then go and have a think about how harmful this advice is. The emotional toll that it must have taken on Aditya just to be there without some grinning goon come lolloping towards him telling him just because they can do a thing anyone can do a thing must have been incredible.
  • 0xEF 2y ago
    Sadly, the grinning goon is often the reality of the situation. I grew up being treated as weird because I hated crowds and needed to rest after interacting with people. Externally, this got treated as me hating people and noisy places, which is not really true at all. I like people and when I have enough bandwidth available, I'll gladly interact with them even knowing that it will cost me some shut-down time later. There's a,"spoons" analogy for this that people seem to like, but I tend to think of it more in terms of how a computer allocates resources to process information. The "noisy" bit is really more social noise, but some environments acoustically confound me. Coffee shops, for example, where the espresso machines make those god-awful noises at random intervals, only to bounce around in some idiotic open-ceiling aesthetic that has become fashionable for reasons I do not understand, since even extroverts like to hear who they are talking to. Thankfully, I have really nice earplugs. Anyway, it was not until my 20's that I was diagnosed with Anxiety, which made things click. People that do not experience this have no clue, but I can't really blame them. The advertising and entertainment media I grew up on always displayed social interaction as healthy or some kind of key to happiness, which got pigeon-holed as "normal behavior", so who would want to be unhealthy or unhappy? You were supposed to just get out there and it would get easier with time, right? These people mean well, but again, they have no clue. But the opposite is true. One of my best friends is a textbook extrovert, constantly needing social interaction and experiencing heavy mental and emotional distress when he's alone with just himself and his thoughts for too long. I have no clue what that's like, though I possess enough empathy to understand that's how he is wired, so his needs are different than mine (he also has enough empathy to return the same understanding toward my needs). Empathy, as you imply, bridges that gap but also takes tremendous effort, hence why Othering is such a pervasive social issue.
• coolio1232 2y ago
  My case is like this: I get no anxiety talking to people, I have nothing against talking to people, and I believe I can get my point across well enough and fluently when I need to get things done. However, whenever there is a social gathering and such that I have to attend, my default, standard set of activities unless someone approaches me is to just look around look at my surroundings, get lost in my headspace while taking a walk around the place while tuning out others and greeting anyone who I happen to know. If I happen to be interested in having a conversation with someone, I will have it. But I'm simply not interested in people by default, or meeting people for the sake of it. I have never spontaneously felt any inadequacy with myself when doing this. What inadequacies are there have almost exclusively have been pointed out to me by others, much in the same way the author does with Aditya here. I just don't ever feel a need to talk or force a conversation unless others (relatives and colleagues) are pressuring me to do so. The mannerisms of the Author are what I've often heard from the management people in the companies that I've worked for and in some Linkedin posts. I'm not trying to deny at all that effective communication and networking has its benefits, but the way they talk, including the Author's article often makes me feel like they're masking an insurmountable amount of annoyance and vitriol for those who just don't want to talk. It's as if they will not accept anything other than the status quo of constant chatter and networking.
  • xandrius 2y ago
    I'd imagine the keyword is "have to attend". If you truly have no choice then who's to blame you but if you decide to show up to a party and then proceed to walk around and look at the furniture all night then maybe you could have put a minimum amount of effort to engage with others who could have stayed at home that day? But if you are somewhere to listen to some nice talks and then they force you to "network" then I'd say it's totally ok to sit it out and avoid anything unwanted.
• yapyap 2y ago
  “ Hey man, what’s up? Why don’t you approach and talk to a few here? They are friendly, you know. You like Open Source, so maybe talk to that guy (pointing to a senior of mine) and ask him how he got started “ ah yes nothing says being a party host like whispering to someone the exact words they should say like they’re a child learning to socialize. I agree with most of the other HN comments that this article, while hitting the nail on the head when talking about socialness and how that is linked to appreciation in the workplace, is not very kind to anyone who strays from this socializing. Kind of like the author got taught he had to socialize, as a rule. and feels a disdain towards people ‘breaking’ that rather unspoken social rule
• andyjohnson0 2y ago
  Interesting article because it made me [1] think. But poor article because the author's apparent lack of awareness leads them to get so much wrong. I suspect that the author is a straight-up extravert who thinks that introversion is the same as shyness (its not), and that their claim to be an "introvert in friendship" allows them to claim to be "deep" (wrong again, introversion is not a virtue and extraversion is not the same as superficiality). Basically this reads like some think piece I'd expect to see on LinkedIn. Kind of like "How to Succeed as a Senior Staff Engineer", written by a 23 year old. I wonder how the author of this piece will feel about it later in their life - perhaps as their awareness of the limits of their awareness becomes clearer. [1] I identify as an introvert
• atleastoptimal 2y ago
  I am an introvert not because I don’t like socializing with people, but rather because I can’t shake the impression that they don’t like socializing with me (and I have been proven right in this notion). In order to become more likable I’ve had to adopt an extremely perceptive and self critical mental framework to analyze every thing I could be doing wrong to annoy or offend people. It has worked, and people seem to like me more, but the mental exhaustion it induces has led to me often yearning for alone time. I wonder if introverts like me are common: those who enjoy socializing very much when they feel socially safe, but rarely feel socially safe.
  • fud101 2y ago
    oversharing, being mean or harsh, not being sympathetic, not continuing the conversation etc, those would hurt your socialising.
  • zdc1 2y ago
    I do wonder how much is extraversion vs introversion, and much are other factors like shyness/social anxiety, or as another commenter mentioned, being non-neurotypical. I feel like these discussions are full of mislabelled terms and people who may not be fully self-aware of where they sit. In social media I often see terms like "Introverted Extrovert" get thrown around when sometimes they just mean that they're an introvert who's good at masking. On the other hand, my energy level goes up in a group, but I definitely need time to warm up to new people before I can be comfortable around them.
    • HPsquared 2y ago
      I see "introverted extrovert" as a kind of frustrated extrovert who doesn't have compatible people around to socialise with so feels the need to mask and work hard to socialise with incompatible people. Which is of course tiring.
      • taskforcegemini 2y ago
        what is an introvert then? because these arguments also apply on introverts
• scotty79 2y ago
  There's also a thing called schizoid personality that about 1% of people have. Maybe "proud introverts" of this article are mostly that. The name schizoid sounds terrible but it's basically self sufficiency and reduced need for real world human contact. This enables evaluating opportunity of each one on its merits and for people who had prior bad experiences might result in avoidance of almost all human contact. Since there's no emotional cost of that such people can be pretty shameless about it. Hence connotation of "proud" and antipathy from non-schizoid people like the author of this article. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorder https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_personality_disorde...
• HPsquared 2y ago
  I think it's 90% contextual and depends on who you happen to be with. Just like the whole "alpha male" idea, or even the economic concept of value of goods/services (subjective theory of value). People try and generalise too much to make these clunky mental models of the world and of people. With the internet it's increasingly common for a person's preferred social group to be somewhere online, and the people you meet in your daily life IRL are not of this group, they are not "your people" and it's tiring to deal with them. Even if you were to meet those people IRL the dynamics would be different IRL. The whole thing is kind of cursed.
• JackMorgan 2y ago
  Some amount of social anxiety has to be a pre-modern survival trait. Strangers from another tribe or clan were often extremely dangerous. Even travel used to be fraught with bandits and highway robbery. Many modern activities will put someone in close proximity to lots of strangers. Airports, public transit, busy streets, college parties, even big grocery stores all have lots of strangers. A person who doesn't want to be surrounded by strangers is probably feeling an ancient survival instinct. Now, if that feeling prevents them from visiting family, living a happy life, or accomplishing their goals, it's a problem. But I don't think feeling uneasy in a location filled with strangers is inherently unhealthy. Likewise introversion isn't a bad thing. Some people would just prefer to be alone, and that's okay. Maybe it's a muscle they could strengthen, but I've known enough introverted folks who constantly practice social skills but never increase their inbuilt number of "social hours". They love people, love entertaining and meeting people, but as soon as that number is hit they go off into their room and don't come out for a few days. I don't think this is an issue, they've got a fixed amount of social energy and that's that.
  • jl6 2y ago
    It’s a modern survival trait too, particularly for women, from whom we are all descended.
    • blueflow 2y ago
      This is repeated often, but recently i found out that men lead all categories (except sexual assault and domestic violence) of being the victims of crime. You are safer if you are a woman.
      • jl6 2y ago
        That’s a pretty big exception. And do your stats control for risk-taking behavior, which is higher in men? [0] For example, do we see a higher rate of violent crime against men because that rate includes gang violence and men are much more likely to be involved in gangs than women? Or because it includes car theft, when car ownership is higher amongst men than women? Or because men are more likely to be employed outside the home where crime is more likely? None of this helps women who have to decide whether to cross the street to avoid a group coming towards them. The GP point about a form of social anxiety being a survival instinct is absolutely plausible. [0] https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/16315-men-are-more-likely-to-commit-violent-crimes.-why-is-this-so-and-how-do-we-change-it%3F https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/16315-men-are-more-...
• revskill 2y ago
  No. It is not extrovert at work, it is about raising awareness to others about your concerns.
• Micral8022 2y ago
  300+ comments so far, and no mention of the elephant in the Valley : Asperger and it's 666 shades of narcissism. I'm "on the spectrum", but conscious that narcissism in the bane of humankind. Halas, 8 of the 10 richest American individuals disagree with me, and the #1 just got in power ;-)
• mgh2 2y ago
  “The odds are good, but the goods are odd” - why is SV full of wierdos? Part of the answer lies in social isolation. Whether you like it or not and regardless of personality, humans are social creatures. This was evident from covid. To avoid interacting with others is not only a disservice to your own growth but also to society. It is much easier to live in your own world then go out there and learn - books and the web are not substitutes. You see this effect on today’s generation who rely on internet bubbles, brainwashing and biases to inform their thinking, hardly having critical skills (ex: woke). You can only blame the system (big tech) to a certain extent, but the individual should ultimately take responsibility. Being born (disadvantaged) an introvert is no excuse as being born a foreigner (ex: H1Bs) or a sinner, you still have to do your best in becoming a better version of yourself.
  • blueflow 2y ago
    Implied in this: That learning about other people will make you like them more and not lead to increased wishes for isolation.
    • mgh2 2y ago
      Sure people are not the best creatures, but it is part of the painful learning curve
• shreddit 2y ago
  When you see me at social gatherings you would either label me as an introvert or an extrovert. It totally depends on the people i am around. Not like whether i know the people or not (i will happily socialize with strangers on the right topic), but rather what type of people and what the current topic is. I deeply dislike small talk, or people i know (or at least i think) don’t share any common interests with me. That’s why i am quite the talkative person at work but mostly quiet (and uninterested) in private.
• throw4847285 2y ago
  The amount of folk psychology in both that article and this thread is disappointing but expected. Introversion has become a fuzzy and basically useless term that gets folded into a number of unrelated concepts: neuroticism, openness to experience, and agreeableness. I think that people get attached to the introvert/extravert division because it's the most clearly defined by social relations. It takes less introspection to be able to look at social group and define one's self relative to one's peers in terms of how much others seem to enjoy spending time in shared company compared to one's self. The reality is that somebody might crave a lot of human contact but be paralyzed by social anxiety (that's me). Or maybe they don't want to leave their comfort zone but once out there can engage in long deep conversations with others, even strangers. We also mix into that stew social lubricants like alcohol, drugs, and board games that can warp a social situation and reward different social behaviors. Ultimately, I think people understand a lot less about themselves than they realize (and I include myself in that). We latch onto the simplest categories, and we especially love categories that depict us as victims of societal circumstance, or somehow superior to the people around us. The reality is that if you pick one dimension of psychological categorization like a diagnosis or a trait like introversion, and then look at all the people who share that, I think they share less in common than they might assume.
• mkl95 2y ago
  Being open with a select group of collaborators has gained me above average praise, promotions, etc. over the years. You don't need to be an extrovert to be an average or slightly above average engineer, you just have to pick your battles appropriately and understand the problems you are solving. OP is optimizing for a rat race that most people don't care about.
  • red-iron-pine 2y ago
    you don't have to play the game all of the time, just be social with the right people in the right places.
• FuriouslyAdrift 2y ago
  If I spend a lot of time socializing in a group of people I do not closely know, I will experience intense depression and loss of energy for about a day or so. That's introversion. I love being around people but it sucks the life out of me. I get energized through working on projects and reading. Inherently private pursuits.
• andyjohnson0 2y ago
  My impression is that (a) extraverts and introverts both have some mutual incomprehension, but that (b) this is greater in extraverts. Am I just projecting my own introvert bias onto (b) here? Or is there something structural that is responsible for this? Or am i completely wrong about (a)? Thoughts?
• hidelooktropic 2y ago
  I know the author is well meaning, but for some part of the population, this is just more of the same hurtful invalidation we've received our entire lives. Being neurodivergent involves others constantly encouraging us to set ourselves up for failure. They don't see the exhaustion so they expect us to push through. They don't have our limits so they expect us to overcome ours. They have will power to get them what we don't have so they think we aren't using ours. There's nothing in here that hasn't occurred to me before. And it's not necessarily that the conclusions are incorrect, but that for some people they come at an extreme cost to mental health and are not truly sustainable. I would love to hear people voicing acceptance instead of more of the same of telling us that we should try harder when we're already trying to the point of constant overwhelm.
• hinkley 2y ago
  Nothing I love more than being lectured by neurotypicals.
• _yb2s 2y ago
  This author does not seem to understand extroversion vs introversion - it relates entirely to your inner experience not your behaviors, and cannot be changed. An introvert can enjoy and be good at social interaction, and use it effectively at work- but they will still be an introvert, and as such will need to ration the energy social interaction uses. This is not “being an extrovert.” Many very successful people that are skilled at networking and social interaction are introverted. I like to point out Captain Picard from Star Trek as an (obviously fictional but quite realistic) character that is introverted, yet renown for social and negotiation skills. When people talk about “becoming extroverted” they usually mean developing social skills, overcoming social anxiety, and/or overcoming antisocial attitudes. All of those things are completely orthogonal to introversion.
• yowayb 2y ago
  I read about a quiet little girl at school that turned out to know all the other kids (eg preferences) better than any other kid. The intro/extro dichotomy has been taken far in mainstream writing, and I think the author is addressing people that have gone too far in the introvert direction, or rather made it a permanent part of their personality. Also, for those of you who are afraid of being judged when speaking, start by convincing yourself that other people have something interesting to teach you, then ask questions.
• lazylizard 2y ago
  it is work. i have to think very hard. to talk strangers. not least i prefer to write. and so its a choice.
• essnine 2y ago
  This whole piece reeks a little bit of a certain sort of spite - forgive me for a misjudgement if I've made one, but it's almost like the author took that one person's reluctance to participate as a personal affront and treated the "I am not an extrovert" line as a flimsy excuse from someone with an ego problem. It's essentially just a setup to frame introversion as a social problem of some sort and very gently implies that introverted folks have a superiority complex about it. I can't take the whole thing seriously because it's such an odd case to make - what is the end goal? To address anyone who may experience social anxiety or just a reluctance to join in a completely new social situation, and say, "No, whatever you might have going on in your head is completely untrue, dude, trust me"? I mean, there's not a morsel of objectivity or grace anywhere in the whole thing, just an admonishment for people who aren't wired the same way the author is. The feeling I get here is essentially that the author wanted to feel like they're in the right about how they see a social event should go, decided to write it up in a way that sounds very serious and selfless and in the best interest of all the introverts out there, and share it so that they... maybe get a good debate going? I don't know. When it comes to individual behavior in group settings, it's hard to really say where a particular person may be coming from in terms of how they perceive psychological safety and comfort, or if they are misjudging their decision to participate for a reason that has nothing to do with the situation itself. People may participate in different ways, people may drop off or leave for different reasons. Which is fine, it's part of the social contract we have with each other. It might hurt sometimes, but it's a part of the thing. And there are already quite a few workarounds for this sort of thing too? The whole notion of plus-ones in social affairs is partly so that you're not left feeling isolated once the event is rolling. Large organizations have onboarding buddies and pair work sessions to get folks up to speed. Some clubs have chaperones or one-on-one buddies for new joiners. These are all patterns that exist. There's no evidence of any of this in the anecdote or the rest of the write-up. And again, this is subjective, but to me it all reads like it's dripping with condescension. If "introversion is not an excuse, you need to work on it for your own good, trust me because I know better and have read a few books" is the takeaway here, then yeesh, maybe the author hasn't given the matter of introversion or extraversion any real thought beyond "phew, I'm so glad I know better because I'm doing so good" and "I wish those introverts tried harder instead of sitting around thinking they know better".
• turnsout 2y ago
  Personally I reject this false dichotomy. If you identify as an introvert or extrovert, ask yourself if the label is helping you move toward the person you want to be. If it’s not, then you can choose to drop the label.