8 ms·
Introversion is not the opposite of extroversion
- jokoon 13y agointroversion/extraversion is a spectrum, meaning you're not either introvert or extrovert, you're both, only you're more extrovert or more introvert. Even introverts can have a hard time not seeing anybody.
- JeffJenkins 13y agoIntroversion and extroversion are obviously a spectrum. The reason that having that as an axis when discussing personalities rather than two different axes because people do tend to fall somewhere on the spectrum and many of the traits are opposites. Knowing that someone is, say, "a little introverted" is a decent heuristic to use when describing someone's personality. I wonder of the author has been Myers Briggs stuff where people are often slotted as one or the other (although a good assessment will still show where on each axis someone is)
- iand 13y agoI disagree and the article is based on a category error. The words introvert and extrovert are defined to be classifications of people not particular traits exhibited by those people. extrovert: an outgoing, socially confident person introvert: a shy, reticent person They are defined in terms of particular traits: shyness: the quality or state of being shy confidence: the feeling or belief that one can have faith in or rely on someone or something. People can have differing degrees of each trait and differ in how they exhibit those in different social situations. However, by definition, if a person is predominantly shy and reticent in most social situations then we're justified in calling them an introvert.
- jt2190 13y ago> ... if a person is predominantly shy and reticent in > most social situations then we're justified in calling > them an introvert. Sure, just understand that you're using the colloquial definition of "introvert" (a synonym for "shy") and not the technical definition, as developed for the Meyers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator: "People who prefer extraversion draw energy from action: they tend to act, then reflect, then act further. If they are inactive, their motivation tends to decline. To rebuild their energy, extraverts need breaks from time spent in reflection. Conversely, those who prefer introversion "expend" energy through action: they prefer to reflect, then act, then reflect again. To rebuild their energy, introverts need quiet time alone, away from activity." [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator#Attitudes:_extraversion.2Fintroversion_.28E.2FI.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator#Att...
- analog31 13y agoHow does one identify a definition as technical?
- geetee 13y agoAwesome, by pointing out that the parent comment possibly intended to say "actual" instead of "technical," you've debunked his entire argument. Congratulations, you win the game.
- shawnz 13y agoHow do you identify a definition as being "actual"? Why are the Myers-briggs authors the authority on introversion? Many people consider the MBTI to be bunk science, and the term "introvert" has been around for much longer than the MBTI. EDIT: Also, why does there have to be just one definition anyway?
- geetee 13y agoWords have meaning. You're welcome to make new ones.
- fwanicka 13y agoI always thought of it as an OR, because my definition of each differs from the author's. My definitions: Introverts are drained by social activity. Extroverts are energized by social activity. Your type then drives your behavior, if you are near one of the ends of the spectrum. Extroverts will tend to be more outgoing because it is what energizes them. Introverts will tend to be less so, because they are drained by social activity and need time to recharge with solitary activities.
- analog31 13y agoIn my view, the enjoyment of human interaction is not inconsistent with the enjoyment of solitary activities, even if you can't do both at the same time. A programmer doesn't have to be an introvert. I know several good programmers, including myself, who are quite outgoing. What's more, "forcing" me to choose sides, and then using it for some sort of employment decision, will result in a mistake. Maybe there should be two scales, where it's more credible that there are actual opposites: 1. Enjoys group activity, or doesn't. 2. Enjoys activities involving concentration, or doesn't.
- derefr 13y agoThose aren't the scales of introversion/extroversion at all, as far as I know. Introverts can enjoy group activity--they just have a capacity for it, that runs down as they use it, and then they tire of group activity (even if they were enjoying it) and must recharge by being alone. Extroverts can enjoy solitary activity--and they just have a capacity for it, that runs down as they use it, and then they tire of solitary activity (even if they were enjoying it) and must recharge by doing something in a group. Everything about the difference in "interests" of the two groups comes from the fact that, being forced (physiologically) to spend time alone, you'll naturally develop solitary interests; and being forced (physiologically) to spend time in a group, you'll naturally develop social interests.
- onion2k 13y agoSusan Cains' book "Quiet" is a brilliant study on introversion and how introverted people interact with the world. Well worth reading if you're at all interested in the subject.
- dschiptsov 13y agoIntrovert and extrovert are outdated terms as meaningless as Freudian oral and anal types, or the word hysteria. More modern view, which should be a blend of Minsky's models of "agencies" in the brain, and neuro-anatomic findings that a brain consists of multitude of highly specialized areas (which could have its deficits) and the notion that genetic predispositions could be compensated in some extent by environmental conditioning and cognitive re-training, should suggest meaninglessness of such articles. Graphing two meaningless categories orthogonality instead of on a single line is a nice trick, and it seems like there is a new information to be read from it, but it is just a trick - replacing one vastly oversimplified generalization with seemingly more correct one, which, in fact, as meaningless as previous one.
- gk1 13y agoThey may be meaningless to you, but these words are still in active use today -- maybe not in research circles but in the general population -- and do have a specific meaning for many people. The popular use and meaning of these words does shape how people think of themselves, as the author explained. Therefore, it's still a helpful issue to address for a lot of those people.
- socksy 13y agoAgreed that is helpful to address. However, the article talks about an 'or' model or an 'and' model, completely failing to take into account the actual model that people use — that you either gain or lose energy from social interactions, what I shall term the 'bullshit' model of human interaction. This article fails to address those that believe that, but does help to remove the dichotomy for those that believe in the superficial shyness/outgoing nature of introversion vs extroversion.
- calinet6 13y agoActually I think it's quite meaningful, due to its recognition of introversion and extroversion as more of agencies which aren't mutually exclusive. Anecdotally, I identify with this much more closely than other analyses. So much so that this is a perspective altering epiphany-class insight. Really good stuff.
- minikites 13y agoThis is a great book on the subject: http://www.amazon.com/Quiet-Power-Introverts-World-Talking/dp/0307352153 http://www.amazon.com/Quiet-Power-Introverts-World-Talking/d... Introversion and extroversion have nothing to do with shyness or how outgoing you are. It has to do with where you derive energy and I disagree with the author of the linked article that introverts just need to practice social interaction. As the book points out, introversion and extroversion can be determined very early in life, she mentions a study where infants who were more reactive to stimulus turned out to be introverts and infants who were chill turned out to be extroverts: ------- “The four-month-olds who thrashed their arms like punk rockers did so not because they were extroverts in the making, but because their little bodies reacted strongly—they were “high-reactive”—to new sights, sounds, and smells,” Cain writes. “The quiet infants were silent not because they were future introverts—just the opposite—but because they had nervous systems that were unmoved by novelty.” These “high-reactive” babies grow up to be children who need a lot of time to decompress after school, need time alone to be creative and explore. They are introverts, not anti-social, Cain explains. There is a big difference. -------
- gk1 13y agoSomeone who's born small and skinny can still become strong later on. I was "the quiet kid" until I consciously worked to improve my social skills. Now when I tell people I was "the quiet kid" they laugh until they realize I'm serious.
- colanderman 13y agoQuiet != introverted. For example, I'm an introvert (need alone time) but I'm not quiet (I was the class clown).
- rodw 13y agoSpot on. Also, introverted != shy. I've known plenty of introverts who are very capable of working a room if they need to, they just prefer not to.
- minikites 13y ago
- segmondy 13y agoThere's a reason we have the word "Ambivert" Introversion and extroversion are not always the opposite of others, but in extreme situations can be. Someone that is really introverted cannot be really extroverted. Imagine someone who is so quiet that they can panic attacks in group/public, how in the world can they be an extrovert?
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- beobab 13y agoGood use of the word "Dolourous". Not heard it before, and had to look it up. :)
- petercooper 13y agoThe same issue occurs in politics. "Right" and "left" as generic terms are pretty useless. I could be left wing when it comes to state welfare or healthcare but right wing when it comes to personal taxation.
- 1angryhacker 13y agoHow about we just stop categorising people.
- LukeWalsh 13y agoI think that was the purpose of the article, even more so that we would stop categorizing ourselves because in doing so we impose psychological limits.
- logfromblammo 13y agoI would prefer to stop categorizing myself for the convenience of other people. Some people will pigeonhole you whether you like it or not, so there's no point in worrying about whether they are doing it correctly. Stop identifying yourself as a thing, and you may find that the label never really fit you in the first place.
- vbuterin 13y agoOne thing this article misses completely, as do many other arguments on the subject and even many posts here, is that introverts do not simply dislike or wish to reduce all social activity. The kind of social activity matters greatly. Introverted people tend to prefer spending time with one other person or in small groups, whereas extroverted people prefer larger gatherings.
- npsimons 13y agoInteresting side note on "fitness versus intelligence": hasn't it been shown repeatedly that exercise helps you think more clearly and remain more relaxed and focused? I know it does for me, and one of the biggest things I can recommend to anyone (but especially the scrawny nerds) is to exercise. It doesn't have to be an IronMan triathlon, but thirty minutes every day can help wake you up and make you much more productive.
- spodek 13y agoI hope perspectives like this are one of the main outcomes of the And model of the post -- that people don't see the skills associated with introversion as "versus" those of extroversion. So that just like you point out with fitness and intelligence, so with introversion and extroversion, so people can find solitude, focus, and meditation help them develop skills of being outgoing and gregarious. And that people can find talking, socializing, networking, and partying help them develop skills of spending time alone or with a small group of close friends.
- asdasf 13y agoYes, it is. I do not understand this mentality where people go "I know nothing about X, therefore I will assume everything people say about X is wrong, and pose an alternate hypothesis that contradicts existing evidence, and it is up to other people to call me out on my bullshit because I was not aware of the evidence". Google exists, use it.
- badman_ting 13y agoEven though I find it draining to be in social scenarios, I remain suspicious of this introvert/extrovert divide. I find it draining to be in social scenarios because I mostly don't like people. It wasn't always this way and I don't think it has anything to do with some intrinsic, immutable quality of myself. And I certainly don't think it's some special thing that others need to respect about me and so forth. That's the part that really grates for me, the implication that there is some special class of person that needs to be treated with kid gloves, and "respected" (i.e. condescended to) in certain ways. Just be honest, you want people to fuck off. I certainly do. Same thing with "flow" - if you can't do your work because of extremely minor distractions like people walking by your desk, are you actually good at it? If it takes you 12 hours to get into the zone, whose fault is that?
- goldenkey 13y agoIt's really interesting how this whole introvert/extrovert thing has gained mass validation when it's mere hogwash. Yet it requires a strong self detachment to not get sucked in by the bs banter. I don't lose energy when I'm around people I know well, because I'm comfortable. When I'm nervous, and fidgety, in strange places that aren't my comfort zone, clearly I'm going to become fatigued by the extra energy spent on biological systems that deal with anxiety. I have never adapted to strange situations very quickly because I'm somewhat haphazard to trusting the unknown. It really grates me to hear people accept their lack of social ability as a given, when the fact of the matter is, the more you throw yourself out there, and make strange conversation comfortable, the less energy it will take next time. Same goes with riding a bike, or driving a car. Get used to it, and you won't be as drained next time. Everyone starts at a different point due to upbringing and aggregate social experience. Like anything, training helps make it easier next time. This goes for sociality no different than programming.
- derefr 13y ago> if you can't do your work because of extremely minor distractions like people walking by your desk, are you actually good at it? Do you expect people who swallow swords to be able to do it when someone slaps their back every five minutes?
- beat 13y agoI'm a pretty powerful extrovert, but I need alone time on a regular basis to decompress and not be "on stage" for a bit. I have a friend with a very similar personality in this regard. Sometimes we'll get where we can be around each other, but not anyone else - so we have company, but company that gets it. My wife is an introvert. We find parties and big social activities exhausting in very different ways. Her, because it involves a lot of social interaction she doesn't want to do. Me, because I feel I must go around and charm everyone, which is actually very tiring.
- benched 13y agoGo ahead and make the axes orthogonal instead of collinear. Just don't be surprised when most actual people fall close to the axes, rather than out in the middle of the graph.
- Aardwolf 13y agoThe truth is somewhere between those two options... some correlation, some outliers.
- logfromblammo 13y agoA while ago I decided that personality metrics were just another way for some people to pretend to know someone else without actually making the effort to become familiar with them. For most people, being able to describe themselves as introverted or extroverted is at best useless and at worst detrimental. I'm not introverted. It might just seem that way to you because I don't share any of your interests and I don't care for small talk. If you see that I am alone most of the time, that may just be an indicator that the sort of people with which I enjoy socializing are relatively rare in the general population. I am generally offended by people who suggest that I learn to accomodate the social customs of the so-called "extroverts" rather than the other way around. They would have me stuck at a boring party with 10-40 people, unsuccessfully trying to avoid malicious gossip, instead of pretending to kill orc slavers on an imaginary war galley along with 3 to 5 other people for whom the real treasure to be found is friends that value you for the things that make you different. Some people will always try to categorize you. It isn't necessary to help them do it.
- summerdown2 13y agoI think one of the reasons the introvert/extrovert axis has come into prominence recently is that quiet, reserved and particularly technical people find it useful. I'm speaking mostly of my own experience here. I've been seeing a shift in the world of work in the past decade away from the idea of the specialist into the all-rounder. People would often tell me in interviews/appraisals that it didn't matter how good I was at my job, the most important thing was my ability to communicate. There's an increasing pressure to socialise everywhere - from open-plan offices and group nights to ever more frequent team meetings. The place I last worked introduced a yearly evaluation that required people to be popular across departments. One person I know was told "your work is top-rate, but other department heads haven't heard of you, so they won't vote for your bonus." The next year, he had to spend his time doing meet-and-greets rather than working on technical issues. So here it is: Mostly, I want to get my head down and solve problems. I don't mind focused meetings, but I really find forced socialisation tiring. The whole concept of introversion is a dream for me. It allows me to succinctly explain why I'd rather just get on with work. I have no idea whether it's scientifically accurate or not, but I do think that challenging it on that front is missing the point. Even if it's wrong, I'll still need a word for what it means.
- jacques_chester 13y agoMy understanding is that the intro/extra axis is supported by empirical evidence from numerous studies of personality and (increasingly) neurological studies.
- spodek 13y agoThat was my understanding too, but I haven't come across such evidence except when accompanied by yet more compelling criticism of it. I would love to learn of compelling evidence. So far I have only come across cases where someone made up a model, started using it, and people followed, same as the And model here. Anyone can make up any labels, attach behavior to them, and lo and behold, people will fall into one or the other category. Add a few years for people to get used to them and people forget the labels were made up. Add a few more years for the labels to make it into standard language so people grow up learning them and they feel like parts of nature. Penn and Teller could probably go to town on the concepts on their show. I'd love to learn something new and be shown something I missed.
- jacques_chester 13y agoFWIW, I'm not a psychologist. I only studied it for a few years. Personality theory is one of the weakest branches on the tree of psychology because of its historical roots and because of the difficulty of applying the full apparatus of science. There is no universal consensus for personality theories as there is about, for example, behavioural conditioning. Not even close. My personality textbook was very, very thick and nobody mentioned in it agreed with anybody else. The strongest results in personality work so far come from aggregating work from different existing models; that's how the Five Factor Model (including the Intro/Extra axis) was developed. The strength of the FFM is that it comes from multiple lines of evidence (lexical studies and factor analysis of existing personality tests regardless of underlying theoretical model). That is: it arose from what appears in the data, not from what appears to fit particular theories of personality. Indeed it finds support from work done on theories that flatly contradict it. Put another way, the FFM finds widespread support because it is merely descriptive. Eventually, as I say, more work from the neuro direction will begin to tease out what, if any, correlations can be found with underlying neurophysiology. A quick squiz at Wikipedia shows some early fMRI studies with different brain activation patterns for folk identified as extra/introverted.
- edem 13y agoThis And model makes sense. I don't have an Or model (or any other model) but I've seen the Or models represented as in your essay. In fact I had the feeling for years that I have a lot of introvert/extrovert traits and it did not make sense to put myself on the either side of the line.