Introvert\Extrovert is pop psychology nonsense.
Introvert\Extrovert is pop psychology nonsense.
The idea that human personalities and behaviors can be sorted into two simplistic piles or even a scale between two piles is just silly.
There's no predictive value to it- you can't objectively classify\quantify people's 'vertion' and then predict behaviors or outcomes based on those classifications, not even statistically from a large sample set because it's meaninglessly subjective.
People are complex. Someone might appear 'introverted' in a social situation they're unfamiliar with, but in a different setting my appear 'extroverted' because they're very comfortable.
And some will say "social interactions give energy to extro and take it from intro" but what the hell does 'energy' mean in that context anyway? If I go to a small party with close friends all talking about sci-fi I'll enjoy myself all night and feel refreshed, but I'd be exhausted after 30 minutes at a rave and need a week to recover.
And do people migrate between intro-extro throughout their life? In my 20's I felt compelled to meet and experience new people all the time but now in my mid-40's I don't really care and tend to stick to the people I know. Does that mean I turned more introverted at some point? That's why even as a personality scale it's nonsense.
It's all just Myers-Briggs for dummies, which is already for dummies.
The only way it makes sense is as a description of immediate behavior, not of a personality. Someone may be 'behaving in an introverted way' but saying that makes them an 'introvert' is nonsense because they may go somewhere else and behave in an extroverted way an hour later.
An extrovert trying to understand my people. Challenge Level: Impossible
I have to go get some alone time now just to recover from this post.
That's especially funny because I almost added "This post will probably mostly piss off people who identify as extroverts" because those are usually the ones I hear evangelizing the whole concept of introverts\extroverts.
But I guess it turns out the issue is that people have picked one or the other as part of their identity. And telling people the basis for any part their chosen identity is invalid is never going to go over well.
I enjoy spending time by myself more than I enjoy spending time with other people. Social situations are draining and I avoid them when I can. If I make plans with someone and they have to cancel, it's usually a relief for me. If that doesn't make me an introvert I don't know what else to tell you.
Social situations are draining and I avoid them when I can. If I make plans with someone and they have to cancel, it’s usually a relief for me.
I'd say that's generally true for me too but I've also enjoyed seeing and spending time with old friends AND been relieved when I get to go be alone again. I think that duality is present in everyone and I find it hard to believe anyone has literally never enjoyed the company of another person or 'gained energy' from an interaction.
Also I have to wonder how much age has to do with it. I might have said I was an 'introvert' as a teen and early 20's and then found spaces and people that helped me enjoy some parts of social interactions, then later found I'm just slowing down and I go out of my way to spend more time alone. So did I go introvert-extrovert-introvert again or was I always a complex mixture of internal states and behaviors like everyone else is?
I think you're conflagrating what introvertion/extrovertion are in and of themselves with how they are described and used in the Myers-Briggs personality scale. Myers-Briggs is pop psychology. Being introverted or extroverted are just 1 aspect of behavior (do you lose or gain energy when socializing) and isn't used as a measure of other personality traits someone might have anywhere other than that test.
It's really not about enjoying or not enjoying social interactions. It's about your default state. So when I finish work I think "finally some time to spend by myself: learning, reading, gaming, whatever". When my extrovert friend finishes work they think "finally I can meet with my friends". I love my friends and I enjoy spending time with them but I do it like once a week and I would be exhausted if I had to spend every evening with them. My extrovert friend rarely spends evening without any company and if they do they will often call someone because not interacting with anyone is just weird to them.
Bullshit.
One bit of research discovered that introverts prefer quiet, so as to concentrate on work, whereas extraverts preferred music, to distract them from the work they were doing.
As Nick Yee, if I remember his name right, pointed out in one of his talks on yt, look up Gamer Motivations GDC ( I think it was GDC ), but he did research into gamer motivations, and in one of his talks he shows us the difference between the fake Myers-Briggs 2-bell-curves ( 1 bell-curve for introverts, another for extraverts ), then he explains that all the research has shown there's really only 1 bell-curve, so "ambivert" is an artifact of the fake science of the false-dichotomy that Myers-Briggs pushes.
I'm hard-line introvert: I'd rather be executed honestly, than have to endure what extraverts want.
Jung was right, in that it's significant, but it isn't what Myers-Briggs pretends it is.
It is a fundamental thing, where introverts are damaged by social-interaction amounts that feed extraverts.
I can't remember who it was who explained that you can take a stuffed-animal with a bell on it, or something, & jiggle it above a baby, & some babies will, after awhile, become agitated/crying/freaking-out/etc...
Those are statistically-likely to be introverts: you crossed their threshold.
The ones who like the endless-stimulation? extraverts.
Finding ANY predictor which works from babies to entire-lives, & has statistical-significance, is important evidence.
That may have been in Nick Yee's video, too, or some other, I've no idea ( been studying mind for decades: it's all a mishmosh in my memory, now )
Anyways, cheers, eh?
_ /\ _
No, it's not bullshit, it's science illiterate pop psychology.
Introversion and extroversion are things. "Introverts" and "extroverts" are reductive simplifications. Introversion and extroversion are nowhere near as binary as sexuality, and sexuality is still an extremely wide spectrum.
You've probably experienced fear at some point in your life. Would it make sense — for that reason alone — to label you a coward?
I'm hard-line introvert
Yet you, by your own choice, wrote and posted a comment on a public forum. Purposefully communicated your thoughts to the extraneous world. So you're not a "real introvert", clesrly. ^/s
God I'm tired of people pretending people have fundamental differences to the point of being different things, instead of understanding traits can be high or low and different in different contexts and that reductive simple labels only make things worse.
You've probably experienced fear at some point in your life. Would it make sense — for that reason alone — to label you a coward?
lolwut
No, if he cowered to everything ever, then he would be a coward. Just like he's an introvert if he gets drained from too much intense socialization, ever.
I think you need to severely adjust your knowledge of concepts and confidence in said knowledge.
I think the absolute best way I've heard it described is simply: Extroverts get charged up around people, while introverts lose energy around people and need some time by themselves to recharge their batteries before socializing again.
The labels are really a tool to help you understand yourself.
Exactly, as labels are meant to be. Use them if they suit you, don't bother if it's not for you.
I love your name tag!
lol thanks MrPoopyButthole!
And some will say “social interactions give energy to extro and take it from intro” but what the hell does ‘energy’ mean in that context anyway?
Energy ,in this context, would be defined of a mix of ideas:
- enjoyment
- engagement
- interest
- patience
Granted, its a small sample, but you describe two different social interactions and from that, I can tell you're an extrovert.
If I go to a small party with close friends all talking about sci-fi I’ll enjoy myself all night and feel refreshed, but I’d be exhausted after 30 minutes at a rave and need a week to recover.
...and...
In my 20’s I felt compelled to meet and experience new people all the time but now in my mid-40’s I don’t really care and tend to stick to the people I know.
In both examples you are comparing two different types of interact with different groups of people. What you're not comparing is an interaction with people on one hand vs being alone by yourself on the other.
Let me ask you about how you like to spend your time alone. How would you feel if you went two weeks without every interacting with another human being besides perhaps anonymous non-personal point-of-sale transactions where you buy groceries? No phone calls with family, no meals or drinks with friends. When you think about this does it fill you with a fear of isolation, or a comfort of ease? My guess for you is the former.
This doesn't mean that all introverts want to be alone, but rather they ration how much interaction with other humans they have to the capacity they can do so without negatively affecting their sense of self or mood.
I can tell you’re an extrovert.
Which is hilarious because in person most people describe me as an introvert. At this point I'm closer to shut-in than anything resembling an extrovert.
But that's the issue- you're demonstrating pretty clearly that the intro-extro thing makes people feel they can make categorical judgements of a person from even a casual self-description of their behavior.
Let me ask you about how you like to spend your time alone. How would you feel if you went two weeks without every interacting with another human being besides perhaps anonymous non-personal point-of-sale transactions where you buy groceries? No phone calls with family, no meals or drinks with friends. When you think about this does it fill you with a fear of isolation, or a comfort of ease?
I spend almost all of my time outside of work alone. And I work with 3 other dudes in an office where only 1-2 is there on any given day and have about 3 conversations a week that aren't work related. I do a little woodworking, lot of gardening, watch too much streaming, and I love cooking for myself and eating everything before it even makes it on a plate. Besides some health issues I'd say my life is pretty blissful like this.
In my 20's I was an active musician in the local scene and that was the core of my social life. Maybe that's the breakdown because I had no problem being 'social' in musical contexts because that was my world, I'd kind of helped build it so it was a 'social cocoon' that only people that I had a connection to through music with could even enter. I did like being on stage but that's a different animal- looks like you're in a crowd but you're really very separate from it- at a good venue at least. And I used the small party with sci-fi friends as a casual example because I'd had positive experiences of that nature, but haven't gone to any kind of 'party' in over a decade.
But I think your response explains why this is such an unpopular opinion. For whatever reason a lot of people have adopted introvert\extrovert as a part of their identity and here I am telling them that it's invalid because it's nonsense. That's a bit like telling someone their religion is invalid so no surprise people will push back against challenges.
First, nearly all of your statements are posing the question of: "is someone an introvert or extrovert" as a binary condition. You are X or you are Y. You made one statement I saw where you allow for a spectrum, but all responses to responses appear to only recognize a binary condition.
I do believe its a spectrum, but when someone says "I'm an introvert" its shorthand for "On the spectrum of intro- or extro- version, I fall so far on the introversion side, that I would consider, and my behavior for myself, matches introversion". That whole statement would be a mouthful.
But that’s the issue- you’re demonstrating pretty clearly that the intro-extro thing makes people feel they can make categorical judgements of a person from even a casual self-description of their behavior.
You gave two small examples of your behavior/patterns, both falling in one way. I even called this out that it was a small sample. I think you put too much weight in my categorizing you from those two. I wasn't making a clinical diagnosis. If you want to use this as a whole point that introversion and extroversion aren't a thing, you're welcome to, but I think you'd be offbase.
But I think your response explains why this is such an unpopular opinion. For whatever reason a lot of people have adopted introvert\extrovert as a part of their identity
Introversion is not part my identity. Its a rational system that helps me cope with and navigate my personal limits, strengths and failings. If you have another system that fits better to help me understand myself I can apply introspectively, I'm open to it.
and here I am telling them that it’s invalid because it’s nonsense.
Okay, I'll bite. If its nonsense, as an example tell me why I'm totally mentally exhausted after spending 60 minutes presenting to a large group of people. Why is it some people instead thrive on that same 60 minute large group presentation and come out energized and wanting more?
That’s a bit like telling someone their religion is invalid so no surprise people will push back against challenges.
Not quite. A religion is a system of explanations about the world, life, and lifestyle. I assume you wouldn't just say "its wrong" you'd point out scientific answers to those same questions.
So far on our intro/extroversion topic, you're just saying its non-existent, offering no other explanation for the observed behaviors and outcomes. Here's your chance to fill in that second half. Please explain your version of the alternative.
classification is needed for any discussion about anything. sure. we are all individuals and no two are exactly alike. There are reasons though we have clicks and clubs and groups and conventions. extrovert/introvert is just a classification. if you really want to get annoyed go look at disc which is basically introvert/extrovert combined with alpha/beta :)
My point is that it's only useful as a classification of behavior, not personality or 'what kind of person you are'. It's verb not a noun kind of thing.
DISC... yeah that looks like Myers-Briggs corporate astrology stuff. Fortunately I don't hear a lot of people spitting out their DISC or MB ratings so I only get annoyed by that whenever HR gets a wild hare about it.
DISC is just to understand different methods of communicating and how to engage with them or how to avoid miscommunication.
This is loosely related to the classification of any customer of a service or product into categories of what they want to get out it and how to cater to them.
If you aren't a practiticing psychology researcher, this whole post is pop psychology nonsense. Might as well ask random strangers about dark matter, it's just as valuable an opinion.
Good thing I didn't try to post this in 'Valuable Opinions' then ;)
But by all means please find me a reputable, practicing psychologist that will explain how to objectively apply introvert\extrovert labels and what value that has for anything.
Like the one I see regularly? Or every single one I've seen before them, or the psychology researchers from the study I was in, or my friends in the field, or the hundreds of scientific articles deliniating exactly that and the physiology and psychology behind it? You actually have to look for something before you publicly declare it's not there.
https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=introversion+and+extraversion
I just find the labels as a useful tool. Descriptive, not prescriptive.
They get across a lot with one word- you get antsy if you get around people too much, of you get antsy if you stay in too much.
I think you're taking this personally for some reason and you may need to reconsider the media and/or company you're paying attention to if this is bothering you like this. Maybe even if just for a little while.
Same goes for whenever any use of any labels starts bothering a person- its usually just a symptom of some kind of jargon fatigue.
You said it yourself- you think it all feels like "Pop psychology nonsense." But do you even need all that pop psychology in your life in the first place?
I don't think they're meant to describe someone's "everywhere all the time" personality. I've met and know several people that fit into one or the other.
One friend is completely "alive" at D&D, but quiet and reserved at any other social function, whereas another loves going to concerts, parties, and other social events, but falls asleep trying to play board games.
I don't think it's meant to be an end-all, be-all. Just one way to generally categorize personality.
As far as people being complex? Above a certain level, yeah, definitely. But we also have a lot of very low level behavior that's relatively easy to categorize.
I don’t think it’s meant to be an end-all, be-all. Just one way to generally categorize personality.
That's more or less how I think about it, except I'd rather use phrase it as 'categorize behavior' to emphasize the point that it's not everywhere all the time. People tend to think of personality as a more fixed attribute but we understand that behaviors can change in the wind.
... when used in a medical oriented conversation. Completely legit when describing character, which was the case before everybody started self-labelling like items in a retail shop
which was the case before everybody started self-labelling like items in a retail shop
That's definitely my beef. If there is a clinical, objective definition and test for intro\extro as traits I'd be interested to know more about it and I'd accept it could have value if applied with rigorous objectivity, but no part of the public conversation about intro\extro is anything but nonsense.
Man(and Woman) see their world with labels. Cant make sense of it without them. Some might try but even subconciously they label what they see
I find it more funny to read on tinder ahit like: i'm an inteovert/extrovert. Ah cool, i'm an alcoholic but don't drink alcohol
I know we had a run-in the other day, over on my stupid-ass Olympics post...but I agree with this post SO FUCKING MUCH.
I mean, not for nothing, but I actually think ALL psychology is nonsense, pop or otherwise.
During the same time that physics (ya know, an actually real branch of science) extended its grasp of nature to prove the existence of atomic, sub-atomic, and quantum particles, as well as the theory of relativity and the Big Bang, what did psychology do?
During that exact same time period, psychology went from Freud's perverted bullshit, through to the "awareness doesn't actually exist, lol" behaviorist era, through to a bunch of other debunked, unhelpful, failure-ass theories. And then there was that time when dipshits stuck metal rods into non-consenting patients' faces and carved up parts of their brains.
Annnnnd, throughout the whole time, LGBTQ people were defined as mentally ill. In case anyone doesn't know, homosexuality was still classified as a mental illness, up until 1973, according to the DSM manual.
And where are we now? Still nowhere. There still isn't a really good, unified theory of human psychology to show for all that effort. And all those actual victims.
At the end of the day, I don't even think this should be surprising, because we're asking human minds to derive a theory of human minds. I'm pretty sure you can use math to prove that any given system can only analyze other systems that are LESS COMPLEX than itself. Our minds are literally too complex for us to meaningfully study. We should literally, actually stop trying to do it. All we're doing is producing an endless parade of half-baked, harmful procedures, based on completely incorrect guesses.
If we want an answer to the question of "how do human minds work," we need to finish developing artificial intelligence. If we produce a system more complex than the human mind, then it WILL be able to analyze the human mind, and deliver meaningful conclusions.
Of course, we probably won't be able to understand those conclusions, and also the AI might want to destroy us. But at this point, I think we deserve it, as a species. The best thing we could do is bring about a better being and then give up the whole being-a-species game, once and for all.
It was an early theory to describe humans. Most psychology is just pop sci. There is some truth to it. I work in sales which is dominated by extroverts. I am an introvert. I can party with the best of them for a few hours then I need me time. My hobbies are going to CrossFit where I don’t have to interact with anyone, doing research and learning new things. I fit the mold of an introvert. The sales people, the more people and chaos the better. Their hobbies are typically social things.
Does everyone fit the mold exactly? No but it’s a basic theory. One of the mays it’s described. How do you recharge and what drains you? I recharge doing solo things and get drained having to deal with the average person.