
Myths About Introverts - Teckla
http://jerrybrito.org/post/6114304704/top-ten-myths-about-introverts
======
parfe
This article is nothing more than a chain-mail style bullshit list and it's
sad to see it voted up so highly. I suppose it's a nice ego-stroke for all the
self described introverts, but most of the "myths" are actually supported by
their counter-descriptions.

The Original Source appears to be: <http://www.carlkingcreative.com/10-myths-
about-introverts>

_They hate small talk._

Small talk is a social skill. and when meeting a new person small talk is
generally all you have. This basically affirms the "myth".

 _They want everyone to just be real and honest. Unfortunately, this is not
acceptable in most settings_

Talk about a value judgment on non-introverts. Being polite is more important
than being pointlessly honest.

 _If you are lucky enough for an introvert to consider you a friend, you
probably have a loyal ally for life._

If only I could find myself a loyal friend who can't make idle talk, will talk
for days about things that only interest him and won't want to do much out in
public.

 _They take in data and experiences very quickly, and as a result, don’t need
to be there for long to “get it.”_

Ah yes, pity those non-introverts that take weeks to figure "it" out.

 _Introverts are perfectly comfortable with their own thoughts. They think a
lot. They daydream. They like to have problems to work on, puzzles to solve._

 _Introverts are often individualists. They don’t follow the crowd. They’d
prefer to be valued for their novel ways of living. They think for themselves
and because of that, they often challenge the norm. They don’t make most
decisions based on what is popular or trendy._

Non-introverts are mindless slaves to culture and advertising!

 _it’s just that their inner world is much more stimulating and rewarding to
them._

Or said in a way to not flex the ego "Their inner world is comforting and
welcoming without challenge from outside stimulus."

~~~
Helianthus
I agree with your general point about the chain-mail style bullshit, but it's
not just an ego-stroke for self-described introverts: many are value judgments
against introverts.

>Myth #7 – Introverts are weird.

Introverts (in my experience) _reject the concept of weird_. Social decisions
like who's "in" and who's "out" hold no weight. Until this is understood,
you're (by you I mean the writer, not you, parfe) not countering the myth that
introverts are weird, you're just explaining the reasons people say that
introverts are weird.

>Introverts cannot “fix themselves” and deserve respect for their natural
temperament and contributions to the human race.

Again, what is "broken?"

It reads like an extrovert making a poor attempt to explain what he knows of
introversion to other extroverts.

~~~
chrischen
Err... the fact that "fix themselves" is in quotes implies there may or may
not even be anything to fix.

------
jhamburger
Here's a myth held by introverts. Introverts (rightly) believe that extroverts
don't understand them, but they don't understand extroverts as well as they
think they do. Case in point, the commonly held belief on HN that extroverts
mostly BS their way through life while the introverts are doing the real work.
In reality we introverts probably don't understand how incredibly nuanced
seemingly superficial relationships and conversations can be.

~~~
ignifero
As an introvert, i understand very well how extroverts think. For years i
tried to become more extroverted, only to discover at a certain point that
it's a dysfunctional path that leads to a superficial, seemingly fullfilling
but unfocused and non-goal-directed lives. The nuance of conversation is a
charm, it fades fast.

The way I see it is time management: life is short, do you want to spend most
of it dealing with people or things? for me it's "things", because they have a
higher signal/noise ratio.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
I don't think you could have come up with a comment that more perfectly
illustrated the GP's comments. An introvert trying to understand being an
extrovert is like a white guy trying to understand what it's like to be black.
It's not who you are, so no amount of pretending is going to give you a true
understanding.

I'm very much an introvert, but over the years, I've learned that networking
is a critical part of being successful in any business endeavor, and it is
nearly impossible to network following typical introvert patterns. As a
result, I will go up to a group standing around at a social event, throw out
my hand, and say "Hi, I'm Travis. What's your name?" even though I hate every
second of it (and, given the sieve my brain is when it comes to names, I will
likely forget before we are done talking :/).

Given that, I don't believe for an instant that I understand being an
extrovert. My wife is the prototypical extrovert. She will have life-long
friends within minutes of entering a room full of people she's never met
before. I will never understand how she does it, but more importantly, I will
never understand _why_ she does it.

~~~
lss456
Haha. As a white guy, I perfectly understand how black guys think. For years I
tried to become more black, only to discover at a certain point that it's a
dysfunctional path that leads to a superficial, seemingly fulfilling but
unfocused and non-goal-directed lives.

My real point is that anyone who believes they KNOW how anyone else thinks is
wrong. It's a very egotistical thought to have that you know so well what
another person thinks or feels.

~~~
Psyonic
What makes you so sure there is really a binary divide between introverts and
extroverts? Even if it shows up on tests, whose to say that's not a learned
behavior?

~~~
lss456
I'm not sure what you mean by binary divide, but the reason why some is
introverted versus extroverted fascinate me. It's a pretty basic question -
learned behavior versus instinctual/genetic behavior. Maybe it's somewhere in
the middle?

Here's what I think: as a young kid, you get exposed to things that shape your
attitude. If your early experiences are negative in social settings, perhaps
you grow up to be introverted. But what happened first - your negative
experiences, or an attitude that pre-disposed you towards negative social
experiences? Can little little kids have attitudes like that? Hard to day -
how do we really know?

I don't care what physical science has to say on it regarding brain maturity,
neuro-pathways, etc - unless we can communicate with infants, we don't know if
they have pre-disposed attitudes or thoughts.

------
latentflip
This list is taken from this article:
<http://www.carlkingcreative.com/10-myths-about-introverts> which is based on
the guy reading this book: [http://www.amazon.com/Introvert-Advantage-Thrive-
Extrovert-W...](http://www.amazon.com/Introvert-Advantage-Thrive-Extrovert-
World/dp/0761123695)

I read the book myself recently, and I can highly recommend it if you feel
that you sit anywhere on the introvert spectrum.

It covers the "science" behind introversion, how introverts vs. extroverts
think and respond to stimuli and neurochemicals. (I put science in quotes as I
don't know enough about the brain to know how scientific the discussion is but
I found it useful and interesting nonetheless).

It then goes on to look at how this affects introverts' interactions with
themselves, others, and in social situations - with some thoughts and guidance
on how to better integrate into an "extroverted world" without just trying to
be more extroverted.

I have definitely found it helpful and it's made me think a lot about who I am
and how I react to life as an introvert.

------
tcskeptic
_Myth #3 – Introverts are rude. Introverts often don’t see a reason for
beating around the bush with social pleasantries. They want everyone to just
be real and honest._

Yes, this is often called being rude. It may be true that by this guys
definition introverts don't _mean_ to be rude, but if a person (introvert or
otherwise) acts as described above, that is rude.

~~~
46Bit
If we're going to keep to narrow introvert/extrovert definitions here, then to
an extrovert only is that rude. Personally I find small talk and social
pleasantries little more than a way to waste time and pretend you care more
than you really do. I rely on the pretty sensible concept that if someone has
anything important to tell me, they'll come out with it.

Besides, the internet is wonderful for me because social niceties have faded.
You don't get forum posts with 5 lines of social waffle, you get people just
cutting to the chase. Think just-go-ahead-and-say-it IRC.

~~~
Monkeyget
Social niceties serve as a grease that makes the social interaction go
smoothly. By avoiding those and being frank and direct you only introduce sand
in the mechanism.

There was a wonderful quote to this effect a while ago on HN but I can't quite
find it.

~~~
crazymik3
I don't really understand how not going directly to the point can be better,
for any mechanism.

~~~
seabee
I'm sorry, in which world do all these introverts live where any topic is
perfectly OK to talk about at any time?

Small talk and social niceties aren't merely hot air, they are tools you can
use to assess a person's mood, what they are interested in or comfortable
discussing, or even whether it is productive to discuss something at all.
Consider it the metadata of conversation.

Also consider that conversation is two-way communication. You reveal
information about yourself not just by the answers you give, but by the
questions you ask.

~~~
hugh3
It also establishes the fundamental fact "This is a friendly conversation".

If I walk into my subordinate's office right now and say "Have you finished
that graph yet?" then that communicates that I'm _really_ impatient about
getting that graph. Which would be fine if I am, but I'm not. If I do that,
I'll just make him jumpy and anxious.

Instead I'll wander down to his office and start with a "Hey, how's it going?"
before asking about the graph, cuz I'm not actually impatient to get it, I'm
just interested to know whether he's making progress or whether there's
anything I need to help him with. The smalltalk is basically just equivalent
to "I come in peace".

If I were a gorilla I'd probably have to do this with gestures and facial
expressions, but since I'm a human I have this extra tool in my arsenal to
communicate the non-threatening nature of my approach. Awesome!

~~~
billswift
So instead of asking a 5 second question and letting him get back to work, you
turn it into a 5 minute demonstration of your superiority by forcing him to
pay attention to you instead of what he was doing.

~~~
hugh3
More like a one-minute interaction which communicates a _lot_ more stuff in
subtext than a five-second interaction could hope to... including the fact
that I'm not scary and that he should feel free to ask me for help if he needs
it.

~~~
epochwolf
When a manager starts off with small talk, it only increases my anxiety more
than any straight question ever would. I'm always waiting for the other shoe
to drop. I've seen the pattern in every job I've had before my current one and
with most teachers and professors I've met. They start off talking about
something unrelated only to hit you with a hammer with the next question.

Out of place small talk doesn't actually help people that are perspective
enough to realize you want something. My experience has been that when a
manager randomly starts a conversation that's not work related when it's not
lunch or break time they are going to be asking or demanding things I won't
like. Infinitely so when they just called you into their office.

------
AlexC04
I did a degree in Psychology and one of the advanced topics in personality
theory that came up when discussing the Introversion/Extroversion spectrum was
the concept of 'Pseudo Introversion' and 'Pseudo Extroversion'

The general crux is that there exist people who are what you might call
'biologically' introverts (or extraverts) but who have made a conscious
decision that there is something that they love more than their base trait in
the I/E personality dimension.

Examples of pesudo-extroverts might be a very shy actor, singer or performer.
Socially they'd be considered an introvert, but they love their craft so much
that they pretend to be an extrovert in order to do the thing that they love.

I thought it was pretty interesting.

(More reading:
[http://carletonnow.carleton.ca/february-2004/personalities-a...](http://carletonnow.carleton.ca/february-2004/personalities-
at-work-toward-a-%E2%80%9Cfree-trait%E2%80%9D-agreement-in-ottawa/))

And more, this is a good one too:
<http://harvardmagazine.com/2003/07/introversion-unbound.html>

------
agentultra
Myth #11: _all introverts are exactly alike_

I think it is worthwhile to note that not all introverts are alike. I can tick
off some similiarities in this list with myself, but my experience of being an
introvert is quite different. ymmv.

------
drblast
The assumption that there's something wrong with not interacting with other
people eagerly and often strikes me as oddly egotistical. Other people aren't
alive solely for the enjoyment of extraverts.

The "problem," if there is one, is that extraverts are uncomfortable and find
it difficult to interact with introverts. But this is as much the fault of
extraverted people as it is of introverted people. They speak a different
language and need to meet halfway to interact effectively.

Due to the personality type, however, the extraverts see this as a huge
problem while the introverts really don't care all that much.

What if we asked the obvious counter-question: Why are extraverts so
threatened by anyone who won't interact with them on their terms?

Nobody asks that because extraverts get a pass on this; it's the introvert's
fault when social interaction between and extravert and an intravert is
uncomfortable.

I can see why that would happen but it's odd.

~~~
bluekeybox
> Why are extraverts so threatened by anyone who won't interact with them on
> their terms?

I act as an extravert in certain situations and as an introvert in others, so
I feel qualified to answer your question. Extraverts don't always interact
with everyone -- for example, in circles where social cliques are established,
extraverts will interact with people outside of their clique less often. I
call this "exclusionary" behavior -- one that serves to maintain the
exclusiveness of the clique. Given that cases of extreme introversion are
rare, an extravert A is more likely to interpret another individual B (who
could well be an extreme introvert) as another extravert who simply shuns
individual A so as to exclude A from his or her clique.

The reason this "misinterpretation" occurs is because extreme introversion is
rare (1% of the population?) while exclusionary behavior (shunning others to
maintain exclusive cliques) is relatively highly prevalent (20% of the
population?). So the conditional probability that individual B is not an
introvert but an extravert exhibiting exclusionary behavior is high.
Basically, the extravert A makes a correct conclusion given the limited
information he/she possesses. Because the introvert B is unlikely to engage
into conversation with A, the individual A will never gain more information
about B and will therefore maintain the conclusion that B is an asshole.

~~~
rokhayakebe
_extraverts will interact with people outside of their clique less often. I
call this "exclusionary" behavior_

Touche. There is only one center of attention, and I have noticed extreme
extroverts will not let you in if you are going to take away from their
attention. It's like drug.

------
Shenglong
_Myth #10 – Introverts can fix themselves and become Extroverts._

I don't know if "fix" is the right word in the complete, but they can
definitely change. I used to follow that list pretty closely - and while
there's nothing intrinsically wrong with that, I realized that it can be
extremely socially disadvantageous. Regardless of how smart someone is, it's
an undeniable fact that in this world, almost all the time, you need the
support of other people to make your desires come true. I'll cite the academic
community on this one: even if you make a great scientific discovery, you'll
never get a Nobel prize if all the other academics think you're a jerk.

I really think the primary talent any intelligent person should learn is
_adaptation_ \- and that includes adapting to your social surroundings. For
example: although I played a lot of sports semi-professionally, I have never
enjoyed watching sports... especially team sports. Yet, when I go to a hockey
game, I make a ton of noise, and force myself to get into the spirit and have
a good time, even though I still haven't bothered to learn the rules.

Don't like idle gossip? Well, it's the fastest way to permeate a new group of
people. Now I'm an active gossip and drama seeker (although I make sure the
gossip is harmless).

In any case, I feel his point needs to be refined a bit.

~~~
pavel_lishin
But do you _enjoy_ acting extroverted? Do you enjoy gossipping and seeking out
drama? Do you get bored when you've been alone for too long?

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Saying the primary character traits of extroverts is gossipping and seeking
drama is just silly. Extroverts make connections with many people (shallow
extroverts are drama-seeking gossips), which most introverts simply can't
understand. My wife, who is the premier example of an extrovert, has no
interest in gossipping or in drama. I've seen far more drama in a group of
forum-cruising introverts than in her life.

~~~
Shenglong
I think you're misunderstanding. I'm saying it can be an important part of the
social experience. Not everyone likes gossip and drama, and some don't even
think it's appropriate. Gossiping provides a social venue for people to relate
to each other and bond over similar ideas/beliefs on social situations.
Regardless of whether it's appropriate or shallow, it serves a social purpose.

I think to an extent, we're debating the semantics of "extrovert".

------
MetaMan
Sorry but I can't take the article seriously. The notion that everybody can
simply be divided into either being an "Extrovert" or "Introvert" is very
doubtful for me.

Even if you accept this one dimensional personality description as being
useful by itself;

\- is it constant (the same in all circumstances),

\- does it vary over time?

\- Is everyone either an "introvert" or an "extrovert" OR do people fit on a
sliding scale between the two extremes?

I'm guessing that the author feels he is an introvert. IMO, rather than trying
to redefine or clarify what it means to be an "introvert" just don't accept
the "introvert/Extrovert" labels. Its a pseudo-scientific term which is used
in a lazy way to put people into neat boxes.

I'll bet most people can think of situations where they will act "extroverted"
and others where they'll be "introverted".

We are neither a number or a label!

~~~
Symmetry
The words "introvert" and "extrovert" have been used by a lot of people over
the years, starting all the way back at Freud I think. If a modern scientist
uses these words, though, they're probably talking about it in terms of the
Big Five[1] personality model, which is mostly just identifying some observed
clusters of traits with strong correlations that tend to persist over a
person's life. People argue about whether there might be more emperical
clusters worth adding, or whether they might be made more orthogonal but
generally there's a good amount of rigor behind them, far more than IQ for
instance.

Introversion/Extroversion is very much a matter of degree, just like pretty
much any other human trait. It doesn't uniquely determine behavior by any
means, humans are very complex creatures. However, there is a pretty strong
correlation [2] between someone acting in an introverted or extroverted manner
in one situation and acting the same way later.

[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits>

[2]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation>

EDIT: All of which isn't to say that people can't use those terms in pseudo-
scientific ways, or that the author of the article isn't. After all, people
use terms like 'mass' and 'gravity' in pseudo scientific ways too.

~~~
MetaMan
Thanks for the links but I remain unconvinced that Extraversion (describing
people as either extrovert or introvert) is accurate or ultimately useful.
From the 1st Wiki link I note that:

1\. "Many studies have confirmed that in predicting actual behavior the more
numerous facet or primary level traits are far more effective (e.g. Mershon &
Gorsuch, 1988;[25] Paunonon & Ashton, 2001[26])"

2\. Most measures are based on self-description.

So we have a personality description which is not very accurate in terms of
predicting behaviour and which also leads to a lot of disagreement (as
witnessed by the comments here) about what it actually means in terms of
behaviour and human interaction!

If a "measure" is (a) not very accurate and (b) confuses rather than clarifies
behaviour / human interaction then for me its not very useful no matter how
seductive it is.

------
dkarl
Just somebody (presumably an introvert) denying common negative
generalizations about introverts without providing any supporting references
or analysis. Turns out (thank you, oblique63) it was an off-the-cuff list
thought up by someone who read a self-help book and was inspired to "redefine
[his] entire life in a new and positive context."

Seeing introversion as a preference or identity is fine as long as you have a
nice consistently introverted life and that's exactly what you want, but it
harks back to the day when everybody had their place and accepted their
limitations and anyone who felt any conflict or frustration about it was
"maladjusted." If you're introverted and want some of the benefits of
extroversion, such as a bigger social network for locating jobs and meeting
women, or if you discover that you really enjoy a hobby that has a large
incidental but unavoidable social component, then you're supposed to realize
those things are "just not you" and go home and read a book.

Introversion as an identity is a nice explanation when you really don't want
to do something. "What, you don't want to go to the Nicki Minaj concert?" "Let
me explain. You see, I'm an introvert...." But what explanation do you give
yourself when you really want to go see a certain band but you think the
social aspect will drain you so much it will be hard to enjoy? There's no
simple "I like this" or "I don't like this." There's a conflict that can't be
resolved. What do you do when you realize it's nice to have a big diverse
circle of friends sometimes -- for trying to round people up for certain
activities, or so you aren't limited to the tastes of your one or two really
close friends -- but maintaining that social network is intimidating and
draining and you don't know if you're up to it? Introversion starts to seem
less like a matter of taste and more like a limitation you're fighting
against.

It's nice to say you're a picky person who doesn't like superficial
relationships, who only wants a handful of close friends you can engage with
in a meaningful way, but then you plan a backpacking trip and realize there's
some climbing involved and it isn't safe to go alone. You could limit yourself
to whatever your friends like to do. But the trip sounds really cool, and now
that you think about it, you're pretty sure you'd enjoy rock climbing in
itself. Wait, there's a problem. Learning basic rock climbing doesn't
intimidate you, but you will have to meet people who like climbing, meet
enough of them and cultivate enough social connections to put together three
or four people to do this hike. What would sound fun to an extrovert -- meet a
bunch of new people who share my interests, yay! -- poses a tough decision for
the introvert. Do I really want to do this? Will it be worth it? Am I even
capable of doing it? It will involve a lot of social interaction, and I don't
know if I can muster enough smalltalk and conviviality or if I'll get tired,
zone out, fail to engage and be engaging.

That brings up another matter of "taste." It would be nice to say I'm simply
bored by smalltalk, but I can't kid myself; it isn't that simple. I know that
once in a while I _do_ like smalltalk, and when I think about it my ability to
enjoy a social situation has more to do with my mood going into it than the
situation itself. I get bored when I'm not engaged, and I have difficulty
engaging with people because anxiety and stress make me shut down. When I'm
overflowing with positive feelings, I have no problem engaging with people and
enjoying smalltalk. So the problem isn't smalltalk, unless I want to say that
I'm stupid to enjoy it when I do, and right to be bored when it bores me.

I could resolve all these problems by having a consistent life and molding my
tastes to coincide with my comfort zone. I could just _happen_ to prefer
hobbies that shelter me from social situations or bring me together with other
introverts instead of forcing me into uncomfortable situations. It's great
when it works out that way, and it's certainly a major factor in how I manage
to enjoy life! But I chafe against it. I'm maladjusted. I don't like tailoring
my life to my natural limitations any more than I like tailoring my life to
other people's expectations. My introversion messes with me, so I mess with it
right back. Sometimes, when I can afford the energy.

~~~
yelsgib
You are seriously conflating "social anxiety disorder" and "introversion." The
idea that a concert would "drain you so much it will be hard to enjoy" or that
an introvert would have a tough time interacting with a group long enough to
go on a rock climbing trip is essentially saying that an introverted person is
somehow handicapped, or pushed to their introversion by a type of mental
disorder.

I identify as an introvert. I like thinking about mind, experience, truth,
math, language, etc. I don't have a social anxiety disorder or any other type
of anxiety disorder, so I'm not afraid to join a rock climbing group or any
other type of group. I go dancing. I make small talk. These things can be
introverted activities, if you make them.

My M.O. with respect to social situations seems to be "create comfort zone ->
expand comfort zone." Since I'm an introvert, I tend to bring people into my
world rather than go into theirs.

That being said, I vastly prefer spending time with one person whom I really
like to a bunch of people who I vaguely like. I also hate carnivals.

~~~
dkarl
_You are seriously conflating "social anxiety disorder" and "introversion."
The idea that a concert would "drain you so much it will be hard to enjoy" or
that an introvert would have a tough time interacting with a group long enough
to go on a rock climbing trip is essentially saying that an introverted person
is somehow handicapped, or pushed to their introversion by a type of mental
disorder._

Yep, that's exactly my point. The label has been embraced as a way to put a
positive spin on social anxiety. I don't necessarily think it's a good way to
use the word, but on the other hand, I'm not sure it's accurate to call
someone like you who is able to enjoy himself and interact fluently with
groups of people an "introvert." The traditional use of the word seems more in
line with the idea of an introvert as someone who has an aversion to social
interaction rather than a simple preference for other uses of time. Naturally
people tend to rationalize, so it's hard to tell.

By the way, I think it's healthy and not entirely unjustified to put a
positive spin on social anxiety. Most of my abilities and good qualities come
from the time I've spent alone. I just don't think it's sustainable to be in
complete denial about it.

~~~
andywood
You're still doing it. Introversion is not social anxiety. I am categorically
an introvert. I do not suffer in the slightest from social anxiety - I'm
perfectly comfortable in crowds and most social situations. What you're doing
in this comment and the one above is simply displaying ignorance of what
introversion means. And just because most laypeople have an inaccurate idea of
what the word "introverted" means does not mean that it doesn't have a fairly
well-defined technical meaning.

~~~
dkarl
I'm not ignorant of what you think introversion is. I learned it reading your
first comment. Like I said elsewhere, the argument here is about what the word
actually means. Jung says introverts experience emotional drain when they're
around other people, so by his definition, if you are comfortable being around
large groups of people for any length of time, then you are not an introvert.
Instead of just insisting that I accept your definition of the word, try
persuading me.

~~~
andywood
It isn't my definition. There's a fairly coherent consensus view of the
salient points of the intro/extra dichotomy. You're distorting it. For
example, the first half of your sentence beginning "Jung" is correct, but the
second half is gross exaggeration. Other people aren't Kryptonite. That's
what's wrong with your top post as well - it's full of exaggeration which
misrepresents introversion.

There's been plenty written on the topic, including the linked article, which
you seem to reject.

~~~
dkarl
_There's a fairly coherent consensus view of the salient points of the
intro/extra dichotomy_

Not at all. First of all, introversion was a concept long before psychologists
started to get technical with it. Second, its appeal as a psychological
concept is mostly to laymen like us, and it certainly isn't used in any
technical sense when people write blog posts about how great introverts are.
So even without citing any disagreements among psychologists, there's a
question of whether we should go with a some psychologist's technical meaning
or the meaning in popular usage. In popular usage, you can see disagreement
here on this page.

One way to see how a word is used is Google:

<http://philosophy.lander.edu/ethics/jung.html>: "Weakness of the introverted
attitude includes ... (1) a lack confidence in relation to people and things
and (2) a tendency to be unsociable, shy, and hesitant." Don't worry, his list
of weaknesses for extraversion is bigger ;-)

<http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/genpsytraits.html>: "The more obvious aspects
of introversion are shyness, a distaste for social functions, and a love of
privacy."

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraversion_and_introversion>: "Introversion
does not describe social discomfort but rather social preference: an introvert
may not be shy but may merely prefer less social activities." Good ol'
Wikipedia, the voice of the people ;-)

<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/introvert>: "1. a shy person. 2.
Psychology . a person characterized by concern primarily with his or her own
thoughts and feelings ( opposed to extrovert)." Funny how dictionaries list
multiple definitions for words. Clearly they're all wrong except one!

Here's a nice quote from Jung himself about the "extreme" introvert (gathered
from this page: <http://www.infj.com/INFJ_Introversion.htm>): "In a large
gathering he feels lonely and lost. The more crowded it is, the greater
becomes his resistance. He is not in the least 'with it,' and has no love of
enthusiastic get-togethers. He is not a good mixer. What he does, he does in
his own way, barricading himself against influences from outside. . . . Under
normal conditions he is pessimistic and worried, because the world and human
beings are not in the least good but crush him. . . ."

Wow, that's a downer. You'll find more ammunition for yourself than for me on
that page, though, as apparently psychologists have tried to empirically
distinguish shyness, introversion, neuroticism, embarrassability, public
shyness, private shyness, and sociability. Naturally in order to fit all those
in as distinct concepts they've had to define them quite narrowly as aspects
of personality instead of sticking to the broader idea of introversion as a
"type."

However, on that page the immediate followup to the Jung quote I quoted (not
by Jung, and possibly not referring to his views) is this: "In less extreme
cases, introverts are simply more conservative than not, preferring the
familiar surroundings of home and intimate times with a few close friends;
they husband their energy and would rather stay put than go from place to
place."

I think that characterization would be contested as well. So no, there is no
coherent consensus. You can see all over this page as well that many of the
arguments made here take the same form: accept my definition of "introvert",
and my conclusions follow naturally. So the real argument is about the meaning
of the word.

 _There's been plenty written on the topic, including the linked article,
which you seem to reject._

I may be missing a better link elsewhere on the page, but the only "article" I
see is one person's biased top-ten list inspired by a self-help book. You'll
see a big difference between the Google results for introversion and the
results for extro- or extraversion. There's a whole lot of boosterism and
self-help content for introversion, but not for extroversion. I like some of
it, but honestly, I think most of it can be ignored. We should know when we're
being pandered to.

~~~
gruseom
_introversion was a concept long before psychologists started to get technical
with it._

I believe that's wrong; the term was introduced by Jung in _Psychological
Types_ and thus originates as a technical concept in psychology.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
The term "introversion" was introduced by Jung as describing a particular
condition that pre-existed. He originates the term but not introversion itself
which is extent but (possibly) unlabelled. (Aside: It usually turns out with
these things that others had labelled it but not popularised their
encapsulation of the concept or failed to be as encompassing or thorough - not
sure if this is true here though.)

I think the real problem you have is with the loose use of the word "concept"
by the parent.

~~~
dkarl
The term "introversion" dates to the 17th century.

<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/introversion>

~~~
gruseom
That's like saying Shakespeare knew about concurrent programming because he
used the word "thread".

Let's see a usage of "introvert" before Jung that has anything to do with
personality types.

[http://www.google.com/search?q=%22introvert%22&tbs=bks:1...](http://www.google.com/search?q=%22introvert%22&tbs=bks:1,cdr:1,cd_min:1600,cd_max:1900&lr=lang_en)

~~~
dkarl
You'd do better with "introverted" or "introversion" with some terms excluded
to filter out some of the results.

Wordsworth, "The Excursion", 1814:

    
    
      --Nor deem that his mild presence was a weight
      That pressed upon his brother's house; for books
      Were ready comrades whom he could not tire;                
      Of whose society the blameless Man
      Was never satiate. Their familiar voice,
      Even to old age, with unabated charm
      Beguiled his leisure hours; refreshed his thoughts;
      Beyond its natural elevation raised
      His __introverted__ spirit; and bestowed
      Upon his life an outward dignity
      Which all acknowledged. The dark winter night,
      The stormy day, each had its own resource;
      Song of the muses, sage historic tale,                      
      Science severe, or word of holy Writ
      Announcing immortality and joy
      To the assembled spirits of just men
      Made perfect, and from injury secure.
      --Thus soothed at home, thus busy in the field,
      To no perverse suspicion he gave way,
      No languor, peevishness, nor vain complaint:
      And they, who were about him, did not fail
      In reverence, or in courtesy; they prized
      His gentle manners: and his peaceful smiles,              
      The gleams of his slow-varying countenance,
      Were met with answering sympathy and love.
    

More with "introverted":

[http://books.google.com/books?id=IFwCAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA545&#...](http://books.google.com/books?id=IFwCAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA545&dq=%22introverted%22+-parallelism+-specimen+-parallel&hl=en&ei=e5n_TdjgIajd0QHmsujQAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CFgQ6AEwCTge#v=onepage&q=%22introverted%22%20-parallelism%20-specimen%20-parallel&f=false)

Again here:

[http://books.google.com/books?id=q1VIAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA181&#...](http://books.google.com/books?id=q1VIAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA181&dq=%22introverted%22+-parallelism+-specimen&hl=en&ei=L5j_TfTXLcbTgAfUlZnwCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22introverted%22%20-parallelism%20-specimen&f=false)

And here:

[http://books.google.com/books?id=q1VIAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA181&#...</a><p>Similar
usage here:<p><a
href="http://books.google.com/books?id=AnMPAAAAYAAJ&#38;pg=PA217&#38;dq=%22introverted%22&#38;hl=en&#38;ei=NZf_TcTNFojY0QGFuaH7CA&#38;sa=X&#38;oi=book_result&#38;ct=result&#38;resnum=3&#38;ved=0CDkQ6AEwAjge#v=onepage&#38;q=%22introverted%22&#38;f=false"
rel="nofollow">http://books.google.com/books?id=AnMPAAAAYAAJ&#38;pg=PA217&#...</a><p>Check
out the definition of introversion at the top of the page in this dictionary:
"The set of introverting, or the state of being introverted; a turning or
direction inward, physical or mental."<p><a
href="http://books.google.com/books?id=bLkCAAAAIAAJ&#38;pg=PA3166&#38;dq=%22introverted%22+-parallelism+-specimen&#38;hl=en&#38;ei=h5j_Tcb-
Hsq_gQee7bDeCw&#38;sa=X&#38;oi=book_result&#38;ct=result&#38;resnum=4&#38;ved=0CD8Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&#38;q=%22introverted%22%20-parallelism%20-specimen&#38;f=false"
rel="nofollow">http://books.google.com/books?id=bLkCAAAAIAAJ&#38;pg=PA3166&...</a><p>Another
dictionary:<p><a
href="http://books.google.com/books?id=ovhOAAAAYAAJ&#38;pg=PA2722&#38;dq=%22introverted%22+-parallelism+-specimen+-parallel&#38;hl=en&#38;ei=e5n_TdjgIajd0QHmsujQAw&#38;sa=X&#38;oi=book_result&#38;ct=result&#38;resnum=7&#38;ved=0CEkQ6AEwBjge#v=onepage&#38;q=%22introverted%22%20-parallelism%20-specimen%20-parallel&#38;f=false"
rel="nofollow">http://books.google.com/books?id=ovhOAAAAYAAJ&#38;pg=PA2722&...</a><p>Not
really relevant to your question since the usage is different, but interesting
nonetheless, since it includes not only introversion but extroversion as well,
predating Jung by a century and showing that people can be quite flexible
about how they understand words like these:<p><a
href="http://books.google.com/books?id=OJEPAAAAIAAJ&#38;pg=PA9&#38;dq=%22introversion%22&#38;hl=en&#38;ei=s5b_TdG9COfL0QHY-6XrCw&#38;sa=X&#38;oi=book_result&#38;ct=result&#38;resnum=3&#38;ved=0CDoQ6AEwAjgU#v=onepage&#38;q=%22introversion%22&#38;f=false"
rel="nofollow">http://books.google.com/books?id=OJEPAAAAIAAJ&#38;pg=PA9&#38...</a>

~~~
pbhjpbhj
Good catch.

------
Goladus
The definition of introvert is already so vague it's hard to take this
seriously.

------
scythe
Why do we need this silly choice between being an 'introvert' and being an
'extrovert' and some fifty-cent words to hang around our necks with some
attached activities we're supposed to like or dislike? I joke about how
awesome it is to be "ENTP", but I don't really take that shit _seriously_.

This whole "*-trovert" obsession drives people away from understanding
conversation because they try to categorize it solely as 'necessary' and
'unnecessary'. What sort of life is it when things are solely necessary or
unnecessary?

~~~
mcantor
It reminds me of the "alpha male/beta male" thing that leaks out of 4chan
occasionally. Sometimes it's just not as easy as one or the other!

~~~
Psyonic
alpha/beta has gone much bigger than 4chan. I don't have the links on hand,
but I've seen it in serious publications recently.

------
jamesaguilar
I love his myth #3 response. "Introverts often don’t see a reason for beating
around the bush with social pleasantries" reduces to "Introverts are rude."

Personally I don't think the average introvert is rude. I think that not
because I redefine what "rude" means, but simply because on average introverts
are polite people just like extroverts. Sure, there are socially maladjusted
introverts who think that communicative efficiency scales with bluntness.
(Hint: making someone feel insulted or defensive is likely to slow you down a
lot more than the taking the effort to word criticism cautiously.) Just like
there are extroverts that think it's ok to shout someone down or make fun of
them until the acquiesce to whatever the extrovert wants. But I don't know
that rudeness is more common in either of intro- or extroverts.

------
Benjo
I feel compelled to share my current process of understanding and dealing with
my own introversion. Maybe this will resonate with others, maybe not. Where I
am right now, it's more important for me to be able to share this than
anything else.

I ended a relationship recently, partly because we had huge communication
issues. Her thoughts were always close to the surface, I tended to think about
things for hours before finding the courage or words to express ideas that
were important to me. When I finally managed to say out loud what I'd been
mulling over, she didn't always take me very seriously or even let me finish
my thought before jumping in with hers. This of course made it even harder to
open up to her again. I tried earnestly to explain to her that I needed quiet
time daily to process my thoughts and that interruptions were lethal to my
ability to communicate. In the end she never seemed to accept that this was a
fundamental part of my personality and not some excuse I was giving her. Often
she would make sarcastic comments like "Have you had enough quiet time today?"
These relatively innocuous comments hurt me more than most of our arguments,
simply because it communicated to me that she truly didn't understand me or
what I needed to be happy. Maybe we could have established that communication,
but the relationship had gone on too long for that kind of refactoring.

After the relationship ended, I suddenly had ten times the social energy. I
thought I was burnt out of performing comedy, but suddenly had more then
enough energy. I took the time to study social skills and took a hard look at
my life and my emotional state. It became clear to me that being introverted
had closed me off to not only her, but to all my friends and even family. I
realized that my closest friends actually made me LESS social, simply because
of the attitudes they held towards meeting new people and society in general.

So I started cutting them out of my life. I began a new effort of being more
social. I limited my "deep thought introverted" time to when I was actually
alone. When I was socializing, I made sure that I extroverted the entire time.
If I felt the urge to check my phone or zone out of the conversation, I
recognized that my energy had run out, excused myself and left. I made new
friends who viewed me as a social, outgoing person. Their expectations of me
helped my momentum. I forced myself to be open with people. I ignored my
tendency to withhold personal information, embarrassing stories, or questions
that might make me look stupid. I started bantering more with coworkers that I
hadn't been close to before. I started reinforcing the believe that I
shouldn't feel the need to hide anything about myself.

I was a little confused by the new amounts of social energy I had. My
girlfriend had taken up a lot of my time, but after our breakup, I was able to
maintain a schedule with at least twice the social hours as previously. Where
was I getting all this energy? I realized that what was draining me wasn't
being social, it was being uncomfortable. It was the awkward situations, not
social situations in general, that were sapping my energy. I couldn't tell the
difference because I was in a situation where 90% of my social interactions
were uncomfortable for one reason or another. In my relationship, I was
constantly worried about giving her the time she wanted to spend with me while
giving my time to process my thoughts and work on projects. In general, I was
always trying to follow a train of thought in my head, even when out with
friends, or in a meeting, or in a friendly conversation, instead of being
present and happy to interact with someone else.

The biggest benefit to this change in my life has been the increased
sensitivity to my own emotional state, including how much control I had over
my own happiness at any given time by means of my own posture, facial
expression and state of mind. I realized that just wearing a stupid grin on my
face made my happier than any of my academic or professional accomplishments.
It was as if my introversion had muted me to my own emotional state. I began
to recognize that humans are essentially emotional antennas. Evolution has
conditioned us to subcommunicate volumes of information to each other. The
emotional state of a person is broadcast and received by everyone around them.
Extroverts are much more sensitive to this than introverts. Suddenly I
realized why smalltalk, politeness, and so many other things I had never given
much value were so important. Other people felt the effects of these things a
hundred times more than I had. And they couldn't help it anymore than I could
help being introverted.

The reverse of this is also true, by learning to recognize this, I began to
pick up much more how other people were feeling. Connecting with people and
making them happy begin to give me as much satisfaction as I've ever had from
programming or making something work. I'm beginning to reconsider whether
technical work is good for my emotional state, or if I am even cut out to be
happy while doing it.

Am I truly an introvert? Yes, I still believe I am pretty strongly introverted
by nature. Do I think all introverts are closed off? No. I think most
introverts, even those more introverted than me, are more successful than I
was at maintaining at least a few close friendships. I do believe that
learning how to be comfortable in ones own skin is critical to being a happy
person. I certainly didn't give this problem nearly as much attention as I
should have. If you take anything away from this, I hope that you will
consider if you should be giving it more attention in your life as well.

~~~
Psyonic
Patronizing comments like "Have you had enough quiet time today?" are anything
but innocuous. That would be a huge red flag for me that the relationship is
unhealthy. There's no reason to tolerate such overt disrespect.

~~~
pbhjpbhj
It depends. Was she being patronising or were you perceiving it as
patronising. Perhaps she was unable to tell if you wished her company or not
and doesn't want to overstep the mark.

That sounds the like the response someone would make after hearing "I just
need a bit of times to myself" quite often.

------
oblique63
original, slightly more detailed article:
<http://www.carlkingcreative.com/10-myths-about-introverts>

~~~
tybris
I like that one much better. No need for the cockiness.

------
T_S_
Instead of the "War Between the 'Verts", it would be useful to hear some
comments about successfully interfacing with the other type. Seems to me the
two types complement each other well in business as long as there is mutual
respect.

------
jfruh
I consider myself pretty introverted but I'm also pretty conflict-averse,
which means that myth #3 doesn't apply at all, at least to me -- if anything,
I tend to be overly polite with people. And I know lots of introverts who are
the same way.

The introvert-extrovert axis is a great tool for understanding behavior, but
don't just assume that every angle of your personality arises from where you
are on that spectrum.

~~~
jhamburger
I would describe myself the same way. However sometimes I find myself in
conversations where I might for example not respond to something someone says,
and rather just reflect on it in my own mind as I don't really have anything
meaningful to add. This makes perfect sense in my head where two different
"conversations", internal and external are going on, but I realize that in
real life it's pretty awkward.

------
cmurdock
I hate this sort of stuff because it's so binary. I consider myself a definite
gray area and I think a lot of people are in there as well.

------
petenixey
Why is this being dressed up as introvertedness v. extrovertedness?

Introvertedness and extrovertedness are different directions on a scale, not
absolute points. Introvertedness covers a far milder set of characteristics
than those described here.

What the author describes is an extremity of the spectrum and characteristics
more usually associated with Asberger or High functioning Autism.

------
amosson
Here's an anecdote.

My first job out of collage was with a Big 6 accounting firm as a IT
consultant. As part of training, we took the Myers-Briggs test (which places
you on the Introvert/Extravert spectrum) and spent an entire day discussing
the results. The message of the day was any of the different personality types
can thrive and people should be aware of other's personality styles and taylor
their interactions given what they know about themselves and what they know
about the people they are interacting with. This was/is an important lesson
and has been helpful in my career.

They ended the day with a set of two slides that broke down the population of
the firm as a whole and the population of the partners in the firm. 80% of the
firm were extraverts and >95% of the partners where extraverts. So the other
lesson I learned that day, was that if you want to be in a sales-y leadership
position, you better learn to behave like an extravert.

------
mattiask
You know being an introvert or extrovert isn't a binary thing but rather a
spectrum. If you want to find out how you are on that scale you can get do a
Myers-Briggs personality test to get a rough estimate.

I'm squarely in the middle myself, I enjoy being by myself for periods of time
working on my own stuff but after a while I need to socialize, and when I've
socialized I need some me-time again :)

I just hope people think they're introverted because they lack social skills,
being uncomfortable and not enjoying certain social situations doesn't mean
one is introverted it only means one has to improve one's social skills.

They're like any skill, something you learn by experience and practice.
Perhaps the reason that people think many computer-oriented people are
introverted is because they choose to spend time in front of their computer
instead of interacting with people (irl) and therefore don't develop their
social skills as much.

------
scelerat
A lot of this rang true for me. I'm an introvert, always have been. From a
very early age I tended towards internal activities: reading, programming.
Even the sport I ended up focusing on (running) is a very solitary activity.
Social interaction drains me and I need lots of alone time, often preferring
it.

I play in bands too though, and get a serious, addictive rush from making
noise and performing for a lot of people. And I genuinely like people and
making friends, but I don't really feel like I'm sharing "me" in a meaningful
way unless it's one-on-one or with a very small group. Parties sap my energy,
but I go to them because I get to interact with so many people. The only point
I take issue with is #9, because I definitely have a thrill-seeking,
adrenaline-junkie streak.

There's no script.

------
john2x
Most of the explanations pretty much equate to its corresponding myth, more or
less.

P.S. being a shy introvert sucks.

~~~
ignifero
indeed, all but #9 and #10 are not myths, for me

P.s. many introverts loathe themselves

~~~
billswift
Because the culture tells introverts that they are basically just "broken
extroverts".

EDIT: I meant American culture, as several people have pointed out other
cultures are somewhat different about this.

------
ChrisMac
A site I read on social skills has a post explaining why it doesn't use the
words Introvert and Extrovert. The main points it gives are:

* There are no agreed upon definitions of the terms

* Just bringing up the terms can derail conversations and turn them into debate on what the words _really_ mean (e.g., like what is happening in this thread)

* The terms cram too many sub-concepts into one

* False dichotomy

* Tends to ignore context (i.e., people act differently in different situations)

* Associated with a bitter Us vs. Them mentality

* The terms can make people feel defensive and closed off

* The words can be self-limiting labels

Full post: <http://www.succeedsocially.com/introversion>

------
a3_nm
"Their brains are too sensitive to the neurotransmitter called Dopamine.
Introverts and Extroverts have different dominant neuro-pathways. Just look it
up."

This seems surprisingly simplistic. Is there actually any serious science to
back this?

~~~
Goladus
I've spent the last 20 minutes or so digging and haven't found much (though I
haven't read the book linked).

The most interesting paper I've found is this one from 1990 called _The
Biological Bases of extraversion: psychophysiological evidence_ [1]; which
discusses a hypothesis by Sybil Eysenck from 1969.

Essentially, extraversion and introversion are first observed to be
personality traits that can be passed genetically. Eysenck's hypothesis was
that introverts were more sensitive to stimulation in the reticular activating
system. Attempts to confirm this hypothesis have met with mixed success.
Eysanck also came up with a personality inventory, similar to the popular MBTI
and the "Big Five" inventory used by psychologists.

I haven't yet found anything particularly solid that confirms the connection
between those physiological traits and the personality as defined by the
Eysanck Questionnaire. Every other paper I have found so far _begins_ by using
the Eysanck Questionnaire to sort people into Introverts and Extraverts and
does some other tests.

[1] [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.ezp-
prod1.hul.harvard.edu/pubmed...](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.ezp-
prod1.hul.harvard.edu/pubmed/2198340)

------
jkuria
I just read a very interesting book called The Art of SpeedReading people that
supports this article. According to the book the main distinction between an
introvert and extravert (yes, not a typo, the term used in the book) is that
introverts re-charge by being alone while extaverts recharge by being around
people. Even introverts who are socially adept and can thrive in public
gatherings, feel drained by the experience and need some time alone
afterwords. Extraverts are the exact opposite. Also there are shy extaverts
and highly talkative introverts! I highly recommend the book!

------
int3rnaut
Why can't we all just get past labels and respect one another for who we are
and act--there wouldn't be a need for this blog post if that was the case
which is reason enough to try for that better future.

~~~
pjscott
Labels are sometimes handy for quickly getting an approximate idea of what
kind of person you're interacting with. For example, I'm a human rather than
(say) a turtle or a supernova, so the "human" label is very useful for telling
you how to interact with me.

Labels _among_ humans have subtler distinctions behind them, but when people
fall in useful clusters, labels can be useful if you bear in mind that they're
necessarily fuzzy concepts. My gender is male, I have a fairly nerdy
personality, I enjoy hiking and various such outdoor activities -- surely
these are potentially useful things to know about me, even if they are not
perfect descriptions of me, and do not define my identity.

Labels aren't bad; just too often misused.

------
mcantor
Am I the only person who just can't figure out whether I'm an "introvert" or
an "extrovert" no matter how hard I try? I hate small talk (and love
Smalltalk), but love meeting people. I value unfiltered honesty, but prefer
effective communication. I love to be alone with my thoughts, but sometimes I
just need to go out and make an idiot of myself at a party. Am I really the
only person in the universe with a mutant 'vert-agnostic brain, or maybe,
_perhaps_ , are we creating some unnecessary binary distinctions here?

~~~
AlexC04
Look up big five personality test online. (Check my other comment in this
thread for a link) you'll find that E/I is a spectrum of opposites. Most
likely you sit somewhere in the middle - or score high in both E & I.

------
jinushaun
Pretty much describe me, and I consider myself an introvert.

------
protagonist_h
Judging from responses, the topic resonates well here. Therefore a more
interesting question to ask is ― why so many hackers are introverts/shy/anti-
social etc? Or more precisely, which one causes the other? Is it spending too
much time in front of your computer which makes you introvert? Or is it that
introverts are more inclined to take up solitude activities like programming?

------
dholowiski
That's great - it's like a user manual for Me. If I wasn't such an introvert,
I'd print it out and give it to everybody I work with!

------
sambeau
I'm often surprised at how many performers are introverts. I have known people
who while barely saying a word and make eye contact in close social contact
are able to get up on stage and sing, perform and show-off in front of
hundreds.

A few famous examples: Michael Stipe of R.E.M., George Harrison of The
Beatles, Jimi Hendrix.

~~~
droz
In college I used to hold study sessions for undergraduates in computer
science. One thing I found was that one-on-one interactions were incredibly
simple. Bump that up to may 5 or so people, and the mental effort to keep
track of each person's reaction became more difficult. Up to about 15, almost
impossible to do effectively. But, once I got past 50, it was almost like
being up there by yourself. So, I can see how an introverted performer might
have a similar experience as the audience grows in size.

------
thomasgerbe
What about ambiverts?

~~~
wisty
What, you mean MOST people?

Yeah, they got left off the Myers-Briggs scale. Everyone is either a hermit,
or dances on tables after half a cup of coffee.

More modern psychological metrics rate people on an introvertedness (or
extrovertedness) scale, which is more or less normally distributed. But Myers-
Briggs (which is roughly as old as the belief that you can electroshock queers
straight) and crappy pop-psychology tests in women's magazines (and facebook)
persist in categorizing everyone into two bins.

Big 5 (a more modern categorization) is a much better descriptive framework.
The factors are introvertedness, openness (or curiosity), conscientious (hard
workingness), agreeableness, and neuroticism (the tendency to react to
negative emotions). Note how they are all factors, not categories? You don't
put normal people into bins.

------
thret
#5 is the only one that doesn't apply to me. I quite enjoy observing crowd
activities and can do this for long periods of time. I don't know how to 'let
go' and join in with the crowd but it is precisely that release I find so
fascinating to watch.

------
kenjackson
The thing that is interesting about introverts (of which I am one) is that
they will often say very little in person. But in email will write a rant that
goes off in 20 different tangents to ppl they've never met.

------
uniclaude
This article does not seem to describe Introverts, but more INTJ/INTP types.
Neither all introverts like to solve problems or puzzles, nor they all take
data and experience very quickly.

------
schiptsov
There is my demystification. ^_^

[http://schiptsov.blogspot.com/2011/06/top-ten-
oversimplifica...](http://schiptsov.blogspot.com/2011/06/top-ten-
oversimplifications-over.html)

------
rokhayakebe
Cheap shot: "The loudest one in the room is also the weakest"

------
vladoh
I think it will be very interesting to see a poll for introverts vs.
extroverts. Unfortunately I don't have enough karma to create it...

~~~
AlexC04
You might find you're interested in this article called "Geographic
Distribution of Big Five Personality Traits"
[http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Schmitt-
JCCP-2007....](http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Schmitt-
JCCP-2007.pdf)

It's a scientific paper so the reading is going to be 'heavy' but if you skip
down to page 198 (it's out of a larger journal, actually closer to about 5 or
10 pages in) you'll see that they graph some of the major traits.

    
    
      - East Asians are generally introverted while everyone else is pretty much 'flat'
    
      - East Asia is also the least "Agreeable" while Africa is the most.
    
      - EA is the least Consientious, while Africa is the most.
    
      - South America is the most open to new experiences while East Asia is the most conservative and resistant to change.
    
      - EA is the most Neurotic, while Africa is the least.
    

It's possible that the outstanding nature of the results indicate that
something might have been lost in translation when adapting the test to the
East Asian market - but who knows? These things are usually quite heavily
tested.

I'm sure there's a lot more in there that's neat in there, but I only did a
quick glance.

For a more 'high level' explanation of what the aspects of the big five are:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits> is a fine overview,
and you can actually do your very own personality inventory online
<http://www.personalitytest.org.uk/> seems good with a 41 item test, but you
can also try some larger ones out there - I've done some 100 item tests
online.

------
JohnnyBrown
O language, how poorly suited you are to describing the multidimensional space
that holds all possible personalities

------
rapind
#1 Introverts are not introverts. It's a generalization and simplification
that's more often wrong than right.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Can you expand on that? I sort of want to downvote you because what you said
didn't make sense.

Type-A personalities aren't Type-A personalities.

~~~
rapind
As an example, I read over his points and find myself agreeing with about 60%
of them, while the other 40% don't describe me at all.

Labels like Introvert are nice and neat, but unfortunately not very realistic.

------
known
Can introverts become good sales man?

------
crux
I have to agree with some other commenters that although this article is
accurate enough, it establishes a view of introversion that's so rigidly
determined, so reified, and so self-perpetuating and self-justifying that I
find it hard to recognize and certainly hard to endorse as a lifestyle. The
personality type and lifestyle here is a sort of baseline tendency for
introverts (like myself), but there's so much more leeway and growth possible
within the most introverted soul that it makes me a little sad to see
something so pat about these tendencies (and the whole dopamine thing—well,
let's just say I Am Not A Neuroscientist but I suspect that Dr. Laney isn't
one either).

A couple commenters have suggested that instead of wholly embracing these
practices—especially the ones about being rude to people—it's advantageous,
for job purposes, to meet women, to learn to at least put up with talking to
other people. To be honest it's been kind of entertaining to hear from
introverts who view the great extroverted mob like an enemy camp, to be
infiltrated—at great personal expense, but to great personal reward—by
learning to mimic their ways.

I want to suggest that it's possible to actually learn to enjoy being social
and meeting people. You know, for its own sake. While it's true that
eventually one will find that they might need to make relationships with other
people so they can do camping trips and get laid and such, I have found that
actually humanizing people, rather than treating them as ends to means, is
more satisfying and healthy in the long run. Further, while it's nice to try
to maintain a few close relationships, I think it's more satisfying and
healthy to learn to get beyond a simplistic superficial/real binary with your
human relationships—and by extension, with other people.

There are lots of ways to be introverted without seeing nearly the whole raft
of humanity as psychic vampires, or insensitive extroverts, or simply resource
repositories that you need to interact with. If you treat a work relationship
or a bank teller with this attitude of, 'I'm not interested in superficial
small talk. You only exist to me for the purposes of sending and receiving
information or resources', you will not ONLY be alone when you want to go
camping, but you will also be spiritually and emotionally impoverished.

The good news is, it IS possible to learn to enjoy talking with other people,
even if it's ultimately tiring. I mean, most things in life are tiring. That's
the nature of energy—we spend it on doing things. But you can be mindful of
your energy level (and I might suggest, blood sugar) without having to abstain
from all human contact. In fact, you can even enjoy human contact. The last 8
or so years of my life has been in a large part about learning to enjoy human
contact—and I've learned to enjoy it by learning to be _good_ at it. I am now,
I am glad to say, a pretty charming guy. I tell good stories, I meet people
well, I dress well, I make a good impression. This means that I don't have
trouble meeting women or finding partners for the activities that I like, but
it also means that I derive actual satisfaction from the practice of social
skills. I like exercising my expertise, like most people, and I like the
rewards I get—social reinforcement, positive feedback, that sort of thing. And
I think that's been the key for me. I didn't decide to embark on a project of
self-improvement and socialization because it was necessary for my eventual
professional success. I learned to get off on doing a good job at social
behavior. Introvert or not, it still _feels good_ to be a charming, likeable
person. It just means I take a nap afterwards.

------
Hisoka
Myth #6 describes me. I prefer authentic one on one connections rather than
spreading myself "too thin". I think that's a problem w/ people with too many
friends. Having too many friends is good but it also means you can't be great
friends to all of them.

~~~
potatolicious
I used to think (and act) the same, but I think it's really an unfair judgment
on extroverts. What happened is that I started dedicating more time/effort to
my relationships, and what I've found is that I _can_ maintain good,
meaningful friendships with a larger sphere of people than I thought would be
possible.

It's also a mistake to believe that extroverts have a large circle of loose
friendships _and that's it_. This can't be further from the truth - everyone
has close friends, and much looser acquaintances. It's one of the more
annoying aspects of the "introverts are people too" movement - the constant
need to put-down extroverts and the persistent claim that extroverts'
relationships are predominantly shallow.

------
zyfo
This is a much better article to pass along to non-introverts, if
understanding is the goal:
[http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring-f...](http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring-
for-your-introvert/2696/)

------
Macro
So true!

------
MatthewPhillips
This is relevant to my interests.

