
The Tyranny of the Extroverts - zootar
http://allendowney.com/essays/tyranny.html
======
kristofferR
The author doesn't know the difference between introverts and extroverts, so
this article falls completely flat. The difference is really simple:

* Introverts get tired when interacting with people and recharge their energy when they're alone

* Extroverts get tired by being alone and recharge their energy when they're with people

Extroversion and introversion doesn't say anyone about how shy or social
people are. There are a lot of introverts with great social skills and a lot
of extroverts with good inward skills.

That being said - it's obviously much more normal to be a shy introvert than
it is to be a shy extrovert. It does happen though.

I'm an introvert and used to be a really shy guy with low social skills. In
the last years however I gained a lot of confidence and social intelligence.
Have I become more extroverted? Nope, I've just improved my social skills
drastically.

The belief that how social people are is an unchangeable genetical trait is
downright dangerous. Unfortunately a lot of people are misled into believing
that it's unchangeable. It's just a skill like any other skill, it can
definitely be learned!

~~~
scott_s
Is there any evidence for that model of how humans work? People talk about it
all the time, but I've never heard of attempts to test it.

~~~
araneae
Thank you for this. The "official" definition of extroversion and introversion
and the "colloquial" definitions are bit different, I think. I have a greater
tendency to buy the colloquial version. The former was a definition invented
by one dude and never substantiated, whereas the latter is the current
evolution of the word as defined by what people find most useful.

~~~
chc
In much the same way, though, the classification of bats as mammals is
something one dude came up with, while human language naturally evolved to
call them birds. Which more accurately identifies their pedigree?

~~~
scott_s
First, I have never heard anyone, anywhere, ever call bats "birds." Second,
the relationship between bats and other mammals is well established through
genetics. In other words, that classification has been tested in ways that the
personality types have not (that I am aware of, hence, my question).

~~~
araneae
The Bible calls bats "birds," that's probably where he got it from.

------
zdw
"And I hope we value and develop other skills, like independence, focus,
persistence, deep thought and careful reflection, which might not be as
natural for extroverts."

Amen. Extroverts ruined my K12 education, how about yours? Now they're busy
doing the same to the political system, entertainment, etc.

And what're the introverts doing? Oh, they're off building the next
Facebook/LinkedIn to facilitate the extroverts...

~~~
hansy
What do you expect? How can you have someone that doesn't like talking to
crowds be a politician or someone who avoids cameras be in the entertainment
business? I guess, then, that leaves the extroverts to fill the gaps...

I hate the idea of cliques (jocks, nerds, etc.) just as much as I hate the
idea of baseless notions that extroverts are the slime balls while introverts
are the silent heroes. If people hailed the qualities of introverts, then they
would be in the position of extroverts, and since introverts presumably
dislike being in such situations, they would cease honing the skills like
"independence, focus, persistence..." they are admired for.

If the introverts are truly "building the next Facebook/LinkedIn," then their
success is derived from the extroverts using it.

It might not be a pretty world, but at least it's balanced (to a decent
degree).

~~~
pyre
Maybe we need more introverted politicians... Seems like nowadays being a
politician is more about kissing babies, and accepting bribes^Wdonations than
about trying to do something meaningful with their time in office like:

\- Make an attempt to understand the laws that they are passing and their
implications

\- Cut 'riders' out of bills

\- Try not to make laws that only benefit lawyers (so ambiguous that there
will be multiple precedent-setting cases before the legal grey area is gone).

    
    
      > It might not be a pretty world, but at least it's
      > balanced (to a decent degree).
    

How so? If we accept the idea that extroverts are in the CEO / politician /
sports star / etc positions, then you have to accept that the extroverts are
the ones the hold all of the power. If the introverts are 'building the next
Facebook/LinkedIn,' that gives them relatively little power: 1) politicians
can make your product illegal 2) there are relatively few success-stories that
give founders enough money to be considered in a position of 'power' (how many
failed Facebooks are there for every Facebook).

I'm not throwing in on either side of the 'this is reality vs this is fantasy'
argument, but if we assume that it is reality, your idea that it's balanced
doesn't seem to hold up.

~~~
wladimir
I wonder what would be the introvert/extrovert ratio for politicians be in
countries such as China? From what I've heard, more of their politicians there
have an education as engineer or scientist, instead of laywer or MBA which is
common in the west (or at least, USA).

~~~
pyre
I'm not sure how to take that... (as purely inquisitive, or as a subtle attack
on my argument -- i.e. more introverts as politicians => China => Socialism /
Communism => Game Over).

On the same token (introverts in Washingon == Communism), I could say that few
con-men are introverts, thereby implying that an extrovert-heavy government
would be full of con-men. The introvert-vs-extrovert argument certainly isn't
a battle of good-vs-evil, though I don't think anyone here is saying that we
should have a population of 100% introverts (or extroverts) either.

~~~
j_random_hacker
My take on that comment was that it was not a subtle attack at all -- it was
merely an observation that it's not a logical necessity for the leaders of a
large country to be extroverts.

~~~
wladimir
Indeed, that was my reasoning. I'm simply curious. It didn't even come into me
to think of it as an attack. Any anti-communism or anti-introvert bias he
might have read in my message is completely his own. I'm an introvert myself
and I don't regard either capitalism or communism as evil in itself.

~~~
pyre
I may have been _over_ reading into your comment. I tried to make my comment
seem like I wasn't just assuming the worst of you, but it looks like I failed
at that. My initial read of your comment was that it was just curiosity, but
for some reason a second reading made me realize the 'oh noes! communism!'
angle too.

------
wisty
Rant.

Myers-Briggs is one of the dumbest things in psychology. Psychologists, who
generally accept the stupidest theories generally admit it's useless, and
Big-5 is much better. It's only popular because it's so value-free - nobody
gets offended by any of it's factors (except introversion-extroversion: the
only useful one).

Introversion-Extroversion is the only factor that is really a big factor.
There other MB factors - (Sensing (S) - (N) Intuition, Thinking (T) - (F)
Feeling, and Judgment (J) - (P) Perception) are so meaningless nobody even
remembers them. The other big 5 factors (Openness to experience,
Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism) are much better descriptors
of people. Are you interested in stuff? Openness ++. Do your homework on time?
Conscientiousness ++. Say "yes" too much? Agreeableness ++. Crazy? Neuroticism
++. Honesty, intelligence, and empathy could be added; but they are a little
prickly to measure. But Big 5 is still fairly descriptive of most people.

Personality traits are (roughly speaking) normally distributed. It's stupid to
classify people as "extroverts or introverts", as most people are basically
just "meh". Sure, there's the geek who never speaks, and the cheerleader, but
most people just talk with a few friends, and feel a bit sick when they have
to talk to strangers. The dichotomy that's implied by using two classifiers
("extrovert / introvert"), rather than just scoring "extroversion" on a scale
of (say) 1-10 is just brain-dead.

"Introversion does not describe social discomfort but rather social
preference". I like reading books, but in high school I could talk to anyone
except a hot girl. Now, I guess I would prefer to read than make
"connections", but that doesn't totally disqualify me for having a job that
requires a lot of communication. Of course, I'm quite good at jobs that
require a bit of thinking, and enjoy them more. So, um, I guess I won't be
selling Avon any time soon. My loss, I guess.

And who says introverts aren't successful? I would pick Warren Buffet, Bill
Gates, Larry Page, Allan Greenspan (yeah, he caused the crisis, but virtually
no-one else new better), David Letterman, and quite a few other successful
people as un-extroverted people. Possibly Barack Obama, and quite a few other
presidents too (but I know next to nothing of US history). Maybe Bob Dylan.
Possibly John Lennon. Not Ringo though.

Having "social skills" can be important. But not all extroverts have them
(think - the bully, Mr. Foot-in-mouth, and the guy who just won't shut up),
and most introverts have adequate social skills. Most people do.

~~~
Goladus
_The dichotomy that's implied by using two classifiers ("extrovert /
introvert"), rather than just scoring "extroversion" on a scale of (say) 1-10
is just brain-dead._

Perhaps more importantly, it's unfalsifiable, untestable. There's no
possibility of identifying a person who is neither introverted or extraverted.

This is like having a theory that people are either short or tall, and then
trying to determine shortness vs tallness by having people take surveys about
whether they are comfortable in airline seats or have trouble reaching items
on the top shelf. Of course everyone will fall into a little of both
categories, but mostly all you are doing is wasting time.

~~~
owensmartin
Wonderful. The concept of falsifiability is a gift Karl Popper gave to
humanity, and we mustn't forget it.

So from a statistical standpoint, you're estimating theta, some parameter that
indicates your level of extroversion. What does this parameter get you? Will
you then predict this person's success in life? Why would you want to do that?

Much worse, could you possibly point to this untestable parameter as being the
_cause_ of one's success? Hardly.

But from an epistemological standpoint, there is some benefit to identifying
what we take to mean intro/extroversion. So that's why we give Jung credit,
but more as a philosopher and less as a scientist.

------
lionhearted
> Society rewards extroverts. They get the job, the money, the girl (or boy),
> and the front page.

I'm not entirely sure this is true. A lot of the top inventors,
industrialists, writers, and artists in any generation are introverts.

What less people realize is that the most accomplished statesmen and
politicians are often introverts too.

Augustus Cesar led the height of the Roman Empire, Tokugawa Ieyasu unified
Japan, Abraham Lincoln crushed the Confederacy and led to modern strong-
Federal America, etc, etc. All introverts.

Anecdotally, it seems like it's easier for an introvert to learn how deal well
with people than it is for an extrovert to learn to enjoy the solitude and
meditative periods necessary for serious hardcore expansion.

It's probably easier to become moderately popular and get external trappings
of success as an extrovert. But if I was trying to massively change the course
of history, I'd want the bulk of my top personnel in leadership positions to
be introverts.

------
notJim
I am highly skeptical of his assumption that skills like working on a team,
communicating with others, and leading others all imply extroversion.

Now that I think about it, most of the people I've worked with (as a
programmer) have probably been introverts, and excepting one or two, they've
all had excellent team and communication skills.

I am an introvert (reading HN and programming on a Saturday night, and I have
no problem with it!), and I am sympathetic to the idea that extroverts are a
problem, but I don't think this article articulates that problem in a
particularly convincing way.

~~~
pyre
I think the point is that if those 3 things (working on a team, communicating
with others, leading others) are what we start selecting for as the most
desirable skills for engineering students, then we effectively have started
selecting out introverts and selecting in extroverts. Granted these skills
aren't limited to extroverts, but it's much more common to have extroverts
with those skills than it is to have introverts with them.

~~~
notJim
> I think the point is that if those 3 things (working on a team,
> communicating with others, leading others) are what we start selecting for
> ... then we effectively have started selecting out introverts and selecting
> in extroverts.

I think this was the very assumption I was questioning. I am simply
unconvinced that these skills imply extroversion. I guess I'm not sure what it
would take to convince me, as anecdotally at least, I've found my generally
introverted friends to be very competent in these areas.

I also do not frankly believe that these skills are prioritized above
technical competence _at companies that highly value technical competence._
For ho-hum business software, this may be the case, but in that case, it may
be that people skills are more important than developer skills, because the
problems being solved are just not that challenging from a technical
viewpoint. On the other hand, at companies where innovation is very important
(well-run startups, Google, Amazon), the interview process will tend to
heavily favor technical skills.

 __Edit __: I felt I should explain something better. It is certainly the case
that people who have abominable social skills will have a very difficult time
getting hired. But frankly, at tech companies, the bar is basically "is able
to communicate with people without being an asshole." I'm sorry, but if that
is your definition of extrovert, than there is a confusion of terms going on
here.

------
DanI-S
The difference between an introvert and an extrovert is two pints of beer.

~~~
Pent
I'll drink to that.

------
greenyoda
This doesn't make sense to me. I'm definitely an introvert: shy, lousy at
casual conversation, and can happily go for days without talking to anyone.
However, I have no problem in my software development job with teamwork,
communication or leadership (I was even a manager for many years before
deciding to go back to being a senior developer). I can work effectively with
others to get things done, taking the initiative when necessary. And, as
someone else pointed out, I've seen many extroverts who have poor skills in
these areas.

------
timsally
This is a classic misunderstanding of what a introvert is. It does seem to be
true that introverts have weaker social skills than extroverts. This is not
however, inherent! It is simple a function of practice, and as introverts need
alone time to recharge, they are less likely to have practice in social
settings. It's a subtle distinction but an important one to make. The article
claims that people skills come "naturally" to extroverts, but that's an
oversimplification of the underlying issues.

Put simply, the difference between introverts and extroverts is how they
recharge energy. Imagine a party in a packed apartment. An extrovert can spend
hours there and feel refreshed and energized at the end. On the other hand, an
introvert will feel tired and drained. But this has nothing to do with how
they act at the party. Being shy and awkward doesn't mean you are an
introvert! This misunderstanding is fairly pervasive. I'm a huge introvert and
I go to parties all the time. I act very outgoing, friendly, and confident.
Close friends are in fact quite surprised when they find out I am an introvert
at heart. But I could never sustain going to parties twice a week every week
because I would get too drained.

All of that said, the author does raise some important points about the place
of introverts in society. _Caring For Your Introvert_ is absolutely
recommended reading:
[http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring-f...](http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring-
for-your-introvert/2696/). It touches on some of the issues raised in the
article and provides a much better overview of extroversion versus
introversion. Previous discussion of this excellent article here:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=561311>. Rands also has a nice article
about nerds which does not explicitly touch on introversion. It does however,
address many issues introverts typically deal with:
[http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2007/11/11/the_nerd_ha...](http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2007/11/11/the_nerd_handbook.html).

~~~
Tycho
But this whole concept of recharging energy sounds pretty unscientific to
start with, unless you're talking about sleep and digestion. Although
interestingly I did see an experiment once that showed introverted people
salivated significantly more than extroverted people, while carrying out a
group task (licking envelopes).

------
nlawalker
The other day, I saw a discussion on reddit entitled something like "What is
it that people actually _do_ at parties?" I thumbed through it, not really
that interested, but I had just been to a gathering the evening prior and had
a small realization while thinking about it.

Quite simply, people talk about themselves.

There's some skill and filtering involved (you have to _do_ things to have
something interesting to say when you talk about yourself, and you don't want
to focus the whole conversation on yourself), but the most important part of
this epiphany was that I realized that growing up, I was always taught that
the best way to be a conversationalist (and the best way to get girls to like
you, and the best way to get support for your decisions, and the best way to
get important people to listen to you) was to minimize yourself in the
conversation and take interest in the other person, asking questions and
responding with more questions...

and that this advice is sabotage, created by extroverts to make introverts
easier to spot so the E's don't have to spend as much time trying to engage us
and can just move on. It's like telling someone who has a hard time picking up
skiing that snowplowing down the side of the run is just as fun as actually
skiing, so they should just stick to that (and incidentally stay the hell out
of the way of everyone else).

Extroverts naturally ignore this advice (or never see it, because extroverts
don't need to seek out advice about how to engage others), and when introverts
internalize it they further push themselves into a corner.

The most rewarding thing for me in extrovert situations has been figuring out
what makes me an interesting person, and talking about it.

~~~
Karzyn
Wow, oversimplify much? I happen to much more on the extrovert side of the
spectrum and while, yes, people do sometimes talk about themselves at social
gatherings many of us, myself included, also make an effort to hold an actual
back-and-forth conversation. It's unfortunate that your experiences have been
so negative but don't classify all people based on that.

Though let me just say that:

 _"this advice is sabotage, created by extroverts to make introverts easier to
spot so the E's don't have to spend as much time trying to engage us and can
just move on"_

Sounds like "Toot, toot, all aboard the crazy train!" to me.

------
Cherian_Abraham
The Tyranny of the Extroverts title reminds me of "The Smart Talk Trap"
(stanford-online.stanford.edu/apm04csia/docs/SmartTalkTrap.pdf) from the
Harvard Business Review which talks of these poisonous extroverts who excel in
the language of "No, it wont work" and revels in shooting down ideas to fix
something and not coming up with any actual steps to solve the problem. I
recommend it if you havent read it already.

------
bartonfink
This essay is ridiculous on a number of points, but the point that stood out
the most to me is below. The author writes:

"I shouldn't have to say this, but there is a place in the world for
introverts. Show me the ten most innovative minds of the 20th Century and I
will show you ten introverts. From Einstein to Wittgenstein, not one of them
could carry a conversation if you put handles on it."

Apparently Richard Feynman never happened.

~~~
binspace
> Fortune 500 companies are run by 499 extroverts, plus Bill Gates. There are
> 435 extroverts in the House of Representatives and 100 in the Senate, two
> from each state.

I doubt it.

~~~
ScottBurson
You're right. Bill Gates is no introvert.

Edited to add: I read an amusing story about Gates' childhood once. His mother
had called him to dinner and he didn't come right away. She called out "What
are you doing?" and he shot back, "I'm thinking! Have you ever tried
thinking?"

Granted, thinking is an activity normally associated with introverts. But that
doesn't mean extroverts can't do it. And the aggressiveness Gates showed in
this incident -- and indeed, has shown many times in his life -- is not a
quality of an introvert.

~~~
nhangen
I'm not so sure that agression has anything to do with
introversion/extroversion.

------
daimyoyo
I am very introverted. I always have been. The fact is that the unique
challenges that programming and web design are suited to introverts. Can I be
an A-list actor? No. But I can use the talents I have to make something from
nothing. So don't try to change yourself to fit some idea you have of what you
aren't. Embrace the personality you have and the talents you're given and make
something amazing.

------
Joakal
Is there any education system in the world that trains kids with social
skills?

Seems needed due to digital communication technology.

------
eyeforgotmyname
Emotional Strength > Intellectual Intelligence in determining societies
winners. You have to convince people that you are entitled to lead, to get
them to grant you leadership.

------
jayhawg
Other than because it's easy, what's the appeal of using stereotypes to create
these supposed normative behaviors? Of all the people I've met in my life,
most come closer to being balanced than not. We're all extroverted in some
situations, and introverted in others. Maybe being divisive makes it easier to
swallow the bitter pill of unrealized potential, but it's not productive.

------
Kolya
It's interesting he uses Andrew Wiles as an example. Perhaps FLT would have
been proved faster if Wiles had _not_ mostly shut himself away.

His achievement was exceptional, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that
he went about reaching the goal in the optimum way.

------
schintan
As an introvert, I tend to agree with the author. Introverts generally make up
the extreme ends of the population distribution in terms of being
"successful", success being defined the way it is generally accepted. On the
other hand, extroverts are spread out much more evenly. For example,the CEO of
a big corporation might be an introvert, but most of the middle level managers
are extroverts. Then there are those introverts who find it difficult to move
up in the management hierarchy, for one reason or the other. I believe that
those who are exceptions are so in spite of being introverts and not "because"
they are introverts.

------
known
If you're good at _selling_ it doesn't matter if you're introvert or
extrovert.

------
gohat
Well it makes sense. Senior management positions and positions running
companies all require one thing.

That you can tell other people what to do and that they'll do it.

By definition, an introvert is significantly less likely to be able to do
this.

------
known
Extra-ordinary people like Hitler & Einstein were introverts.

------
hammock
I find it interesting that the only people who spend this much time talking
about and defending extrovert/introvert are, themselves, introverts.

------
jakubmal
This is a letter I sent to the author of essay few minutes ago:

Hi, As you probably know already, your essay landed on Hacker News main page:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2345552> Also, here you can see comments.
Congratulations for that.

However, being keenly interested in applied psychology I’d like to point out
few things about your essay.

First thing that made me worried is that you actually didn’t mention Emotional
Intelligence. I’m not sure whether it was so known back then in 2005. You rely
on extrovert/introvert factor to categorize people. The same what Jonathan
Rauch did.

Very latest researches and publications tend to categorize people by low/high
Emotional Intelligence (EQ), which is a good choice in my opinion. Note that
EQ covers wide range of factors, but generally relates to understanding one’s
own and others’ behavior. So this not only applies to dealing with any social
interactions, but also to dealing with one’s self.

You may now assume that introvert means low EQ and extrovert means high EQ,
but it isn’t necessarily true. I’m in one of very top high schools in Poland.
And we have an AP Computer Science class, which has a program that is very
similar to what is done on University on Algorithmics. Also we have analogical
Mathematics class.

Obviously, we observe EQ drop when comparing these special classes to others.
However we do not observe introverts/extroverts categories. Of course those
extroverts – low intelligence guys are quite funny ;) , but that’s not the
point. The point is to show that there’s not so much connection between EQ and
being extro-/introvert.

Now, you are right that introverts are generally ranked lower in “life/people
categories”. That happens because emotions plays key role in human brain. They
were introduced by evolution to help species survive, but now it turned
against us.

High EQ people (not all extroverts and not only extroverts, also some
introverts) know how to use this to help themselves in many life situations.
They know how to negotiate, how to talk people into something, how to have
great friendships and fulfilling marriages. In our times EQ became one of the
most important factors in life.

So I believe we should stop complaining against people treating others worse
because these others are introverts. Rather we should improve our EQ to be
aware of our own behavior, of what controls us, because this is the way to
living our lives better.

With equal EQ levels introvert and extrovert will be dealing with life very
similarly, they both will be able to find a way in difficult situations.
Unfortunately, extrovert will always have an advantage over introvert, e.g.
extrovert will have more connections and that as we know is better in
business. But it will not be that significant.

What I want to point out is that we need to help people improve EQ and
choosing people by high EQ levels (observe them in social interactions) is not
so surprising from the point of chooser. Fortunately, Emotional Intelligence
is not something like “being tall”, which cannot be changed.

At last I’d like to thank you for this essay. I’m sure it is going to have
positive impact on its readers. When hunting for those EQ guys we sometimes
forget that there is also a place for IQ guys. And they are going to find it
too. Also, they are in lucky situation, because they have high IQ, which
cannot be changed and probably low EQ, which can (easily) be changed. The life
would be theirs, only if they did a little to improve Emotional Intelligence.

Sincerely, Jakub Malinowski from Poland

------
Kilimanjaro
"there are problems you can't solve with your mouth open"

------
maurycy
The reality rewards action.

------
binspace
I've seen plenty of extroverts who are bad team members.

I've seen plenty of introverts who are effective communicators.

~~~
kijinbear
Extroverts can be bad team members when they're assholes. Assholes come in
many flavors, but an extroverted asshole often makes a worse team member than
an introverted asshole.

Introverts can be effective communicators when they've thought through the
problem at hand and therefore know exactly how to make sense of it. Extroverts
are sometimes too distracted to think deeply about something.

I think the article is talking about a specific way of talking about "team
skills" and "communication skills". Some people tend to equate those terms
with the ability to make small talk with everybody, be popular at parties,
etc. Those kinds of "skills" are definitely lacking in introverts, yet
expected of everybody where extroverted assholes are in positions of power.

~~~
tkahn6
> Assholes come in many flavors

Two figures of speech that compose to form something hilarious and unexpected.

------
TimothyBurgess
I've noticed that I have the ability to go between introverted and extroverted
(regardless of alcohol consumption haha)...

When I'm solving problems and piecing stuff together while glued to my
computer I definitely get into a zone or mode or whatever, and don't really
care for much outside interference. Most of the time it actually annoys me to
get interrupted. But it only takes a few minutes away from it (sometimes an
hour or two if I've left something unfinished haha) to get into the
extroverted, outgoing talkative mode.

I've actually noticed a little bit of a curve in how well I communicate. The
first few minutes after ending problem solving mode consist of me pausing a
bit in my sentences (thinking ahead and seeing the conversation as a whole)
and as time goes on I end up speaking very quickly and fluently without much
thought at all.

Any other developers here transition between intro and extroverted like this?

What sucks is that it takes a few minutes for my brain to switch modes...
because at work everyone probably just thinks I'm some really quiet, super
serious guy.

------
georgieporgie
"our emphasis on collaborative, active learning tends to encourage it."

In my childhood experience, 'collaboration' means that one person does all the
work while the others screw around. Since no outside pressure is exerted to
ensure that all parties contribute, this just amplifies existing social
biases. If you put the 'cheerleader' with the 'nerd' and don't check in to
make sure they're both working, all you did was hinder the 'nerd'.

------
zyfo
I wonder where he gets his supposed statistics from. Seems like he's basically
equating social awkwardness ~ extroversion. Which, as many posters here have
pointed out, is plain silly.

~~~
SteveJS
80% of statistics are made up on the spot. Only 1.23432% of them have too much
precision, and 64% of statistics are worse than lies or damned lies.

------
sliverstorm
Bill Gates: The revenge of the introvert.

