What does introvert even mean? I've heard shy people who are energized by talking to others described as introverts, and I've heard outgoing people who have to be alone to energize described as introverts. These descriptions are the opposite, but they're given the same label. Then you have articles like this one, where some of the bullet points make sense for both types of people I describe, some make sense for only one, and some make sense for neither. Online discussions about introversion are usually just as confusing.
Then at some point the term "ambivert" became popularized, with claims the majority of people fall into a vague middle category (http://www.today.com/health/winning-personality-advantages-b...). But this doesn't really clarify anything to me, from what I can tell it just adds another label onto a spectrum that isn't well-defined.
I'd love clarification on this, especially if anyone has a good authoritative source on it.
Summarized from Susan Cain's book "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking"
---
A very basic definition is that introverts have a preference for quiet, minimally stimulating environments.
This means that introverts tend to enjoy quiet concentration, listen more than talk and think before they speak. They tend think more and focus on quality over quantity in most things and tend to focus intently on a single project at a time (i.e. friendships and how they engage projects and hobbies at work/during free time).
Extroverts are energized by social situations and tend to be multi-taskers who think out loud and therefore need others' feedback to validate their ideas or nudge them in the right direction.
---
I highly recommend the book, especially if you think you're an introvert or have difficulty accepting yourself as one. It really helped me see that it was OK being introverted and that there were certain advantages that extroverts don't have
I don't see how introversion and extroversion are mutually exclusive. Sometimes I prefer being alone and concentrating on something (eg. thinking, writing, coding, etc), other times I prefer socializing with other people.
What does that make me - someone who's sometimes introverted and sometimes extroverted? In that case these labels aren't very useful are they? Not to mention everything is relative. I'm more social than the average software engineer, but less social than the average salesperson.
This taxonomic question always comes up in HN discussions of personality type - see also, whenever Myers Briggs is discussed.
My take is that some people are well characterized by being on one side of a dichotomy - say, introvert/extrovert, or analytical/intuitive. They really get something out of discussions like in TFA, because they fit the class. And the fit can provide a powerful high-level diagnostic on a lot of otherwise inchoate feelings.
But, some folks are not well captured by the dichotomy - like yourself. These people tend to say that TFA is reductive and simplistic, and does not capture reality.
And both sets of people are right. For themselves.
Do you think it's possible that your (well-thought-out) post could replace "people are well characterized by being on one side of a dichotomy" with "people are more comfortable thinking they are on one side of a dichotomy", without losing any resolution?
For me, that weakening seems inaccurate. And going further, I really do believe some people besides me are well-characterized, in part, by the introvert/extrovert divide.
There's a concept of an 'ambivert' too, which sits in the middle.
The popular understanding of introversion and extraversion has necessarily simplified the whole set up to 'loud, socialising people', and 'quiet, solitary' people.
Neither are true - both are caricatures of the truth.
I think it comes down essentially to how you recharge mentally - you do it in company by bouncing off others, or you do it alone.
Neither precludes the capabilities traditionally ascribed to either camp - introverts are perfectly capable of being social, as much as extraverts are perfectly capable of being cerebral.
The book discusses this point well. (Arguably the article could have done a better job with this.) Seriously, it's a good book and I would recommend it.
I've always heard the first group you mention called extroverts (while the second is introvets).
I have my old MBTI lit from college, and it seems to agree with that -- extrovet versus introvert has to do with your focus and how you relax.
A common introvert versus extravert trait (and is the main one I used for the labels) is that introverts compose internally while extroverts compose externally -- eg, introverts take a few seconds to compose a reply, then say it while extroverts tend to talk their way through coming up with one. That behavior seems to be the one the other introvert/extrovert behaviors cluster around. (It also is one of the fastest to bother the other -- expecting them to compose in the opposite style.)
So for a source, I would recommend "The Highly Sensitive Person". The theory is this: some people are more sensitive. They pick up on the microgesture you maybe dont. They hear the small vocal cue or see the change in posture. Our brains -- thinking in general -- its expensive! If you process things more quickly, it's plausible your batterys drain a bit quicker too. Evolutionary speaking, everything has a cost. Look is this true? I dont know the science has to be sorted out, but it is plausible.
Do you think it is possible for this to be sorted out by science? It seems non-nullifiable, which generally puts it in the not-science category when I think of social science.
I don't think the label of introvert or extrovert, no matter what the definition, can describe a human wholly. We all have tendencies. I think if you tend to be an introvert by your actions than you are an introvert. For those, who claim to be introverts and are extroverts, they may be more likely seeking attention and/or are types of performers than the typical introvert.
You might be interested in learning more about the Kolbe ($$) test. It is better than the well-known Myers-Briggs test.
Then at some point the term "ambivert" became popularized, with claims the majority of people fall into a vague middle category (http://www.today.com/health/winning-personality-advantages-b...). But this doesn't really clarify anything to me, from what I can tell it just adds another label onto a spectrum that isn't well-defined.
I'd love clarification on this, especially if anyone has a good authoritative source on it.