Introversion vs. Extroversion

[under the rain]

All people tend to fall into to camps when it comes to social activity. These are introversion (Loss of energy during social situations) and extroversion (Gaining energy in social situations). Many people make the claim that extroversion is the superior trait, primarily because introverts tend to seem aloof and more difficult to reach than extroverts. Is this really the case? That is, make your argument for which trait, if either, make for better people and better contributors to society.

I argue that introversion is extroversion's superior and a world composed primarily of introverts would be a much better one. One reason is that introverts, because they tend to stay away from tiring social situations in favor of being alone, tend to think more then extroverts. I think it might be because of this that while only around twenty-something percent of the general population is introverted, around sixty percent of people with "gifted" intelligence level are introverts. Simply put, introverts are generally smarter than extroverts. Not only that, but they think more when they talk, generally resulting in more polite, nicer conversation when it does occur. So in other words, a world composed of introverts would have a smarter, kinder, more polite populace than the one we currently inhabit.

[Wio]

Our society is built for extroverts. In that context, extroversion is the superior trait. It is like asking whether you'd want to be in a wheel chair or have functional legs in a race up a flight of stairs. Even in positions where little to no human interaction is needed, extroverts take priority over introverts.

[Anoleis]

The world needs a balance of both Introverts and Extroverts. Neither is superior to the other.

I argue that introversion is extroversion's superior and a world composed primarily of introverts would be a much better one. One reason is that introverts, because they tend to stay away from tiring social situations in favor of being alone,

How does staying out of "tiring social situations" make one superior?

tend to think more then extroverts.

Entirely subjective.

I think it might be because of this that while only around twenty-something percent of the general population is introverted, around sixty percent of people with "gifted" intelligence level are introverts.

Citation needed.

Simply put, introverts are generally smarter than extroverts. Not only that, but they think more when they talk, generally resulting in more polite, nicer conversation when it does occur. So in other words, a world composed of introverts would have a smarter, kinder, more polite populace than the one we currently inhabit.

Again subjective.

[under the rain]

The world needs a balance of both Introverts and Extroverts. Neither is superior to the other.


How does staying out of "tiring social situations" make one superior?

Forgot to add a therefore in that sentence, that would have made it much more understandable.

Entirely subjective.

"Introverts are more concerned with the inner world of the mind. They enjoy thinking, exploring their thoughts and feelings." (Bainbridge)

Citation needed.

See below.

Again subjective.

"[They] have a clear idea of what [they'll] be doing when [they] decide to act." ("Myers & Briggs Foundation")
---

Bainbridge, Carol. "Introvert." About.com. About.comThe New York Times Company, n.d. Web. 6 Feb 2011. <http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/introvert.htm>.

"Extraversion or Introversion." The Myers & Briggs Foundation. The Myers & Briggs Foundation, 1997. Web. 6 Feb 2011. <http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/extraversion-or-introversion.asp>.

[Wio]

Entirely subjective.

What about it is subjective? Does the measurement of how much one thinks depend on the measurer?

[Anoleis]

Introverts are more concerned with the inner world of the mind. They enjoy thinking, exploring their thoughts and feelings.

This is a generalization (e.g. not all introverts are like this.) It, also, does not show superiority.

---

Bainbridge, Carol. "Introvert." About.com. About.comThe New York Times Company, n.d. Web. 6 Feb 2011. <http://giftedkids.about.com/od/glossary/g/introvert.htm>.

"Extraversion or Introversion." The Myers & Briggs Foundation. The Myers & Briggs Foundation, 1997. Web. 6 Feb 2011. <http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-personality-type/mbti-basics/extraversion-or-introversion.asp>.

While these do cite your percentages they do not show that introverts are superior to extroverts. How successful someone is depends on a variety of variables.

"[They] have a clear idea of what [they'll] be doing when [they] decide to act." ("Myers & Briggs Foundation")

So? This does not prove superiority.

What about it is subjective? Does the measurement of how much one thinks depend on the measurer?

How was it measured? How do you measure thinking? It is subjective because being introvert/extrovert does not directly correlate to how much one thinks/ can think.

[Kusuke]

This is a generalization (e.g. not all introverts are like this.)

This is the only problem I have with what you just put. Generalizations are all we can get for personality traits. You can say it the way under the rain did without loss of generality, and therefore it is a valid statement. Generalizations like these do not make the definition of introversion less true.

Also, we are all forgetting the rarer personality type of Ambiversion. Who's to say that central tendency may not be superior? Though I will not venture into which personality trait is superior, since I haven't the slightest clue.

[Anuket]

You can't really be sure which one is superior to the other because as time goes by things would change. And as Aeschylus said the world needs a balance of both just like yin and yang, if you have too much of the other things would be unbalanced and that isn't always a good thing.

[Anoleis]

Generalizations like these do not make the definition of introversion less true.

Well yes, but the generalization does not prove superiority either.

Generalizations like these do not make the definition of introversion less true.

My intention was not to disprove introversion, but to show how it varies. How an introvert "explores their mind" is different for every introvert. (i.e. drug use vs mediation)

An introvert is not superior to an extrovert simply because he/she thinks more, just as an extrovert is not superior because he/she likes being around others.

[Kusuke]

Well yes, but the generalization does not prove superiority either.

Well yes... That by itself doesn't... But if you follow logically you could arrive at this conclusion:

Inversion: Tendency to be concerned with and gratified by the mental life

----> It is not clear whether or not they enjoy thinking, but they do PREFER thinking

----> Because they prefer thinking, the thoughts and comments/responses/conversations may tend to be more analytical

----> Analytical thinking is purposefully reflective (or critical) concerning what to believe and what to do.

----> Because introverts are likely to be critical thinkers, they are more likely to make better personal decisions and possibly even better decisions in general (It depends on what level of clarity, credibility, accuracy and logical capacity they have).

I didn't state anything as absolute. With all generality you could arrive at such a conclusion. It simply states that introverts are more likely to make better decisions then extroverts. It doesn't mean that extroverts can't make better decisions, it just means that out of the two, introverts are more likely.

Now here's where the contradiction comes in, I'm SURE there is an equally logical argument that goes for Extroverts, so it should be impossible to even guess at which is superior.

[Aku no Hikari]

I think this should be moved to serious talk.

And... can we screw "superiority" for a while? We're not going anywhere with that.

From my humble experience, I see there are two types of "introverts". And when extroverts think of introverts, they think of the bad one.

Like Wio said, society is built for extroverts. Society is divided in a hierarchy based on one's social ability, attractiveness, money, ability to solicit, etc. People are usually struggling towards the top of the hierarchy. Men at the top of the hierarchy are the ones who have more money and girls than they know what to do with. Everyone thinks of them as "better" and thus more "desirable". Naturally, there are also those at the bottom of the hierarchy. They're just like everyone else; they're struggling towards the higher half, but they fail, resulting in them being miserable and withdrawn.

When extroverts think of introverts, they think of this kind of introverts. In relation to the hierarchy, I'll call them the "bottom introverts".

But there is also the other kind of introverts. Those who realized the lie. They usually keep to themselves, but they don't look weak or miserable. Some of them are loners, but they're never lonely. They're not at the bottom of the hierarchy -- they live OUTSIDE the hierarchy. And they look down on the whole hierarchy in pity. They know very well who they are, and they're quite determined. Nothing in the world will make them change that. They are usually the most intellectually and academically successful people in the world. They build the world with their minds and hard work, and they go fully invisible and unappreciated in the outside part of society. They are usually very pleasant people to be with, because they're more multidimensional; more educated; more sophisticated; more helpful. Again, in relation to the hierarchy, I'll call them the "outside introverts".

Now "bottom introverts" and "outside introverts" are not mutually exclusive categories. More often than not, "outside introverts" realized what they realize only after hitting the bottom. And it's sadly the case that some "outside introverts" grow too cynical and nihilistic towards their societies. They give up all hope on society and choose to keep their minds to themselves and live for themselves for the rest of their lives. They abandon all responsibility over their societies, and all faith in humanity.

I say screw the social hierarchy. As long as you have your job and/or academic life, your family and your friends, you don't need anything more than that to live a full, happy life. Your life is too short, and your society needs your mind and your hard work. But more importantly, it needs your social criticism. You know society is wrong, and you have the keys to change it.

I want to see "outside introverts" making themselves more visible. Their societies need them. The social hierarchy sadly produces very miserable people (for example, like those you find on 4chan's anime board). Those people are the products of your society; they're your responsibility. Society overall needs to grow up and become more aware of that. It needs to start to deal with it more rationally. Pulling a "get out and get a life" on every "bottom introverted" basement dweller you happen to see does not make them change. It's not cool. It's not funny. It's stupid, immature, and very destructive. They wouldn't have become that miserable without people like you mocking them all their lives.

I think both introverts and extroverts need to develop their other trait. Extroverts should "get in". They should start using their heads more. They should learn to listen before they talk; and to think more than they talk. They should learn to appreciate and respect introverts, even the "bottom" ones. "Bottom introverts" should re-develop themselves, eliminate all the pathological crap they might have developed through their life, develop their self-esteem and self-confidence, develop some worthy interests, become more outspoken, but still humble and kind.

And "outside introverts" should learn to be more outspoken, and develop their ability to articulate their visions, because concepts inside your head will die with you when you do, if nobody knows about them. And "outside introverts" should also learn to appreciate extroverts. They're not "inferior". I think society needs both introverts and extroverts, but in a different mixture. Let's face it, there are jobs introverts cannot stand, and extroverts are naturally excellent at them. If there was some kind of balance, e.g. a 50-50, and both were mature enough to understand and appreciate the existence of the other (no social hierarchy), the world would be a better place.

Just my two cents.

[Anoleis]

And... can we screw "superiority" for a while? We're not going anywhere with that.

I thought that was the point of the thread.

I argue that introversion is extroversion's superior and a world composed primarily of introverts would be a much better one.

I mean we can compare and contrast introverts and extroverts till humanity is composed of brains in jars...

[Wio]

Aeschylus, are you an extrovert?

[Skylar1]

hm.

so, I am introverted.. extremely.

Ever since I was... well, aware of existing, I knew for certain that I operated under a far different set of protocols and parameters. I just didn't relate at all to anyone.

When I was little, I would completely ignore my peers, and instead favor discussions with teachers, and adults. I loved their knowledge, and ability to understand things; and I became most agitated as a child when they weren't able to answer the questions I asked.

I crave new information; the more I learn about something, the better I feel. And the more I learned, the more I wanted to learn even more. My mind essentially became an extensive reservoir of information and knowledge. I would not be lying if I said that 90%-99% of my time spent awake is spent JUST digesting information and thinking about it. Sometimes, to the point (though rare) that I can't function. An entire spectacular universe of wondering and joy that exists in an ever broadening expanse within my own mind.

I love to think, and that's just it really. Sure, maybe it's not society's picture perfection of "normal", and you know what? I DON'T CARE. There is no pleasure greater to me than knowledge and understanding.

Extroverts contrasts with me in a really bad way. They make me feel uncomfortable by their 'bliss of ignorance', or unwillingness to sit down and have a deep conversation about something because it's "boring" to them. Sure, that's not everyone, but that's most certainly the majority.

I really don't like social situations, and I'd prefer to keep 'talking' to a minimum. Rarely, do I ever wish to not be by myself.

Whereas extroverts would experience joy by going to a party, or dating, I experience joy by learning about quantum mechanics, or creating a chat/graph about economical output.

I've thought about life; I've thought about happiness; I've thought about what it means to be happy; I've thought about WHY I should be happy; i've thought about what it means to exist; I've thought about why it matters to exist; I've wondered why reality -should- exist; I've thought about why it matters that I care about caring about why reality should exist and if there's even a reason to be happy about it in the first place!!

hell.. I've even THOUGHT about THINKING.

Point being, this is how I perceive the world; and I love it. sure, You do it your way, I'll do it my, but just know that I am more content with my introversion than anything I could possibility ever come up with, and I'll be damned before I let anyone tell me otherwise.

[Anoleis]

Aeschylus, are you an extrovert?

You are calling on the previously disclosed, "Extroverts talk before they think," to insult my argument, and I do not appreciate it. Also, no.

[Forgotten Show]

Human interactions are dynamic and fluid, which is why we behave differently with different groups of people. For every otherwise-healthy 'introvert' you can show me, I can find a person to open them up, and for each 'extrovert' I can find a crowd that humbles them. One of the greatest failings in psychology is portraying introversion and extroversion as binary, 1 or 0 character traits. Nobody is wholly introverted, or wholly extroverted, without being socially maladjusted.


Bad Memory

[Wio]

You are calling on the previously disclosed, "Extroverts talk before they think," to insult my argument, and I do not appreciate it. Also, no.

Those are your words, not mine.

Keep in mind though, that to be an extrovert you have to have be able to fall back on saying things without putting any thought into them. As an introvert it is very hard for me to do this and as a result I get little in edgewise in group conversations, because by the time I've come up with a meaningful statement, the topic has already moved on. While an extrovert is certainly capable of putting thought into what they say, they have no qualms with not doing so and thus often say thoughtless things.

I would also say that it's not just about thinking, but what you think about. Extroverts have to spend a lot of time thinking just about certain people and the lives of those people to keep up. Introverts do not do this for obvious reasons. Their mind does not idle though, their thought is redirected into some other avenue. Many times that investment goes into some intellectual field. Other times it can go into a very obscure field that has seemingly no utility ( ).

For every otherwise-healthy 'introvert' you can show me, I can find a person to open them up

Like their mom?
Almost all introverts are able to enjoy 1-on-1 or even group conversations. In addition, almost all extroverts enjoy to spend some time alone. With most people I've met though, there was always enough displacement to call them as either extroverted or introverted.

[RPGHero]

What I think is... If you make fun of me and you're an extravert than that's ok. If you make fun of me and you're in introvert, then we really have a problem lol. Because I am an introvert and if I speak up, it's only after long scrutiny of my thoughts.

On the other hand... If a potential romantic partner is interested in me and is an introvert, it must mean something lol.

[Forgotten Show]

I'll play ball, but I'll play dirty too: describe introverted and extroverted, please.

In case you didn't already know: if you don't go out frequently, by definition you're introverted, and vice versa. If you take the initiative in general tasks and social engagements, you're extroverted, and vice versa. Textbook definitions don't factor in enjoyment, peer pressure, or plain ol' necessity. Plenty of people go out regularly and don't really enjoy it, and plenty of introverts give hell to salesmen over the phone to customer service when the salesmen fails.

Think you can define introverted and extroverted per the normal requirements of scientific laws? If not, why do you think these terms, as they're currently described (at least by the OP), apply accurately to most people? Hint: there's a reason I mentioned to a sliding scale in my previous post.


Bad Memory

[Wio]

I'll play ball, but I'll play dirty too: describe introverted and extroverted, please.

In case you didn't already know: if you don't go out frequently, by definition you're introverted, and vice versa. If you take the initiative in general tasks and social engagements, you're extroverted, and vice versa. Textbook definitions don't factor in enjoyment, peer pressure, or plain ol' necessity. Plenty of people go out regularly and don't really enjoy it, and plenty of introverts give hell to salesmen over the phone to customer service when the salesmen fails.

Think you can define introverted and extroverted per the normal requirements of scientific laws? If not, why do you think these terms, as they're currently described (at least by the OP), apply accurately to most people? Hint: there's a reason I mentioned to a sliding scale in my previous post.


Bad Memory

My point is not that there isn't a continuum, but rather between introverts and extroverts there is a no-mans-land to which I've yet to meet a person whom belongs.

In addition, I don't see how enjoying one-on-one interaction is contradictory to being introverted. Such would imply that by your understanding of the term, introverts dislike all human interaction what-so-ever.

I also don't I see how being humbled by a group is contradictory to being extroverted, as it would imply that by your understanding of the term, extroverts must be comfortable in every group they ever come across.

My definition is simple. You give someone a choice between staying home (or at least being by themselves) and going out, the introvert stays home and the extrovert goes out. We often don't have this choice though because often we are forced to go out or forced to go home. Sexuality is no less vague than this, and I bet you have no problem classifying people as heterosexual and homosexual. I can find homosexuals who live in heterosexual nuclear families and heterosexuals who have sex with other heterosexual men (often unwillingly).

[blueangel06661]

From what I can tell I'm both. Looking from the sidelines I'd say "what the heck AF'ers in this thread"

It's almost like you guys are trying to make yourself feel better about your introvertedness by spouting off random things. Just because you are introverted doesn't mean you think more nor does it mean you think about a more correct choice. I know introverts who just sit there.. Look dumb and bored.. And they are dumb and bored. Just because you are being a loner at social gatherings doesn't quite mean you think before you speak. It means you lack fundamental social skills in all honesty.

I can say I'm both. Though I'd prefer keeping to myself and sitting around I have to put myself out there because thats the type of world we live in. You won't accomplish things by sitting on the sideline.

[Kusuke]

I can say I'm both. Though I'd prefer keeping to myself and sitting around I have to put myself out there because thats the type of world we live in. You won't accomplish things by sitting on the sideline.

Those are actually probably the key phrases in your post. It's not necessarily about social comfort, it's more about social preference.

[Wio]

It's almost like you guys are trying to make yourself feel better about your introvertedness by spouting off random things.

You know what's really going to bake your noodle? When you realized that some of us are not inherently ashamed about our being introverted. There are a lot of shaming tactics used to discourage introverts, as a result many become "bottom introverts" which Aku has described. Now the tactic you are using now, which assumes we feel bad about ourselves or have a reason to be ashamed, has probably worked very effectively on many introverts. It won't work here though so don't try it. You're actually going to have to give good reasons why we ought to be like extroverts or reasons why we are doing some injustice to society by being introverted. Also, empty rhetoric isn't going to work well either.

Just because you are being a loner at social gatherings doesn't quite mean you think before you speak. It means you lack fundamental social skills in all honesty.

Most social "skills" are arbitrary protocols that can be as much a hindrance to communication as they can be helpful.
You like small talk, and I have no that interest in it.
You want a quick response, and I want to think a couples seconds and then reply.
The difference in approach is not due to a lack of skill, it's philosophical.

I can say I'm both. Though I'd prefer keeping to myself and sitting around I have to put myself out there because thats the type of world we live in. You won't accomplish things by sitting on the sideline.

I have no idea what you mean by "sitting on the sideline". I hope you're not trying to imply that introverts don't accomplish anything or can't accomplish as much as extroverts do. Many jobs both intellectual and laborious can be accomplished swimmingly by introverts. Sometimes extroverts are so busy developing their social "skills" that they waste company time.

[Aleyna]

I don't see there being anything wrong with being an introvert, extrovert, or both. I only see a problem with being narrow-minded. I know tons of extroverts that go out, party a lot, and meet new people, but they don't even know that much about the places they go to or the people they meet. You'd think that because they go get to experience life, that they know more than an introvert that keeps to themself, but that's complete crud. I think it's sad how there's people in Minnesota that don't even know that we have the highest Hmong and Somalian population in the country. They just assume every Asian is Chinese and all of the Black people are just African American. It's quite sad. A lot of people are like this though, introverts and extroverts.

[Forgotten Show]

My point is not that there isn't a continuum, but rather between introverts and extroverts there is a no-mans-land to which I've yet to meet a person whom belongs.

In addition, I don't see how enjoying one-on-one interaction is contradictory to being introverted. Such would imply that by your understanding of the term, introverts dislike all human interaction what-so-ever.

I also don't I see how being humbled by a group is contradictory to being extroverted, as it would imply that by your understanding of the term, extroverts must be comfortable in every group they ever come across.

My definition is simple. You give someone a choice between staying home (or at least being by themselves) and going out, the introvert stays home and the extrovert goes out. We often don't have this choice though because often we are forced to go out or forced to go home. Sexuality is no less vague than this, and I bet you have no problem classifying people as heterosexual and homosexual. I can find homosexuals who live in heterosexual nuclear families and heterosexuals who have sex with other heterosexual men (often unwillingly).

You've missed the point again and have given an example and a comparison, not a definition.

The current definitions of introversion and extroversion are pretty clear: if you frequent large social gatherings and take initiative in life events then you're extroverted, while frequently avoiding social gatherings and showing a lack of initiative means you're introverted. How would you describe me if I told you that I stay home more than go out, but tend to work in environments which are highly social and dynamic and require an outgoing personalty? I have a problem with the definitions given and the ones used in psychology because frequenting social gatherings doesn't necessitate liking them, nor is taking initiative mutually exclusive with introversion. If you can't provide a logical description of the terms in question abides by the usual standards of scientific laws then we can't use these terms to accurately describe the subject at hand (in this case, people and their social preferences).

Further, the degree to which someone exhibits introverted or extroverted behavior can change based on circumstance. That person normally so outgoing and who loves to party might have just had a very bad breakup and subsequently wants to avoid contact with anyone for a while. The 'introvert' might just be introverted around people he doesn't know, while around close friends and family he doesn't shut up and demonstrated extroverted behavior. In other cases, the outgoing 'extrovert' might be a little less, or more, outgoing as the situation changes: that party they went to might've just turned very awkward with an ex-whatever showing up, causing them to modify their outgoing behavior. The same applies for the 'introvert'.

Social preference and sexual orientation are not even remotely similar; social preference can change and be changed fairly easily (3-5 weeks), but changing someone's sexual attraction is incredibly hard (often requiring months of much more frequent therapy) and has a high chance of relapse. The latter is very clearly more hardcoded into the human condition than the former.

Short version: 'introversion' and 'extroversion' are misused and misunderstood terms by the vast majority of people who use them, and in and of themselves are not good (meaning accurate) descriptors of human behavior. The OP's argument and your rebuttal to my comments have no grounding in reality. Blueangel's points are pretty much spot on.


Bad Memory