EPTgotta admit though, it is fun, like horoscopes often are.
Introversion Awareness - Page 21
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
NIJ
1012 Posts
gotta admit though, it is fun, like horoscopes often are. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On December 23 2012 10:46 NIJ wrote: Ah MBTI..... horoscopes for people who don't want to associate with superstitions (so they go with pseudo science)... Welcome to the internet where everyone and their mother is the rarest MBTI category too, INTJ/INTP/INFJ... gotta admit though, it is fun, like horoscopes often are. Ah the internet, where every idiot throws his opinion around as though it's fact. | ||
|
Crescens
Bhutan19 Posts
On December 23 2012 10:46 NIJ wrote: Ah MBTI..... horoscopes for people who don't want to associate with superstitions (so they go with pseudo science)... Welcome to the internet where everyone and their mother is the rarest MBTI category too, INTJ/INTP/INFJ... gotta admit though, it is fun, like horoscopes often are. The internet provides an ideal social medium for the types you mentioned. It's only logical that people that struggle with social interactions would congregate around the medium which provides them a comfortable means of doing so. Furthermore, bearing this site in mind, those types ought to be in the majority. | ||
|
Underkoffer
Netherlands53 Posts
People like to believe what makes them feel better and they like to have explanations for their actions. Sure the idea of introversion and extraversion seems to be a valid explanation, but because I am biased to believe that because the explanation makes me feel more confident, it makes me unsure about its validity. | ||
|
megapants
United States1314 Posts
On December 23 2012 03:28 C[h]ili wrote: Interesting topic. Any guide on how to turn business meetings/conferences into a win as a introvert? After all, these are largely for networking and can be very important for your career, while I think the set up gives extroverts a clear edge. Regards Chili Come prepared so that you can properly contribute. Focus on clearly saying things that have a big impact if you aren't comfortable with the idea of bouncing around a conversation/topic. Being introverted isn't a handicap in these situations, just play to your strength of contemplating and you'll be invaluable. | ||
|
fluidin
Singapore1084 Posts
On December 21 2012 11:07 Cheerio wrote: a bit of info on the Neurochemistry of Introversion http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?10517-Neurochemistry-of-Introversion&s=7c01d853bee95addad3897cf9b2eb5a0 This means a fundamental difference in how our brains process information, and could be the reason that leads to "typical" behavior that most introverts/extroverts face. I can definitely relate to this; I'm not awkward in a social setting by any means, although I do feel like it drains me and that I'm just a more sensitive individual as compared to others, both mentally (how it affects my euphoria levels) and even physically. So no, being an introvert is not just about being shy, or not having enough social interaction. I believe true introversion and extroversion is not just whatever personality traits you can throw at them, which most of the more intelligent posts in this thread has already discussed about, and shown. The reason why Introversion is negatively associated with social disability is because they are more PRONE to developing these characteristics in their growth as compared to extroversion, obviously. If you grow up in a good family, have good friends and learn how to socialize properly, then the differences between Introverts and Extroverts shouldn't be what some of you perceive it to be. It isn't that introverts CANNOT perform in a large meeting, the mature ones just don't necessarily LIKE it, and it drains them, while extroverts can THRIVE in them. | ||
p4NDemik
United States13896 Posts
Personal story-telling time. If I'm at a house party, a club, or a bar where it is wall-to-wall people and the decibel level is comparable to a major sporting event, you can probably guess the parts of the night that I enjoy the most. Smoke breaks. It's not even that I love smoking, in fact I only do it in these situations and I don't smoke casually any other time. It's the fact that me and a couple friends can break off, go outside, and actually talk in relative comfort amongst ourselves, or with relative strangers. Even on a freezing cold winter night like yesterday in some respects I'm more comfortable outside in the cold with a few people than inside amongst the masses. In a extremely dense and stimulating social situation I can enjoy the relative chaos for a time but eventually I am mentally exhausted. My hearing isn't particularly bad but for the life of me after a certain period of time in a very loud party situation I am bound to become a wallflower if I don't get outside, recharge, and then dive back in. Flip the situation. I'm sitting at my desk posting on TL. I could literally do this all night long. Reading, playing a game, playing the guitar, what have you, I don't look at the time when I'm in my room or in small-scale social settings, as opposed to a club where sometimes I'm literally setting 30 minute intervals where I have to go out and rest. That is what introversion is to me. It isn't a result on an online test that we can all post our results and then bicker about. Seriously, MBTI's scientific credentials aside, it really has no place in this discussion. It is extraneous to the issue at hand. If you watched the Susan Cain TED presentation, she gives the reasons why we should be concerned about the issue. Mostly, this is something that affects the development of children. By the time we are adults most of those who consider themselves introverted have learned to cope and adjust and can be quite successful. The issue is they may not be reaching their true peak potential, so to say. This thread thus far has a vibe that the introverts of Western society feel like they've been kept down by the extroverted "man," subjugated in some way to mediocrity and this is some great injustice. There is no reason to be pitting the two sides against each other. There are some biases inherent in our culture that favor extroversion, but to portray it as such a criminal social construct that immediately needs to be flipped on its head is just going way too far. The question is how we can look at rethinking some of the cultural values we hold that may not be really working out in everyone's collective best interest. How can we train teachers to identify those students who are extroverted/introverted? How can we train teachers to help every one of those kids get the most out of their learning experience? How can we do that efficiently while still giving equal merits to both qualities and teaching introverts and extroverts how others perceive the world differently? After all we as humans function better as groups when we understand each other. | ||
|
fluidin
Singapore1084 Posts
This point of identifying introversion isn't about justifying such behavior, it's to help the growth of people with introversion tendencies. Although making introversion out to be a social injustice could have significant social benefits in the long run, even if current methods as shown in the OP is used. It's just how people are more receptive, and thus respond faster to such methods. | ||
|
Crescens
Bhutan19 Posts
On December 23 2012 15:47 p4NDemik wrote: There is so much division in this thread and very little coming together to understand what it is to get into the mind of an introvert if you are an extrovert, and vice versa. Personal story-telling time. If I'm at a house party, a club, or a bar where it is wall-to-wall people and the decibel level is comparable to a major sporting event, you can probably guess the parts of the night that I enjoy the most. Smoke breaks. It's not even that I love smoking, in fact I only do it in these situations and I don't smoke casually any other time. It's the fact that me and a couple friends can break off, go outside, and actually talk in relative comfort amongst ourselves, or with relative strangers. Even on a freezing cold winter night like yesterday in some respects I'm more comfortable outside in the cold with a few people than inside amongst the masses. In a extremely dense and stimulating social situation I can enjoy the relative chaos for a time but eventually I am mentally exhausted. My hearing isn't particularly bad but for the life of me after a certain period of time in a very loud party situation I am bound to become a wallflower if I don't get outside, recharge, and then dive back in. Flip the situation. I'm sitting at my desk posting on TL. I could literally do this all night long. Reading, playing a game, playing the guitar, what have you, I don't look at the time when I'm in my room or in small-scale social settings, as opposed to a club where sometimes I'm literally setting 30 minute intervals where I have to go out and rest. That is what introversion is to me. It isn't a result on an online test that we can all post our results and then bicker about. Seriously, MBTI's scientific credentials aside, it really has no place in this discussion. It is extraneous to the issue at hand. If you watched the Susan Cain TED presentation, she gives the reasons why we should be concerned about the issue. Mostly, this is something that affects the development of children. By the time we are adults most of those who consider themselves introverted have learned to cope and adjust and can be quite successful. The issue is they may not be reaching their true peak potential, so to say. This thread thus far has a vibe that the introverts of Western society feel like they've been kept down by the extroverted "man," subjugated in some way to mediocrity and this is some great injustice. There is no reason to be pitting the two sides against each other. There are some biases inherent in our culture that favor extroversion, but to portray it as such a criminal social construct that immediately needs to be flipped on its head is just going way too far. The question is how we can look at rethinking some of the cultural values we hold that may not be really working out in everyone's collective best interest. How can we train teachers to identify those students who are extroverted/introverted? How can we train teachers to help every one of those kids get the most out of their learning experience? How can we do that efficiently while still giving equal merits to both qualities and teaching introverts and extroverts how others perceive the world differently? After all we as humans function better as groups when we understand each other. Thank you p4NDemik. Your experiences and views echo my own. There is much mutual understanding to be developed on the part of both introverts and extraverts. Fortunately, the means to do so begins with simply learning to respect the differences between us. | ||
|
MountainDewJunkie
United States10340 Posts
| ||
|
p4NDemik
United States13896 Posts
On December 23 2012 16:06 fluidin wrote: Yep, in current society introverts are more prone to develop bad social habits, even if correction happens upon reaching adulthood it's not optimal. This point of identifying introversion isn't about justifying such behavior, it's to help the growth of people with introversion tendencies. Although making introversion out to be a social injustice could have significant social benefits in the long run, even if current methods as shown in the OP is used. It's just how people are more receptive, and thus respond faster to such methods. As far as this speculation that introverts are more likely to have "bad social habits," this is the type of discussion that is entirely moot, and has surfaced multiple times in this thread. Neither type is inherently more likely to have poor social skills, they just develop their social skills in different fashions. As it happens, modern day Western society slightly favors an extroverted approach to social skills, but that doesn't mean introverts are defective or should be addressed as being more prone to anything other than being born into a society that puts them at a very slight disadvantage. People can lie on either extreme of the social spectrum. For every introvert who is quiet, reserved, and not thought of as socially well-versed there are also extroverts who may just be just too over the top, too ready to discuss inappropriate subject matters, who talk about such inane topics that even other extroverts hate conversing with them, who do things in the moment and later look very, very foolish, etc. Even then both of these things are just different. What is the ideal set of social skills? The perfect mix? The golden standard? We don't really have one. We have general guidelines but beyond that whatever it is we are striving for is very vague. As such, why label anyone social skills as "bad" or "undesirable" so long as they aren't harming themselves or others? This is the kind of thing that is at the heart of this issue. There is zero reason for labeling introverts, or extroverts for that matter as bad, or particularly prone to being bad at anything. Yet, we have that mindset. It's no one's fault, no one should be defensive here, its merely the culture we grew up in. | ||
|
p4NDemik
United States13896 Posts
On December 23 2012 16:14 MountainDewJunkie wrote: But the concept is falling into the usual Western system of victimization. Oh, I'm this way because I'm an introvert. Nonono, you are MANY things and you do many things, and based on your thoughts and actions WE can label you as introvert, and better yet, convince you to arbitrarily label yourself through common list of characteristics and pseudoscience. Yes, you too can simplify your entire existence into a single word! Don't you think you're worth more than this? These are very valid criticisms of the format of the original post. You are conflating his approach for presenting this issue with the issue itself though. Susan Cain's criticism's of how we evaluate children in schools and how we evaluate employees for possible promotion have real merit and pose important questions. If you take nothing else away from this thread, I would hope it would be her presentation. edit: Let me clarify why this thread has been difficult to follow for me personally. Reading the OP is like reading a dissertation advocating bipartisanship in the U.S. Congress, while written from completely one side of the aisle. Thus, the party from whose side the dissertation was written gets all pumped and pushes their agenda, while the other party's agenda has been completely glossed over and they get really fucking pissed. That's why I say, drop the introverts vs extroverts bullshit, talk about your personal stories as introverts and extroverts, come to understand each other better, and through that we can actually make some changes. | ||
|
fluidin
Singapore1084 Posts
On December 23 2012 16:22 p4NDemik wrote: As far as this speculation that introverts are more likely to have "bad social habits," this is the type of discussion that is entirely moot, and has surfaced multiple times in this thread. Neither type is inherently more likely to have poor social skills, they just develop their social skills in different fashions. As it happens, modern day Western society slightly favors an extroverted approach to social skills, but that doesn't mean introverts are defective or should be addressed as being more prone to anything other than being born into a society that puts them at a very slight disadvantage. People can lie on either extreme of the social spectrum. For every introvert who is quiet, reserved, and not thought of as socially well-versed there are also extroverts who may just be just too over the top, too ready to discuss inappropriate subject matters, who talk about such inane topics that even other extroverts hate conversing with them, who do things in the moment and later look very, very foolish, etc. Even then both of these things are just different. What is the ideal set of social skills? The perfect mix? The golden standard? We don't really have one. We have general guidelines but beyond that whatever it is we are striving for is very vague. As such, why label anyone social skills as "bad" or "undesirable" so long as they aren't harming themselves or others? This is the kind of thing that is at the heart of this issue. There is zero reason for labeling introverts, or extroverts for that matter as bad, or particularly prone to being bad at anything. Yet, we have that mindset. It's no one's fault, no one should be defensive here, its merely the culture we grew up in. Sorry for being unclear, but my "bad" refers to being disadvantaged in current society. I wouldn't say it's a very slight disadvantage, but a pretty significant one. It isn't inherent, it's that inherent introversion is more likely to lead to "poor social habits" as defined by modern standards. There is no ideal set of social skills obviously, as some are more suited to certain personalities and psyches. However, there are more undesirable ones that stand out from the pack. It is undesirable because certain introverts have ambition, but there are less means to realise that ambition. Of course, this can be subjective, but overall the consensus is that extroverts are rewarded disproportionately, is it not? It's the culture's fault :/ | ||
|
Crescens
Bhutan19 Posts
| ||
|
fluidin
Singapore1084 Posts
Most high paying jobs that do not have a high barrier of entry (academia, medicine, large capital) are skewed towards extraverts (I'm looking at you, finance sector). Furthermore, Einstein and Gandhi are not average introverts (if they are), they are just part of a special group of people that also include extraverts, I'm sure. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On December 23 2012 17:18 fluidin wrote: No, I'm talking about things like, say, material wealth. This is something that both introverts and extraverts are likely to aspire to achieve and not subscribing to the extravert's standards. Most high paying jobs that do not have a high barrier of entry (academia, medicine, large capital) are skewed towards extraverts (I'm looking at you, finance sector). Furthermore, Einstein and Gandhi are not average introverts (if they are), they are just part of a special group of people that also include extraverts, I'm sure. Academia and Medicine does not have a high barrier of entry? What? I am really interested in hearing your definition of "high barrier" here. | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
| ||
|
fluidin
Singapore1084 Posts
On December 23 2012 17:49 Ghostcom wrote: Academia and Medicine does not have a high barrier of entry? What? I am really interested in hearing your definition of "high barrier" here. I'm saying those are the stuff that has a high barrier of entry =____= | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5278 Posts
On December 23 2012 17:18 fluidin wrote: No, I'm talking about things like, say, material wealth. This is something that both introverts and extraverts are likely to aspire to achieve and not subscribing to the extravert's standards. Most high paying jobs that do not have a high barrier of entry (academia, medicine, large capital) are skewed towards extraverts (I'm looking at you, finance sector). Furthermore, Einstein and Gandhi are not average introverts (if they are), they are just part of a special group of people that also include extraverts, I'm sure. i'd say material wealth is something one has to apire to, so it's not really a choise. i care nothing about wealth. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On December 23 2012 18:07 fluidin wrote: I'm saying those are the stuff that has a high barrier of entry =____= Ooooooh, now I get it - sorry, I thought the parenthesis was meant to be the examples. But I think it is because you look at the barrier the wrong way. Essentially you claim it to be society's fault that the big money jobs in the finance sector is favoring extroverts, even though from a purely knowledge standpoint the introverts are better (a notion I do not agree with, but let us leave that for now) - right? I think where your argumentation falls short is that you fail to recognize that talking with people is a skill, not only a preference, just like academia is a skill and not only a preference (again, accepting the definitions made by MBTI, the OP, and Susan Cain). Thus the barrier in the financial sector includes interpersonal skills to a much higher degree than academia. If you want to even the playingfield in the one area you should also do it in the other, i.e. you should rework the grading system (another social construct) to take into account the "handicaps" extroverts face in their lessened interest in academia (again, by the definition of the OP and Susan Cain). EDIT: On December 23 2012 18:02 aZealot wrote: I don't have a personal story as an introvert other than: leave me the fuck alone. Oh yeah, and don't typecast me, either. 10/10 would read again (I honestly did find it very funny - I should be getting to bed) | ||
| ||
