|
ITSJ reporting for duty. I often find myself almost incapable of understanding, let alone intergrating with, the extremely socialized and hyper-interactive world that most of my friends live in. It's a pain sometimes, even after 10-15 years I don't think any of them truly grasp why I find absolutely no joy in going out to get drunk and engage in vapid, meaningless encounters with people I will never meet again.
I tend to despise stupidity and the incredibly aggravating social games one is expected to play in group interactions to the point where I can stand, at most, a few hours of socialising before needing a long break. I have no interest in trying to pique someone's interest with innuendo and subtle advances, I'll state my point plainly, and if it's not well received that is unfortunate but unavoidable.
Sometimes it feels like my crib-space ship took a wrong turn somewhere and I've ended up on a planet with a species I cannot understand for the life of me.
|
On December 21 2012 11:51 Evangelist wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 11:40 HellRoxYa wrote:On December 21 2012 11:37 RavenLoud wrote:On December 21 2012 11:20 Shival wrote:On December 21 2012 11:13 RavenLoud wrote:
I don't really disagree with the OP, but I think introversion-extroversion is more like a spectrum and most people are in the middle rather than having 2 distinct groups. People can also change along that spectrum over the course of their lives, it's not as deterministic as it seems. There's tons of people that use to be shy in high school becoming very socially active in college then at work.
Introvert =/= shy. That's a very common mistake people make, but introverts are not by definition shy, they can be just as bold and certain of themselves as extroverts can be. They may not show it as often as extroverts do, but that has no bearing on whether they are shy. Err... So introverts are less likely to show themselves, but they are not shy by definition? I thought the definition of being shy is to be less inclined to show yourself? Being shy is being unable. Introverts aren't unable, they just choose their moments and do so well. A shy introvert, though, that's someone who you never really see or hear. On December 21 2012 11:36 Evangelist wrote:
There are a lot of people who treat their Meyer code as a thing to be proud of. I think I've been tested externally on 2-3 different occasions and as with most people on the low end of the autistic spectrum I come out as INTJ. However while it does influence my pattern of thinking, it is something I find myself actively trying to overcome. Medication helps a lot - shuts down a lot of the internal doubts and nonsense.
Personally I think your designation shifts with maturity. It's taken me nearly three decades to finally get comfortable with social situations. If you can drink happily with mates at 18, have a girlfriend and are socially adept then you aren't as introverted as you think are you. I don't think you understand. None of these things contradict being an introvert and if you think so you should go back to reading the OP. You don't have to be socially retarded to be introvert or vice versa. Seriously introverted people are almost always socially retarded. More often than not, they tend to be autistic too. You cannot walk into a room full of people and be comfortable with it and still be completely introverted. It just is not possible because an introvert has virtually no understanding of how other people think or behave - constantly judging and guesstimating their behaviour based on what other people do. If you are capable of passably socializing with a large group of people, you are not completely introverted. Trust me on this. I used to be a teacher. I work in academia. Introversion may be a way of thinking/responding to stimuli but severe introversion has a crippling effect on the ability to socialise with other people. It is not a secret club. It is definitely not a big, amazing label to have - some secret power of thinking or understanding. It is, in fact, often crippling to the way in which academics collaborate to the point where courses are given to academics solely to overcome this problem!! So no. If you have developed more or less normally and you prefer your own company but are able to function fine in human society, you are at best mildly introverted. You are not severely introverted.
What is mild and severe introversion exactly?
I know very well how introverted I am and have always been. And I also know that for the longest time I figured there was something wrong with me (very self detrimental) before I realized that it was just who I am. That being said I don't have a scale to put it on nor do I care. I learned social interaction and much of it I do purely logically rather than empathetically. I play (although not in an evil way) with people's emotional responses from time to time and learn from it. While being a natural at social interaction is a plus, it's not the only way.
But yeah, please define mid and severe introversion for me. And while you're at it, define mild and severe extroversion.
|
On December 21 2012 10:15 CosmicSpiral wrote:
I don't like the general tone of the OP. It seems to attempt to make introversion seem like such type of gift instead of what it actually is i.e. a generalized series of traits that are no more 'real' than the categories of emotional intelligence, personality types, moral spectrum, etc.
I am a person who spends several hours of isolated time per day to work on my writing skills. I generally do not look forward to making friends unless they are trustworthy people who are deeply driven to succeed. Conversations with useless words annoy me. Reading philosophy books in the comfort of solitude is one of the most enjoyable activities in the world. However I enjoy working out by going outside. Talking to strangers is a great pleasure; popping off can be even better. The exhilaration of a physical fight is one of the most subtle pleasures in the world.
The "dichotomy" between extroversion and introversion only exists if you accept its existence. Many of the traits associated with one cross over into the other and can be extremely beneficial.
I agree with this. I especially felt this when Ms Cain was speaking. Opposite of how people misunderstand introverts and think being extroverted is a bad thing, there seemed to be a rather heavy undertone implying that extroverts were stupid people that party all the time, and never have meaningful ideas to contribute to society. I know she tried to clarify that she did not think this, but when >95% of a speech is spent building up one thing, the <5% of it qualifying various statements doesn't have much impact. I definitely "walked away" from that feeling like people should feel bad about being extroverted, and that extroverts can't come up with good ideas the way that introverts can, because they spend too much time with other people, and get too involved in groupthink.
+ Show Spoiler +On December 21 2012 10:16 Thereisnosaurus wrote:
as a kind of alpha introvert (best expressed by the line 'yes I am quiet, what are you going to do about it punk?'), I think there's a sort of misconception in the OP that introversion is not aligned with boldness, confidence and charisma. I find I am at my most capable around other people when I let my quieter tendencies lead. I am extremely self confident, self critical (in a positive way) and self aware, so I am capable of making myself into an example of positive humanity. I serve, I prepare, I assist and I encourage, simply by going about my daily life.
I would say that the introvert's answer to extroverted charisma and social skill is what might be called 'force of will', the sort of thing you see in someone that tells you this person is both a) not to be fucked with and b) is worth not fucking with because they have their head screwed on straight. Introverts who aren't ashamed of what they feel and represent have incredible raw charisma in their sheer self confidence. I've always seen these people as role models and they've helped me shape myself into my current psychological state.
You can be an introvert and still a leader. You simply lead by example, not rhetoric.
Along these lines, in a recent class I had to attend for work (regarding accountability), there were a few people that would ramble on and on, seemingly because they couldn't stand not talking all the time. On the other hand, I spoke very few times (along with a couple others), but my statements carried far more impact because they had meaning and thought behind them. I had people approach me after the class to tell me that I had a lot of good ideas (people I had never met before).
On December 21 2012 10:35 Maxd11 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 10:02 RoieTRS wrote:
The myths in the OP apply to 100% of people at varying levels and everyone will identify whether they are introverted or not. The OP paints a picture like introversion is a secret club. If this keeps up, in 5 years you'll be seeing people say "lol im so introverted" on a whim like they treat nerddom now.
I've been called shy or whatever bogus all my life and it has nothing to do with introversion vs extroversion. It is simply people give you shit about anything unless you tell them to back off. This is a scam I wouldn't be surprised if people started writing books on this soon or whatever else they do to get money I totally agree. And they already are making books about it. Many kid's books have the main hero character as a loner who feels out of place.
That's been around forever, he's call Spider Man.
|
|
|
On December 21 2012 11:55 Barrin wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 11:44 Mstring wrote:On December 21 2012 11:32 Barrin wrote:On December 21 2012 11:25 WolfintheSheep wrote:On December 21 2012 11:14 Mstring wrote:I think we've all gotten your point by now  I'm really not sure what your point in all of this really is, though. As far as I can tell, it's essentially some hippie-esque stance of "Down with labels". If your contribution to this thread is really just some aversion to giving things names, I'd suggest making your own thread to discuss it. That's really what it comes down to. What he doesn't realize is that it's him putting a 'label' on labels. I've been there. Again, you're doing me. "He doesn't realize X", "You're too Y", "You are Z". These are all assumptions that you can foolishly choose to accept as truth, or leave them as an unknown and seek further if you are curious to the possibilities. Denying possibilities diminishes freedom. This is exactly analogous to my gripes with the introversion/extroversion concept. Good luck brother. If you actually realized X then you wouldn't do V, at least according to my intuition which I happen to trust. You're right, I can't prove that you didn't realize that. But you were indeed putting a label on labels whether you realized it or not. And now you have yourself expressed the label that you have put on labels. According to you, 'labeling' is analogous to 'denying possibilities'. good luck to you too.
All of my comments are about identifying with concepts. Labels as a shortcut to complicated concepts has never been a part of this discussion so please do not bring it up again.
If you identify with a rigid concept ("I am X") you are limiting your possibilities to whatever X entails. It's really that simple.
|
So your social personality exists on a spectrum? Then endpoints like "sever introvert" to "severe extrovert" are applicably meaningless because 99% percent of people fall in between. And if it is a true spectrum, almost everyone cannot be purely labeled except by standards arbitrarily defined by the OP, apparently.
|
On December 21 2012 11:59 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 11:51 Evangelist wrote:On December 21 2012 11:40 HellRoxYa wrote:On December 21 2012 11:37 RavenLoud wrote:On December 21 2012 11:20 Shival wrote:On December 21 2012 11:13 RavenLoud wrote:
I don't really disagree with the OP, but I think introversion-extroversion is more like a spectrum and most people are in the middle rather than having 2 distinct groups. People can also change along that spectrum over the course of their lives, it's not as deterministic as it seems. There's tons of people that use to be shy in high school becoming very socially active in college then at work.
Introvert =/= shy. That's a very common mistake people make, but introverts are not by definition shy, they can be just as bold and certain of themselves as extroverts can be. They may not show it as often as extroverts do, but that has no bearing on whether they are shy. Err... So introverts are less likely to show themselves, but they are not shy by definition? I thought the definition of being shy is to be less inclined to show yourself? Being shy is being unable. Introverts aren't unable, they just choose their moments and do so well. A shy introvert, though, that's someone who you never really see or hear. On December 21 2012 11:36 Evangelist wrote:
There are a lot of people who treat their Meyer code as a thing to be proud of. I think I've been tested externally on 2-3 different occasions and as with most people on the low end of the autistic spectrum I come out as INTJ. However while it does influence my pattern of thinking, it is something I find myself actively trying to overcome. Medication helps a lot - shuts down a lot of the internal doubts and nonsense.
Personally I think your designation shifts with maturity. It's taken me nearly three decades to finally get comfortable with social situations. If you can drink happily with mates at 18, have a girlfriend and are socially adept then you aren't as introverted as you think are you. I don't think you understand. None of these things contradict being an introvert and if you think so you should go back to reading the OP. You don't have to be socially retarded to be introvert or vice versa. Seriously introverted people are almost always socially retarded. More often than not, they tend to be autistic too. You cannot walk into a room full of people and be comfortable with it and still be completely introverted. It just is not possible because an introvert has virtually no understanding of how other people think or behave - constantly judging and guesstimating their behaviour based on what other people do. If you are capable of passably socializing with a large group of people, you are not completely introverted. Trust me on this. I used to be a teacher. I work in academia. Introversion may be a way of thinking/responding to stimuli but severe introversion has a crippling effect on the ability to socialise with other people. It is not a secret club. It is definitely not a big, amazing label to have - some secret power of thinking or understanding. It is, in fact, often crippling to the way in which academics collaborate to the point where courses are given to academics solely to overcome this problem!! So no. If you have developed more or less normally and you prefer your own company but are able to function fine in human society, you are at best mildly introverted. You are not severely introverted. What is mild and severe introversion exactly? I know very well how introverted I am and have always been. And I also know that for the longest time I figured there was something wrong with me (very self detrimental) before I realized that it was just who I am. That being said I don't have a scale to put it on nor do I care. I learned social interaction and much of it I do purely logically rather than empathetically. I play (although not in an evil way) with people's emotional responses from time to time and learn from it. While being a natural at social interaction is a plus, it's not the only way. But yeah, please define mid and severe introversion for me. And while you're at it, define mild and severe extroversion.
Considering you were able to do this without medication whereas I was not, I think we can define one of us as severely and one of us as mildly, no?
What I find very annoying is when people try and take one of my most overwhelmingly unenjoyable personality traits and make it into a positive out of some need for an identity. I hate being introverted. I would much rather be more extrovert - it doesn't change how I think, I like having people to bounce ideas off, I even enjoy social occasions. However, I find them draining, I find they literally suck the energy out of me. I constantly second guess how people are behaving to the point it used to make me sweat like mad.
For 25 years I was a complete social retard. 25 fucking years, man.
This whole "logically" rather than "empathetically" stuff. I'm sorry but you don't learn social interactions logically. You either learn them like everyone else or you don't and it's mainly down to fear. Your body chemicals determine how you react to other people. Mine didn't work right - I'm on anti-depressants in order to regulate my fight/flight reaction and they basically allow me to deal with other people.
I still do not know how to deal with social situations. I get tongue tied, I still get cold sweats despite the pills and frankly, I still end up getting depressed when little things I say (and hope are noticed) get totally ignored because I am the only one whose brain is going on overdrive trying to figure out wtf is going on! I'm far better than I used to be, but I still have a long way to go.
So yeah. Don't lecture me about how introversion is some kind of benefit. I've lived with severe introversion my whole life and I know how much it has crippled me. Yes, there are some loud mouths out there who could use some self perspective. However, I consider them as crippled by extraversion as I am by introversion.
Neither extreme is particularly useful. Much better to be a balance.
|
This thread is somewhat troubling. If being around people is uncomfortable or undesired, reacting with acceptance is merely one way to cope with that. Sometimes, individuals find themselves faced with immense difficulty in human interaction only to find that they really do not enjoy feeling that way, no matter how much self-acceptance is shoved down their throat, and they do something about it. Whether that be subtly increasing the volume of interaction, developing a tolerance for inter-personal embarrassment, or simply practicing speaking in front of a mirror. I had a friend who hated having to be in social situations, as in he would sometimes pass out from exhaustion at parties, the mall, or even at school. He grew tired of this inability to go out into the world, so he went out of his way to seek out places with increasingly large numbers of people and interaction, starting with libraries and moving his way up. Over time, he became able to go to the movies without issue, and eventually he never had to worry again, and could start conversations with strangers using public transportation.
Now don't get me wrong, not everyone is capable of that sort of self-therapy, but that is more or less my point. An over-indulgence in the safety of a definition can lead one to become complacent or perhaps even more self-destructive in their zeal to come to terms with the borders of their identity rather than the thing itself. So, if you want to call yourself introverted and proud, that's fine, just make sure you actually are proud, for change need not be far away.
|
INFJ
Introvert(56%) iNtuitive(75%) iNtuitive Feeling(12%) Judging(44%)
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (56%)
You have distinctive preference of Intuition over Sensing (75%)
You have slight preference of Feeling over Thinking (12%)
You have moderate preference of Judging over Perceiving (44%)
Yay, I always score the same thing.
|
On December 21 2012 12:11 farvacola wrote:
This thread is somewhat troubling. If being around people is uncomfortable or undesired, reacting with acceptance is merely one way to cope with that. Sometimes, individuals find themselves faced with immense difficulty in human interaction only to find that they really do not enjoy feeling that way, no matter how much self-acceptance is shoved down their throat, and they do something about it. Whether that be subtly increasing the volume of interaction, developing a tolerance for inter-personal embarrassment, or simply practicing speaking in front of a mirror. I had a friend who hated having to be in social situations, as in he would sometimes pass out from exhaustion at parties, the mall, or even at school. He grew tired of this inability to go out into the world, so he went out of his way to seek out places with increasingly large numbers of people and interaction, starting with libraries and moving his way up. Over time, he became able to go to the movies without issue, and eventually he never had to worry again, and could start conversations with strangers using public transportation.
Now don't get me wrong, not everyone is capable of that sort of self-therapy, but that is more or less my point. An over-indulgence in the safety of a definition can lead one to become complacent or perhaps even more self-destructive in their zeal to come to terms with the borders of their identity rather than the thing itself. So, if you want to call yourself introverted and proud, that's fine, just make sure you actually are proud, for change need not be far away.
Again, this thinly veiled assertion that the hyperactive, relentlessly outgoing lifestyle is, on some profound level, the correct one and that those who do not subscribe to it can change if they only want it badly enough. It's insulting, infuriating and honestly rather dumb. As if acceptence would simply be an alternate solution, rather than the only sensible one. What you described with your friend is nothing like a normal introverted personality type. If you pass out at parties and at the mall you have other issues, those are not normal personality traits.
I have no desire to have my life resemble a Husky SC2 cast, an endless deluge of words and exclamations that more often than not are very limited in actual content.
|
On December 21 2012 12:21 McBengt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 12:11 farvacola wrote:
This thread is somewhat troubling. If being around people is uncomfortable or undesired, reacting with acceptance is merely one way to cope with that. Sometimes, individuals find themselves faced with immense difficulty in human interaction only to find that they really do not enjoy feeling that way, no matter how much self-acceptance is shoved down their throat, and they do something about it. Whether that be subtly increasing the volume of interaction, developing a tolerance for inter-personal embarrassment, or simply practicing speaking in front of a mirror. I had a friend who hated having to be in social situations, as in he would sometimes pass out from exhaustion at parties, the mall, or even at school. He grew tired of this inability to go out into the world, so he went out of his way to seek out places with increasingly large numbers of people and interaction, starting with libraries and moving his way up. Over time, he became able to go to the movies without issue, and eventually he never had to worry again, and could start conversations with strangers using public transportation.
Now don't get me wrong, not everyone is capable of that sort of self-therapy, but that is more or less my point. An over-indulgence in the safety of a definition can lead one to become complacent or perhaps even more self-destructive in their zeal to come to terms with the borders of their identity rather than the thing itself. So, if you want to call yourself introverted and proud, that's fine, just make sure you actually are proud, for change need not be far away. Again, this thinly veiled assertion that the hyperactive, relentlessly outgoing lifestyle is, on some profound level, the correct one and that those who do not subscribe to it can change if they only want it badly enough. It's insulting, infuriating and honestly rather dumb. As if acceptence would simply be an alternate solution, rather than the only sensible one. What you described with your friend is nothing like a normal introverted personality type. If you pass out at parties and at the mall you have other issues, those are not normal personality traits. I have no desire to have my life resemble a Husky SC2 cast, an endless deluge of words and exclamations that more often than not are very limited in actual content.
You've clearly misunderstood what I said, so allow me to rephrase (retort  ). I am in no way advocating an extroverted lifestyle, not in the slightest. I'm simply suggesting that the gravity of self-definition can oftentimes fool us into thinking we're more "down to earth" than we truly are. Some people are never going to want to be around people, that's cool, I get it, and sometimes even feel that way myself. But others are on the border, prone to discomfort in the face of social interaction and yet on other levels still truly in search of social fellowship, be it amongst those that are like them, unlike them, or whatever. Over-investing in a brand of self-acceptance that is necessarily more tied to the connotations of a word rather than the pragmatic, contextual truth of human identity is not a recipe for success, not amongst those who do not fall along the extremes. I'm merely advocating caution and an open mind.
|
On December 21 2012 12:35 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2012 12:21 McBengt wrote:On December 21 2012 12:11 farvacola wrote:
This thread is somewhat troubling. If being around people is uncomfortable or undesired, reacting with acceptance is merely one way to cope with that. Sometimes, individuals find themselves faced with immense difficulty in human interaction only to find that they really do not enjoy feeling that way, no matter how much self-acceptance is shoved down their throat, and they do something about it. Whether that be subtly increasing the volume of interaction, developing a tolerance for inter-personal embarrassment, or simply practicing speaking in front of a mirror. I had a friend who hated having to be in social situations, as in he would sometimes pass out from exhaustion at parties, the mall, or even at school. He grew tired of this inability to go out into the world, so he went out of his way to seek out places with increasingly large numbers of people and interaction, starting with libraries and moving his way up. Over time, he became able to go to the movies without issue, and eventually he never had to worry again, and could start conversations with strangers using public transportation.
Now don't get me wrong, not everyone is capable of that sort of self-therapy, but that is more or less my point. An over-indulgence in the safety of a definition can lead one to become complacent or perhaps even more self-destructive in their zeal to come to terms with the borders of their identity rather than the thing itself. So, if you want to call yourself introverted and proud, that's fine, just make sure you actually are proud, for change need not be far away. Again, this thinly veiled assertion that the hyperactive, relentlessly outgoing lifestyle is, on some profound level, the correct one and that those who do not subscribe to it can change if they only want it badly enough. It's insulting, infuriating and honestly rather dumb. As if acceptence would simply be an alternate solution, rather than the only sensible one. What you described with your friend is nothing like a normal introverted personality type. If you pass out at parties and at the mall you have other issues, those are not normal personality traits. I have no desire to have my life resemble a Husky SC2 cast, an endless deluge of words and exclamations that more often than not are very limited in actual content. You've clearly misunderstood what I said, so allow me to rephrase (retort ). I am in no way advocating an extroverted lifestyle, not in the slightest. I'm simply suggesting that the gravity of self-definition can oftentimes fool us into thinking we're more "down to earth" than we truly are. Some people are never going to want to be around people, that's cool, I get it, and sometimes even feel that way myself. But others are on the border, prone to discomfort in the face of social interaction and yet on other levels still truly in search of social fellowship, be it amongst those that are like them, unlike them, or whatever. Over-investing in a brand of self-acceptance that is necessarily more tied to the connotations of a word rather than the pragmatic, contextual truth of human identity is not a recipe for success, not amongst those who do not fall along the extremes. I'm merely advocating caution and an open mind.
I could be wrong, but I think what farva is trying to say is that people shouldn't confuse legitimate social disorders with being introverted, and that accepting a legitimate social disorder by labeling it as introversion is as bad as not being accepting of people who just prefer to spend time alone. His friend had a social disorder, based on what he described.
Too many people in this thread seem to want to make things black and white, and "us vs them," and that leads absolutely nowhere. There's nothing wrong with needing alone time to recharge, just as there's nothing wrong with enjoying being around people. There's nothing wrong with preferring to spend the majority of your time alone, reading books, etc. If that isn't the way you want to be, though, you shouldn't accept it by putting a label on yourself and convincing yourself that you can't change, in an attempt to comfort yourself over your own shortcomings (as defined by you).
|
INTJ
Introvert(89%) iNtuitive(38%) iNtuitive Thinking(12%) Judging(22%)
You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (89%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (12%)
You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (22%)
Introverts fighting! Great thread.
|
I'm pretty damn sure I'm an introvert without needing to take any tests. The biggest point I have to make is, being a quiet person for a large bulk of your life will give you the ability to observe people. And with that ability you'll realize there are a lot of people out there you don't want to interact with. lol
|
I'm definitely an introvert, but I think it is worth highlighting that it is sort of a "scale." I find myself being slightly more "extrovert" as I get older (not only because it is what is more valued in society, but because I'm actually functioning a bit more like an extrovert in reality).
Keep in mind that not all of what is said/thought about introverts will apply to you, even if you feel you are an introvert.
|
|
|
I don't feel like im either an extrovert or introvert.. I prefer bits of both in doses. I do enjoy staying home though compared to going out.
|
On December 21 2012 13:22 Synapze wrote:
I don't feel like im either an extrovert or introvert.. I prefer bits of both in doses. I do enjoy staying home though compared to going out.
NO! You must be defined as a single type, not a moderate! Liberal or conservative! Pro-life or pro-choice! Baked potatoes or mashed potatoes! 
|
Hehe love people saying you can't be an introvert if you can socialize. ISTP here, towards the more introverted spectrum.
This made me feel good, like a little pepp talk.
|
I dunno, the feeling of being socially on fire, when everything hits, when you're the life of the party - nothing beats that. I like to be alone and read books once in awhile, but being social and out of your head is fuckin refreshing.
I'm not introverted or extroverted. I'm a human being. And that's the only label worth giving anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
