There’s a common idea in pop psychology that people are either “extroverts” or “introverts”. This isn’t totally wrong but I don’t think the usual division is a good way to think about it, for two reasons.
I used to think of myself as an “introvert.” The more I allowed myself to use my own judgment of my situation and reason independently about others, the more it became clear that I experience (with some justification) most people as some combination of dangerously hostile and committed to derailing any really interesting interaction. The clearer and more accurate I make that judgment, the less costly it is to interact with people who deserve much more trust than average.
The latent need for beneficial interaction stays about the same as the perceived *availability* of it (and associated risk of trying for it) varies.
I'm an outliner in social need (I'm happy spending weeks never talking to another human) but relatively affable and sociable, sometimes being "the life of the party" when I have reason to be at an event (even though I mostly don't go to parties or events).
Accordingly, my scores on extroversion swing by ~50 points between different instances of taking a big-five test, for more or less this reason.
(And because they ask questions like "you make friends easily, agree or disagree", to which I would literally answer "of course not, true friendships are rare and precious, and most people I meet are not remotely worthy of my friendship", but which I think I'm supposed reply "yes, people do like me, and it doesn't take long before we're friendly with each other and they're enjoying my company".)
I used to think of myself as an “introvert.” The more I allowed myself to use my own judgment of my situation and reason independently about others, the more it became clear that I experience (with some justification) most people as some combination of dangerously hostile and committed to derailing any really interesting interaction. The clearer and more accurate I make that judgment, the less costly it is to interact with people who deserve much more trust than average.
The latent need for beneficial interaction stays about the same as the perceived *availability* of it (and associated risk of trying for it) varies.
I agree they seem separate to me. Wish I had more lives or a longer one to cover it all.
Yep.
I'm an outliner in social need (I'm happy spending weeks never talking to another human) but relatively affable and sociable, sometimes being "the life of the party" when I have reason to be at an event (even though I mostly don't go to parties or events).
Accordingly, my scores on extroversion swing by ~50 points between different instances of taking a big-five test, for more or less this reason.
(And because they ask questions like "you make friends easily, agree or disagree", to which I would literally answer "of course not, true friendships are rare and precious, and most people I meet are not remotely worthy of my friendship", but which I think I'm supposed reply "yes, people do like me, and it doesn't take long before we're friendly with each other and they're enjoying my company".)
fite me