[HN Gopher] Beyond introvert vs. extrovert
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Beyond introvert vs. extrovert
        
       Author : vipshek
       Score  : 127 points
       Date   : 2023-07-19 16:26 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.vipshek.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.vipshek.com)
        
       | msoad wrote:
       | I wonder if it's even worth trying to define a person's
       | personality? I've been following this research for a while now.
       | Almost all the studies I've seen have substantial flaws in their
       | scientific methodology, such as small sample sizes and selection
       | bias, among other issues. Don't even get me started on the
       | replication crisis in this field.
       | 
       | Regarding theories like Jung's introversion and extraversion or
       | the subsequent personality models like the MBTI and the Big Five,
       | while they have been widely used and studied, there's ongoing
       | debate about their reliability and validity. There's substantial
       | evidence for the general reliability of the Big Five, but it,
       | too, has faced criticism.
        
         | analog31 wrote:
         | Imagine a relationship in which one person can read the other's
         | mind. This is the power of gods: They know our thoughts, but we
         | don't know theirs. The only rational conclusion is total
         | submission. The offer of such a power, even to a severely
         | limited extent, is appealing enough for people to part ways
         | with their money and natural skepticism.
         | 
         | Can it be beneficial? A list of categories that seems
         | authoritative and scientific but is open to interpretation can
         | give some people a sense of comfort that they belong in their
         | "place" within the organization, that there are other people
         | facing similar experiences, or that they are not personally at
         | fault. It can give a beginning manager the confidence to
         | interact with colleagues and subordinates by means of a
         | formula.
         | 
         | Can it be harmful? Sure, it opens people to manipulation and
         | bias, or persuades them to give up their agency.
        
         | dosman33 wrote:
         | I got a sigh of relief when I finally discovered that Myers-
         | Briggs is partly broken. It's designed to not offend anyone by
         | avoiding measuring neuroticism so it's "work-safe". I had been
         | struggling to understand how people were able to understand
         | personality defects of out of the Myers-Briggs system and then
         | eventually it became clear that it doesn't do this, it avoids
         | measuring neuroticism, and worse than that it's on shaky ground
         | because it does a poor job of typing people anyway because a
         | persons personality can "shift" around over time. I'm still new
         | to the Big Five though, I've only skimmed the surface of it,
         | but at least it measures neuroticism and should plausibly give
         | you better insight.
        
           | analog31 wrote:
           | You can also game the Myers-Briggs to avoid the introvert
           | classification.
        
         | soco wrote:
         | The only help I can imagine is for self discovery: it maybe
         | gives one a handle on where to search for ideas, solutions,
         | plans. At least that's how personality tests work for me - I
         | enjoyed for instance the Sparketype.
        
       | breakingrules wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | rqtwteye wrote:
       | I never understand why people (especially in the US) have a
       | desire to split everything into two opposing sides.
       | Liberal/conservative, introvert/extrovert and many others. I
       | think it's pretty obvious that most (all?) people are on a
       | spectrum of many dimensions and can't be categorized that easily.
       | These labels can give useful hints but there is way more detail
       | to look at.
        
         | Bloating wrote:
         | Theres 10 types of people, those who understand binary and
         | those who don't
        
         | NickNaraghi wrote:
         | May well be a function of chronic stress. So many people are
         | constantly in fight or flight (sympathetic nervous system) that
         | narrows focus and decreases broad-range / spectrum-based
         | thinking. Makes sense that many people would default their
         | worldview to black and white.
        
         | ravitation wrote:
         | One other problem is that whenever these conversations come up
         | in "extremely public spaces" (i.e. the internet), you
         | inevitably have a small group that _strongly_ identifies with
         | the textbook definitions of introvert /extrovert. Anecdotally
         | (though this _is_ the internet), this is almost entirely self-
         | identified introverts; they will swear that every social
         | interaction leaves them drained and they need a certain amount
         | of hours alone to recover (there is almost certainly some
         | confounding variables and bias at play here). Afterwards, those
         | that do not see their own lives described by these definitions
         | are generally less interested than the former group in arguing
         | about the definitions ' supposed validity.
        
         | stronglikedan wrote:
         | It's human nature, and not especially in the US. It eases
         | cognition when thinking about things.
        
         | nuancebydefault wrote:
         | In fact this happens with any form of social or psychological
         | science. If you start with, anything is a spectrum, gray zone,
         | nuance... you are not able to make different categories. Even
         | with music, pop, rock, metal, hiphop, balade,... if you ask any
         | musician they will tell their music dies not fit any category.
         | My point is, making categories is just a starting point for
         | certain sorts of science and literature.
        
         | quacked wrote:
         | Two sides is the most stable form of competition, it's why
         | there are very few sports that have more than two teams. (Card
         | games, maybe.) A few years ago I saw a great essay/blog
         | post/paper/something that made this point really elegantly,
         | about how conflicts seem to naturally resolve into two sides,
         | but I haven't managed to find it again.
        
           | 0xfae wrote:
           | It's pretty standard game theory.
           | 
           | If there are 3 teams, and one team starts to gain an
           | advantage, the other two are highly incentivized to join
           | forces to defeat the larger one.
           | 
           | Unless you design systems to allow smaller
           | teams/parties/groups to flourish, most competitions will
           | devolve into two sides. In voting this would be things like
           | ranked choice or approval voting, rather than single vote
           | "first past the post".
        
         | akomtu wrote:
         | Isn't it the key feature of the lower rational mind to draw a
         | boundary between I and not-I, true vs false? It is this type of
         | mind that loves to criticize, as it needs to label every thing
         | as true or false. Seeing things as a spectrum, as a
         | distribution of probabilities, is a key feature of the upper
         | abstract mind, and it's barely developed in us today. And most
         | people are still developing the rational mind, and usually swim
         | in the stormy sea of emotions.
        
         | karaterobot wrote:
         | > I never understand why people (especially in the US) have a
         | desire to split everything into two opposing sides
         | 
         | For the record, I don't think this has _anything_ to do with
         | the U.S., false dichotomies are a more or less equally common
         | human shorthand anywhere and anywhen that I 've visited, or
         | studied at all.
         | 
         | I've assumed it's because people don't have time or energy to
         | consider all the nuances of everything all the time, or the
         | space to list them out. The brain is in many ways a device for
         | ignoring anything that doesn't help you get food and not get
         | eaten by a lion.
        
           | iainmerrick wrote:
           | There are two types of people -- those who like to split
           | everything into two categories, and those who believe
           | everything exists on a continuous spectrum.
        
           | watwut wrote:
           | But, US culture is saturated by them and Americans really
           | tend to create dichotomies much more then French or what have
           | you.
           | 
           | There really seems to be some dteong cultural tendency to do
           | this.
        
             | karaterobot wrote:
             | Would love to see some evidence for this, but okay.
        
               | InexSquirrel wrote:
               | Agree that evidence is appropriate, but as someone that's
               | not in the US (NZ), we do broadly see it that way. US
               | politics is very pervasive internationally, and you guys
               | definitely appear to be split way more into 'left' and
               | 'right' (as one example).
               | 
               | Compared to NZ's politics... which is more like a blob of
               | parties which sit pretty close the centre, and sometimes
               | parts of the blobs move more left or more right.
               | 
               | But naturally the dichotomy comment doesn't hold true in
               | all circumstances.
        
               | Delk wrote:
               | Multi-party systems generally tend to have less of a gap
               | between parties. Especially if no single party is strong
               | enough to hold majority power alone in a parliamentary
               | system, decision-making requires collaboration between
               | multiple parties.
               | 
               | A lot of the polarisation in US politics is probably due
               | to the two-party system. I don't know whether or not that
               | has anything to do with people thinking in false
               | dichotomies in other contexts.
        
             | amadeuspagel wrote:
             | The left-right dichotomy was developed in france.
        
         | bregma wrote:
         | It starts with "self" and "other" and goes analogically from
         | there.
        
         | thomastjeffery wrote:
         | The problem isn't in creating or even using these labels: it's
         | in trusting their completeness.
         | 
         | Categories are good for introduction, nothing more.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Tokkemon wrote:
         | Because 3D chess is hard.
        
         | costanzaDynasty wrote:
         | Because it's lazy, and most people don't care enough about any
         | issue to have nuisanced thoughts about a topic. And If they
         | ever did any conversation would break down to A or B. Plus its
         | easier to sell to and manipulate money from both sides.
         | 
         | I try to have conversation about complex issues all the time
         | and those conversations never advance past basic talking points
         | that any person who spent time actually looking into any topic
         | would not reduce down to a binary answer.
         | 
         | Half the people I talk with think I'm super liberal and the
         | other half think Im super conservative and it stems usually
         | from the first interaction Ive had with people where Ive tried
         | to advance a topic to beyond repeating the same lame talking
         | points, but it really never gets past first base.
        
           | InexSquirrel wrote:
           | It feels in part that people like to have opinions, but also
           | lack real information or insight to have a deep conversation
           | about something - hence just breaking it down into basic
           | blobs.
           | 
           | That said for topics I do have some more in-depth
           | understanding (and opinions on), I've started to find
           | discussions around them to be... draining. People seem to
           | want to argue or 'discuss' things heatedly, but that's it. It
           | never leads anywhere or to any meaningful change in
           | behaviours. Not that I'm trying to influence anyone, but it
           | just feels like arguing for the sake of arguing. I'd rather
           | just keep to myself at that point.
        
           | RealityVoid wrote:
           | People generally don't like to think deeply about things. I
           | get it. It's uncomfortable and emotionally draining. It
           | really requires attention and focus. So most people don't
           | practice it and don't get good at it and simply don't like
           | it. And they sometimes their approach might even be right.
           | Since, you know... A lot of the things you think about or
           | talk about don't _really_ matter.
           | 
           | So you might as well talk about more trivial but lighter
           | things.
           | 
           | I know that I really love to deep dive into things and pick
           | things apart. But my girlfriend hates it when I get like
           | that, so I learned to understand her point as well.
        
         | tekla wrote:
         | It makes it incredibly easy to shut your brain down and just go
         | along with what your "side" "expects of you".
         | 
         | No thinking required. Your side is the "correct" one and so you
         | have moral superiority.
        
         | wouldbecouldbe wrote:
         | Most of us are somewhere in the middle, but true extraverts are
         | just wired different. They are really different.
         | 
         | Many normal people are social when they feel good, and less so
         | when they are not.
         | 
         | But extraverts have learned to use social interactions to "fix"
         | their emotional state. Or maybe they are born with it. However
         | they deal with social aspects completely different.
         | 
         | I think most of us are in the middle. Where some of us lean to
         | less social, but I think part of that is emotional issues that
         | haven't been dealt with. Whereas extraverts are just different.
        
       | dosman33 wrote:
       | The author tries to better understand introversion but focuses on
       | slicing the pie in the wrong dimensions. There are underlying
       | issues that cause people to swing between introversion and
       | extroversion. When those underlying conditions change that can
       | shift a person's place on the spectrum.
       | 
       | If you are some flavor of neuro-divergent with any awareness of
       | yourself then you realize that you need to moderate some of your
       | own annoying behaviors to fit in better with those you are
       | currently in the presence of. Doing this is draining when you are
       | around "normies", even if you like these peoples company. It's
       | also likely that you only moderate certain behaviors around
       | certain people and again, the degree with which you have to
       | moderate yourself can affect how drained you are over time
       | changing the duration you can withstand others company.
       | 
       | When you detect that you are around similar neuro-divergents a
       | person can relax and just be themselves. The lack of drain on a
       | person in this condition can swing an introvert into a full-on
       | extrovert. Anyone who spends time at a makerspace or hackerspace
       | probably understands this. It can be fun watching new people show
       | up who usually are introverts and then they slowly shift their
       | personality since they can safely be themselves and come out of
       | their shells.
       | 
       | Again, it's the underlying reasons driving a persons introversion
       | or extroversion. When those reasons shift then the personality
       | shifts as well. This is not directly correlated to crowd size,
       | but it's a given that the larger the crowd the less safe it is
       | for someone to be themselves if they are neuro-divergent in any
       | dimension. Only people who are "naturally normal" can safely be
       | themselves 100% of the time in large crowds and not be worn down
       | by the experience.
        
       | jmyeet wrote:
       | I see a fundamental misunderstanding, even among so-called
       | profesionals, about what introvert vs extrovert actually means. I
       | am an introvert but struggled with the traditional definitions.
       | This article builds on and complicates these incorrect
       | foundations.
       | 
       | Here's the simplest explanation that I have found: social
       | interactions cost introverts energy. Extroverts gain energy from
       | social interactions. When I heard this, it was liike a light bulb
       | going off. It's not that I, as an introvert, didn't like people
       | or exclusively preferred being alone. It's that too much social
       | interaction is, quite literally, exhausting. That doesn't mean
       | it's avoided at all cost or that social interaction can't be or
       | isn't enjoyed.
       | 
       | If you've met a true extrovert you'll know this. For such people,
       | social interaction really can resemble a high. It can be
       | something they crave and they can crash from.
       | 
       | Larger groups are just more social interaction. It can be easier
       | with known people (eg family gatherings) because the processing
       | cost of the social interactions is less and there are fewer
       | unknowns.
        
       | hx8 wrote:
       | The introvert/extrovert spectrum is an aspect of personality that
       | seems to hold true across all cultures. Everywhere we've looked,
       | there are some people that prefer to be by themselves more, and
       | some people that prefer to be with other people more. The
       | distribution of these people follow a standard bell curve. This
       | is probably the single most well supported concept in the
       | scientific literature on the topic of Personality Psychology. I'm
       | dismayed that the author only made one reference in his blogpost
       | -- a century old quote.
       | 
       | It's absolutely crazy that this exists across cultures and
       | implies that the disposition is biological in nature. The term
       | has its flaws, and its pop-psychology understanding is limiting.
       | I do think the concept is pointing towards something universal
       | about human psychology.
        
         | watwut wrote:
         | But thatvis the thing - in that bell curve, majority of the
         | people are in the middle. They are neither extroverts nor
         | introverts, they are literally in between. They get tired from
         | too much interaction and they are also refreshed by
         | interactions.
         | 
         | Meanwhile, people talk about it as if there were two different
         | species. But, very few are on the extremes.
        
       | indus wrote:
       | Great writeup and love your articulation of ambiverts.
       | 
       | I am an introvert--but now trained my mind to be a normal person
       | and not fear people around me. I forced it earlier. If you meet
       | me, you'll not find me an introvert, anymore. 10 years ago,
       | people would politely ask me to talk or share.
       | 
       | It has been years of journey achieving that change.
       | 
       | I don't feel the introvert/extrovert quagmire anymore. However,
       | if I'm in public meetings--presenting, chatting for more than a
       | few hours--then I need to come back and take a hot shower--and
       | fade away the people and conversations.
       | 
       | My wife calls that shower: "Removing the theater from the head."
        
         | coredev_ wrote:
         | I am quite the same, we call this "social hangover".
        
       | wouldbecouldbe wrote:
       | I didn't know Jung came up with this concept.
       | 
       | The power of ideas is amazing. Hardly anyone knows Jung, but
       | everyone knows introvert vs extravert.
       | 
       | The same goes for Freud, more have heard of him but still mostly
       | under educated people, but everyone knows what is meant by
       | subconscious, which was a concept he came up with.
       | 
       | Even though they both had many weird, good and bad ideas. Their
       | reputation as great thinkers iOS valid just by these 2
       | contributions they made to human thoughts.
       | 
       | Ages from now kids will speak of their subconscious and being an
       | introvert while Jung & Freuds names will only be known to a few
       | niche historians.
        
         | kgwxd wrote:
         | It doesn't seem Jung really did the world any favors with this
         | concept. He introduced highly inadequate terms that are mostly
         | used to pigeonhole people into a simple box that supposedly
         | sums up all their behavior. Turning it into a linear scale
         | doesn't make it any better.
         | 
         | Don't like big crowds? Learn how to like big crowds. Don't know
         | how to be with your own thoughts for a long time? Learn to do
         | it. Don't say it can't be done, I've done it, and I've been
         | told I have a learning disability. No one should lock
         | themselves, or others, into a "personality" box, and all this
         | nonsense should be entirely disregarded.
        
       | coldtea wrote:
       | > _This entire introvert /extrovert/ambivert thing just amounts
       | to "most people like to be alone sometimes and around people some
       | other times"?? What's the point?_
       | 
       | The point is that we shouldn't be particularly concerned about
       | that group, and it's the people in the extremes that might need
       | special accomondations.
       | 
       | Breaking it down too much can muddle the distinctions, as opposed
       | to illuminating them.
        
       | JumpinJack_Cash wrote:
       | Could be that introverts have one or both of the following
       | characteristics:
       | 
       | 1) They don't like politics as a mean to reach one's goals. Maybe
       | for moral reasons or because they consider it cheating or because
       | they deem it 'not close enough to the action'.
       | 
       | 2) Social time spent with other people is like any other
       | activity, maybe introverts need or want more time to feel
       | satisfied, much like some people are satisfied riding a jetski
       | while others need to be able to do tricks and acrobatics in order
       | to be happy about the whole experience. Maybe introverts hold out
       | in order to reach a higher level of experience?
        
       | DerekBickerton wrote:
       | > Introverts, extroverts... ambiverts??
       | 
       | I consider myself an ambivert, swinging between introvert and
       | extrovert all the time. The thing is: you are going to have to
       | attend social events often against your will if you're introvert-
       | leaning (weddings, funerals, christenings, bar mitzvahs, etc).
       | 
       | What I've learned over the years is the more you know how the
       | world works, the less you want to be engaged in it (Big Pharma,
       | Big Tech, Big Military, Big Anything). It's all so tiresome.
       | 
       | One of the things all mature adults need to learn ASAP is how to
       | retain good friendships over time. It's a whole art-form. Anyone
       | that can give me a 'belly laugh' and I can retain friendship over
       | more than five years is worth keeping.
        
       | norir wrote:
       | To be fair to Jung, he did not believe that anyone was a pure
       | introvert or extrovert but he needed to use caricatures to
       | illustrate the concepts. He also explicitly warns in
       | Psychological Types not to use his ideas to create a personality
       | classification system.
        
         | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
         | To be fair to Jung, most of what he wrote is barely coherent
         | garbage with zero experimental backing and an attitude towards
         | intellectual honesty and scientific integrity which I would
         | politely qualify as problematic. Sorry, I think it had to be
         | said.
        
           | norir wrote:
           | Do you fear Jung's ideas? If they are incoherent garbage with
           | no merit, shouldn't they just collapse under their own
           | weight?
        
             | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
             | I don't fear Jung ideas. I feel obligated to point that
             | they are entirely unsubstantiated because people like to
             | bring them up and pretend they matter. Thankfully
             | psychology has mostly moved past.
             | 
             | I actually read _Psychology of The Unconscious_ as a young
             | undergraduate and it was a very valuable experience for me.
             | It mainly taught me three things:
             | 
             | 1. Standards in social science at the beginning of the 20th
             | century were very low and even theories which were seen as
             | popular and serious at the time should be seen with deep
             | suspicion.
             | 
             | 2. Things which were presented to me in high schools as
             | serious are actually entirely bogus and everything I had
             | been taught could and should be questioned (invaluable
             | realisation).
             | 
             | 3. All fields of study are not equal. The fact that an
             | academic department exists and a lot of people pursue its
             | subject doesn't mean that what it does is serious,
             | worthwhile and useful. A bunch of fools together can
             | actually keep going for a long time (another extremely
             | valuable realisation).
        
             | analog31 wrote:
             | History doesn't support this. Bad ideas can be remarkably
             | persistent. Yes I fear Jung's ideas if they give rise to
             | beliefs that are harmful to me, or to society. An example
             | would be biased stereotypes surrounding the introvert /
             | extravert dichotomy.
             | 
             | Disclosure: I'd probably test as an extravert, but would
             | advise against identifying as an introvert in a business
             | setting due to the bias against introverts.
        
       | elliottinvent wrote:
       | It was recently explained to me:
       | 
       | Introverts charge their battery in solitude and discharge it
       | socialising. Extroverts the opposite.
        
         | 0xfae wrote:
         | The author talks about how he dislikes this characterization
         | exactly because it's so binary and doesn't seem to be accurate
         | for most people who fall into the "ambivert" center of the bell
         | curve. The whole article is a beautiful breakdown of how social
         | interaction is much more multi-faceted than this. You should
         | read it.
        
           | elliottinvent wrote:
           | Admittedly I didn't get that [1] far, thanks for pointing it
           | out. I read the first half but he lost me at conversational
           | dynamics (I mainly come here for the comments).
           | 
           | The battery analogy was a good way for me to understand my
           | own experience and seemed like progress from the traditional
           | definitions of introvert and extrovert.
           | 
           | 1. "Balance not batteries"
           | https://www.vipshek.com/blog/interaction#balance-not-
           | batteri...
        
       | sublinear wrote:
       | I don't think the dichotomy is a bad rule of thumb to help
       | understand someone, but it's certainly not their identity.
       | 
       | I've come to find that it's down to the person's experience with
       | and resulting preference for crowds and individuals. It's
       | nurture, not nature.
       | 
       | I used to be very introverted until I started living on my own as
       | an adult and had shit to do and wanted things in life. I've also
       | seen extroverts that mellowed out with age.
       | 
       | There's no mystery. Raise your kids and yourself accordingly.
        
         | kstrauser wrote:
         | Despite claiming to have been one, you don't seem to understand
         | what an introvert is. I'm a functional adult. I have a wife and
         | kids, friends, and a good job. I can speak in public if needed,
         | although I'd prefer not to. I don't have trouble meeting new
         | people, talking to them, and getting to know them. I'm not shy,
         | but I _am_ an introvert.
         | 
         | Being in crowds of people I'm expected to interact with on a
         | personal level drains my energy. Baseball games, concerts, and
         | the like? No problem! Crowds of strangers don't bother me a
         | bit. But if there's a hell, my corner of it looks like a
         | cocktail party where I'm expected to mingle with everyone and
         | never get a moment to myself.
         | 
         | Being an introvert is nothing I was raised to be. My mom's one.
         | My dad was a natural salesman: put him in a room with 50
         | strangers, and 10 minutes later he was on a first name basis
         | with them all and had plans to vacation together. They both
         | raised me, and they both stressed the importance of good social
         | graces. The difference is that after my dad's social butterfly
         | antics, he was happy and fully of energy, while my mom was
         | ready to go home and recharge for a while. I'm definitely my
         | mom's kid on that one.
         | 
         | I have stuff to do. There are things I want in life. I'm doing
         | all that successfully. But when I'm done doing them, I just
         | want a little time to myself to exhale and relax, OK?
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | Yea there are many dimensions: Friends vs. family vs.
           | strangers, individuals vs. groups vs. crowds, work context
           | vs. fun context vs. shopping/errands context. Probably many
           | more. After COVID I think there's probably an indoor vs.
           | outdoor setting dimension! Different people respond
           | differently across these dimensions. I particularly have
           | trouble with: strangers + crowds + fun context. I think my
           | nightmare is a crowded shoulder-to-shoulder concert in a
           | stadium. I'd panic before I even got through the front gate.
           | On the other hand, meeting with friends and family or work
           | gatherings are no problem. Everyone has their weirdness.
        
             | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
             | For me it's kind of the opposite. I'm a big introvert. I'm
             | totally happy to spend all day quietly by myself. Just my
             | wife coming home for the evening is more than enough social
             | interaction for me. We sometimes go out with one friend for
             | supper - I'm tired after that. And I HATE family gatherings
             | outside just my immediate family and I dread work events.
             | But I love concerts. Being anonymous in a crowd, and not
             | having to interact with anyone on anything but the most
             | superficial level, is totally fine with me, and feeling
             | that wave of energy from the crowd but not having to answer
             | it is great.
             | 
             | It's when I have to put the energy in to engage with people
             | around me is when I'm pretty much immediately exhausted.
        
               | TylerE wrote:
               | A pro musician I know a bit once said the you never feel
               | as alone as up on stage
        
           | sublinear wrote:
           | > They both raised me, and they both stressed the importance
           | of good social graces.
           | 
           | No offense intended. Parents often tell, sometimes show, but
           | rarely _teach_ their kids much. Teaching isn 't easy.
           | 
           | My original point was that so much of this is also in the
           | hands of the person, not your parents or society. Nurture
           | isn't all external. I had a similar relationship with my
           | parents.
           | 
           | > But if there's a hell, my corner of it looks like a
           | cocktail party where I'm expected to mingle with everyone and
           | never get a moment to myself.
           | 
           | That sounds to me like a lack of motivation, not
           | introversion. I feel like you just don't see what's in it for
           | you. If you were in sales, you would see that as an
           | opportunity. Turning on charisma and charm is a skilled and
           | conscious effort to delight people in subtle ways. Internally
           | it's all about you, but externally it's all about them.
           | Learning that dynamic requires experience. The only part that
           | comes natural is the curiosity to develop a skill. Anyone can
           | find joy in what essentially becomes a game when they
           | understand it.
           | 
           | > The difference is that after my dad's social butterfly
           | antics, he was happy and fully of energy
           | 
           | Yeah because he was satisfied with his performance. It's an
           | interesting high. You should try it. It's worth pointing out
           | I'm saying this as a software engineer from a small and not
           | so well off family and only having a few friends growing up.
        
             | leonhard wrote:
             | Any advice on how to develop such skills in charm and
             | charisma?
        
               | sublinear wrote:
               | I'm not sure if this is sarcastic or not since my reply
               | went a bit sideways. I just felt it would benefit others
               | more to hear my perspective.
               | 
               | Anyway, the social game is to just filter noise and find
               | the signal you want.
               | 
               | When you look at all the self help books on this, they're
               | all very scholastic and merely teach techniques that sour
               | once they're well known. A famous one is repeating
               | someone's name back to them. I can't think of a smellier
               | tactic than that.
               | 
               | The goal of any social interaction is up to you. You
               | don't have to be best friends with everyone. That's just
               | a bonus when it happens. I suspect this is where the
               | emotional drain occurs for a lot of people. You can't
               | make people like you, but they're more likely to do so if
               | you can make them think twice about disliking you.
               | 
               | Determine what appeals to someone, adjust your style
               | accordingly, funnel them towards what you really want to
               | talk about, make a decision about how strong the signal
               | is and whether to move on.
               | 
               | I hope you see how this is kinda like gambling. This is
               | how it can be very easy for someone to talk to 50 people
               | and still be super pumped up to keep going. The upshot is
               | that energy really attracts people. This energy... that's
               | the charisma. You express it your own way and that's it.
               | Keeping it going shouldn't be hard for anyone unless they
               | had a murky goal to start with.
        
               | prewett wrote:
               | I've met people like this, and I don't think that is
               | charisma.
               | 
               | I think a better description of charisma is enjoying
               | people. The people I think have the most "charisma" are
               | the ones that always seem glad to see whoever it is, and
               | they seem be like this for everyone. Kind of like a (pet)
               | dog: they seem to think every new person is going to be
               | an absolutely wonderful experience. Whereas there are
               | some people I enjoy and others that I don't or am neutral
               | about. I'm more like a cat: well, I might enjoy you, but
               | we'll see about that.
        
               | thomastjeffery wrote:
               | There are two ways to be charismatic:
               | 
               | 1. Emulate charismatic behaviors.
               | 
               | 2. Create intentional social space for those around you.
               | 
               | #1 is what I would call "politeness" or "charm". There's
               | a strictly traditional (conservative/Victorian, though
               | I'm coming from a western perspective) way to do it, but
               | every branch of counterculture has effectively created
               | it's own version. I would count everything from chivalry
               | to fashion here: anything that helps people make _useful_
               | assumptions about you. As soon as you are having a
               | _comfortable_ conversation with someone, you are ready
               | for #2.
               | 
               | #2 is more meaningful and more genuine, but it's also
               | really difficult to do without starting with #1. Every
               | person in every social interaction exists somewhere on a
               | spectrum from anxious to confident. You can't directly
               | change a person's position on the spectrum, but you _can_
               | move the spectrum itself.
               | 
               | Lately, I've been watching the sketch comedy series, I
               | Think You Should Leave with Tim Robinson. Robinson is a
               | master at playing with that spectrum: He squeezes it
               | together, making intensely awkward cringe moments for the
               | characters; then at the most unexpected moment, he
               | stretches the spectrum out with impossibly intimate
               | social interactions where everyone in the scene is
               | suddenly loving and respectful to each other, totally
               | leaving behind the awkwardness they started with.
        
             | kstrauser wrote:
             | I trust your sincerity, but our experiences couldn't be
             | more different.
             | 
             | First, my parents _taught_ me, TYVM. I 'm competent, and
             | confident, in social settings. I know what's expected of me
             | and how to do it. It's still exhausting, though.
             | 
             | Honestly, the rest of your comment sounds more like you
             | were always an extrovert but with social anxiety, and you
             | got over it. I've never had social anxiety. Again, I can do
             | all the things you're talking about, and I'm pretty good at
             | them. When I've worked with salespeople in the past, I've
             | been the engineer that they wanted to put in a room with
             | customers, because I can make them laugh and give them warm
             | fuzzy feelings about my employer.
             | 
             | But when I'm done, my emotional batteries are completely
             | empty and I have to recharge by myself or with a small
             | circle of people I know very well and can relax around.
        
               | cole-k wrote:
               | Could you describe what it feels like to have your
               | emotional batteries empty?
               | 
               | I'm trying to imagine how I would feel if I were in your
               | shoes trying to woo customers. I think the negative
               | feelings I would have afterwards would be forms of
               | anxiety: perhaps I'm worried I didn't present myself
               | well, I'm thinking about a blunder I made, I have to
               | recover because there was one guy giving me a hard time
               | and making it difficult for me to be "on", or maybe I did
               | everything right but something else upset me (I don't
               | like the customers, what I'm selling, the venue...).
               | 
               | From what I gather you would feel none of these things.
               | 
               | Edit: Another thought: would you relate being at this
               | kind of event to performing a concert? I usually am
               | nervous, but eventually my instincts kick in and I can
               | play. Afterwards my first thought isn't "let's do
               | another," it's more like "I want some ice cream and to
               | sit down." And I admit I kind of feel this way with big
               | social events like the one you describe - maybe I'm
               | focusing too much of a more negative feeling when I think
               | about what you mean by being drained.
        
               | kstrauser wrote:
               | First, I wouldn't say I feel _none_ of those things. I 'm
               | certainly aware of when I've made a misstep, but probably
               | more than anyone else is.[1] I have what I think is the
               | expected, rational amount of anxiety: I don't want to
               | mess this up because I want to help our company close a
               | deal. That's 99% of it, though. I'm not so much worried
               | about making myself look bad.
               | 
               | Second, your analogy of a concert? Spot on! Yes, that's
               | exactly what it's like for me. The way I've felt after
               | being on a literal stage is the same as I've felt after
               | leaving a figurative one: "Whew, nailed it! I'm glad
               | that's done! Now let's go play some video games for a
               | while."
               | 
               | [1] Someone asked me if I remembered every time my
               | colleagues said something awkward. No, of course not.
               | Well, that's how much they think about the mistakes that
               | I've made. I take comfort in that.
        
           | tetha wrote:
           | I agree with this.
           | 
           | Like, alone, one on one and small groups of 4-6 people are
           | great. I have very enjoyable memories of lounging around with
           | bands after a show, just hanging out, drinking something,
           | shooting some shit about music and life. Our boardgame round
           | is similar, 3-4 people, we have similar interests, we know
           | each other. I very much value these rounds. You can focus on
           | people, you can listen to them, speaking rights are
           | respected. Sometimes there is also nothing to say and that's
           | fine.
           | 
           | Crowds are also no issue. Find or form your bubble, or just
           | be part of the faceless crowd. Or just drift around, bump
           | into people, be part of a pit or another. It's wonderful.
           | 
           | But being forced to get to know 50 people over the next 20
           | minutes just a little bit? That's terrifying and I know I
           | will shut down and flee from the situation. And if I don't, I
           | won't remember anyone. And hell, in a more compatible
           | environment, I remember people from concerts at a festival 2
           | years ago by face alone because we had fun and had a good
           | time and talk without even knowing their name (and as I
           | learned now, it's Pet, haha).
        
         | AndrewKemendo wrote:
         | Agreed totally and Brene Brown has done great work on this
         | topic - along with the whole Emotionally Focused Therapy
         | movement.
         | 
         | My MBTI would reliably give me INTJ from ages 16-37
         | 
         | Now I reliably test as ENFP
         | 
         | What changed was my relationship with myself, and society,
         | after coming to some hard realizations about my childhood and
         | decades of trauma.
         | 
         | I've seen similar changes in others, and I watch as (mostly)
         | extroverted boys have their social extroversion absolutely
         | crushed by weight of social and gender expectations. I watch it
         | happen with my son and his friends and it hurts. Luckily gen z
         | is savvy and a lot of them are countering this.
         | 
         | This seems to drive people to choose being alone over the risk
         | and complexity of dealing with social stuff, to the point where
         | people find or create habits that just reinforce alienation.
         | 
         | If I had to guess, a good percentage of people who are
         | "introverts" have had a lot of early trauma and so avoid
         | engaging with people out of anxiety.
        
           | tayo42 wrote:
           | ive kind of agree with your conclusion, though trauma makes
           | it sound intense. i guess im kind of quiet, reservered
           | "introverted", people always tell me how they eventually come
           | out of their shell or w/e and one day i will. seems like
           | people are always changing. i think anxiety and stuff has
           | more to do with peoples social interactions
        
             | AndrewKemendo wrote:
             | It's a shame that Trauma is only thought of as something
             | violent, when it is often very subtle and "peaceful."
             | 
             | Mostly cause we think of Trauma as adult trauma from War or
             | displacement, or significant physical or emotional child
             | abuse - but it can be as simple as your parent persistently
             | telling you you're in the way etc...
        
         | withinboredom wrote:
         | If you're a Myers Briggs person, apparently there is a
         | 'secondary function' that you can 'switch to' and not drain as
         | much energy (a therapist told me this once, no idea if it is
         | true. I left and never returned; I am not a Myers Briggs
         | person).
         | 
         | Anyway, if true, then you just 'learn to be more comfortable in
         | your secondary function' as you age.
         | 
         | Anyway, I am most certainly an introvert. If anything, I've
         | become more of an introvert as I just don't even tolerate
         | small/bs talk around me. Real conversations or GTFO. I'm a
         | right ole' grumpy old man.
        
         | vidarh wrote:
         | I have no problems in social settings. I can even enjoy them.
         | But they _exhaust me_ , and that is the introversion.
        
       | akhayam wrote:
       | Introvert and extrovert is the most widely misunderstood thing I
       | have seen at work and in personal life. This article also doesn't
       | do justice to the nuance that introverts find interactions with
       | other "draining" ... but it's not necessary that they suck at it.
       | 
       | I feel this way: having led teams of hundreds of people, I know I
       | can have deep, meaningful and long conversations... but I don't
       | find them a source of joy.
       | 
       | I encourage reading this recent opinion post in Washington Post
       | that delves into this nuance with a unique perspective:
       | https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/07/12/rebecca-m...
        
         | vipshek wrote:
         | I did briefly discuss this idea of interactions "draining
         | energy" in the post here:
         | https://www.vipshek.com/blog/interaction#balance-not-
         | batteri....
         | 
         | I understand that the idea of draining vs. charging works for
         | some people, but I always found this concept even more
         | baffling. For me, when I've been in solitude for a while, I
         | feel a restless desire to go out and interact with people. When
         | I'm in that lonely state, I find social interaction "charging"
         | and further solitude "draining."
         | 
         | But when I go interact with people for a long time--especially
         | in a large group where I don't know people well--I feel an urge
         | to retreat to solitude.
         | 
         | So am I charged by solitude and drained by interaction, or the
         | other way around? It feels like the answer is "both"... so what
         | am I supposed to do with all this?
         | 
         | One way you could think about my model is that you have four
         | "batteries", each of which has an optimal "charge level." If
         | you're under that level, you'll feel a desire to be in that
         | state for a while. If you're over it, you'll feel an aversion
         | to being in that state. And it's possible that if you're quite
         | introverted, your optimal level of large-group interaction is
         | close to zero.
         | 
         | If you're somewhere in the middle like me, though, the simple
         | idea that you're "drained" by one thing or the other feels off.
        
           | hightrix wrote:
           | As an anecdote, I am always drained by social interaction and
           | always recharged by solitude.
           | 
           | I can be home alone all week and still dread going out to a
           | party if I'm not in the mood. I'm a very social person, but
           | it is still draining. I have never felt so alone that I need
           | social interaction, but I have frequently felt a strong need
           | to be alone.
           | 
           | But I'm also like the parent in that I've lead large teams,
           | had greater interpersonal relationships, and have been
           | hoisted to leadership positions regardless of if I was trying
           | to get there or not.
           | 
           | Finally, I imagine the reality of extrovert vs introvert is
           | similar to the modern understanding of gender as a spectrum.
           | I would guess there are not many people that are wholly
           | introverted or extroverted.
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | I think there are a spectrum of social interactions.
             | 
             | There are negative social interactions, and they frequently
             | leave me drained, or seeking solitude.
             | 
             | There are busy interactions where lots of people require my
             | time and attention even though I have other things to do -
             | they can also leave me drained.
             | 
             | There are also positive interactions, with friends or maybe
             | places where people are gathered with a common interest
             | that leave me buoyant and full of energy and enthusiasm.
             | 
             | Even online interactions might count as interactions, and
             | fill my day with various effects on my energy.
             | 
             | Pet interactions are generally pretty positive. I often
             | wonder if some people use pets as proxies for human
             | interaction (may be healthy or unhealthy)
        
               | yarekt wrote:
               | Yea I think you're getting close. I enjoy social
               | interactions, but even the most enjoyable ones drain me,
               | even though once I recharge, I end up seeking them out
               | despite. Sometimes the negative emphasis of the word
               | "drain" makes it tricky to understand
        
         | kekebo wrote:
         | The most useful definition I've found personally is basing it
         | on which of the modes provides rather than costs energy
         | (mental/emotional/physiological)
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | > I know I can have deep, meaningful and long conversations...
         | but I don't find them a source of joy.
         | 
         | Sorry to add to the flames, but many (most?) introverts
         | generally do find joy in deep, meaningful long conversations.
         | It's the small talk they tend to dislike.
         | 
         | The problem is trying to shoehorn everything into introvert vs
         | extrovert. The reality is it's a vector. Small talk vs
         | meaningful conversations is an axis different from enjoying
         | crowds vs alone time.
        
           | coffeebeqn wrote:
           | It's also who you're interacting with that's a big input. A
           | party where you know no one but have to be at VS talking to
           | your best friend or kids or spouse for example.
        
           | mklarmann wrote:
           | I would even argue, that it is depending on the context (on
           | how you feel) that makes you introvert or extrovert in the
           | situation. Not just a vector. I found it funny doing some
           | tests, but once with the mindset of being a CEO, and in the
           | other situation on the dancefloor, etc.
        
           | bryanlarsen wrote:
           | AFAICT whether you find a conversation a source of joy is
           | relatively orthogonal to being an introvert. It's whether
           | it's draining or not. A conversation can be both a source of
           | joy and draining.
        
           | a_and wrote:
           | To further reaffirm your division between depth of
           | conversation and intro- and extroversion, I enjoy small talk
           | and deep conversation and I find both a source of joy.
           | 
           | Both, however, do drain me.
        
         | pydry wrote:
         | >introverts find interactions with other "draining"
         | 
         | I'm pretty sure this is bullshit.
         | 
         | Level of drain = lack of trust in that person X overall level
         | of anxiety
         | 
         | If you're highly anxious and socializing with people you dont
         | trust (strangers, acquaintances) then the experience will be
         | stressful and draining.
         | 
         | Ive met many self declared introverts who have no problem
         | socializing for long periods in small groups with people they
         | trust absolutely.
         | 
         | Ditto self declared extroverts who are "socially performing" in
         | a critical sitation where they will be judged can't help but
         | find _that_ experience draining.
        
           | jghn wrote:
           | I'm somewhere in that morass. I love socializing with people
           | I know and enjoy. I hate social interaction with strangers
           | and/or people I don't know well, don't like, etc. I'm also
           | completely happy being by myself for long stretches of time.
           | What's draining vs energizing for me is equally a mess.
           | 
           | Don't know what that makes me but I don't worry about the
           | labels
        
           | stronglikedan wrote:
           | > introverts find interactions with other "draining"
           | 
           | > I'm pretty sure this is bullshit.
           | 
           | As an introvert, it's spot on. I have no problems socializing
           | with people, whether I trust them or not. I spend long
           | periods (e.g., days camping) with groups that I trust. I
           | enjoy all of it in the moment. I don't have anxiety. It's all
           | still draining, and I need to spend days alone to recharge
           | after days of socializing, enjoyable or otherwise.
        
             | tayo42 wrote:
             | if you went camping on your own, you dont think you still
             | need to recharge?
        
               | stronglikedan wrote:
               | No, I do that _to_ recharge.
        
             | 0xfae wrote:
             | I think if you use the model presented by the author of the
             | article, it's less than you need to "recharge" but rather
             | that after a few days you've filled your small group and
             | large group bucket/quota, and now you need to fill that
             | solitude bucket/quota.
             | 
             | It's just two different ways of describing the same
             | phenomenon. I like the authors because it's much more
             | multi-faceted and easier to find practical applications, at
             | least in my mind. "I enjoy a good amount of solitude, and
             | I've just spent several days socializing, so I'm going to
             | prioritize alone time for the next few days" rather than "I
             | need to recharge so I can be social again." It's similar,
             | but I like the first one better.
        
           | emptyfile wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
           | You're heavily conflating anxiety and introversion. My wife
           | is an extrovert with anxiety - once she gets comfortable
           | she's energized by people. She comes home bouncing off the
           | walls. I'm an introvert - regardless of comfort level I come
           | home and want to go to bed immediately.
        
             | pydry wrote:
             | Im pretty sure everybody gets energized once they've gotten
             | fully comfortable with someone.
             | 
             | That process of getting comfortable is the relevant context
             | though - not a virtual dial in their brain that goes from
             | "introvert" to "extrovert".
        
               | isk517 wrote:
               | Ha, I wish. The level of comfort with someone really only
               | effects the rate of energy drain, at least in my case.
        
               | SketchySeaBeast wrote:
               | But that's not what I'm saying - I'm saying conversation
               | drains me even if I'm with someone I'm comfortable with.
               | I'm tired when it's over. My wife is not. She comes home
               | excited.
        
           | karaterobot wrote:
           | I think what you call bullshit is a core part of the
           | generally accepted definition of an introvert, so I'd want
           | some more extraordinary proof than this in order to be
           | persuaded.
           | 
           | > Ive met many self declared introverts who have no problem
           | socializing for long periods in small groups with people they
           | trust absolutely.
           | 
           | How do you know they had no problem socializing for long
           | periods? Did you ask them, or did they just not complain
           | about it to you? Part of the issue for many introverts is the
           | social expectation is often set by a more extroverted
           | culture, and they just try to fit in. That doesn't mean they
           | prefer chatting with you for four hours rather than, say, two
           | hours.
        
             | pydry wrote:
             | >How do you know they had no problem socializing for long
             | periods? Did you ask them
             | 
             | Yes of course. I think pretty much every self declared
             | introvert Ive asked about this had 1-5 people for whom
             | spending time with them didnt "drain" them - e.g. best
             | friend, parent, spouse, etc.
             | 
             | When they described what type of situations drained them
             | that they enjoyed it would generally be something like
             | going to a party where they didnt know anyone.
        
           | vidarh wrote:
           | It does not matter how much I trust someone, or how relaxed I
           | am, or indeed how much I enjoy myself with someone, being
           | around people still drains me of energy. There are
           | differences in how fast, but not whether or not it drains me.
        
           | jgilias wrote:
           | Well, no. I guess if you don't know then you don't know.
           | 
           | As an anecdotal personal example. I love my wife and kids
           | dearly. I trust them, and feel no anxiety being around them.
           | Yet it's draining. Now they're gone for a few days, and I
           | feel very good being finally alone for a few days.
           | 
           | Likewise I enjoy getting together with friends and family.
           | I've also learned to be sociable. But it's draining. After a
           | day of having to interact with people I really, really,
           | really cherish being alone for a few hours with my own
           | thoughts, and preferably silence.
           | 
           | We're different like that, people in general, I mean.
        
             | coffeebeqn wrote:
             | You also adjust to a degree. With a family those longer
             | moments can be as rare as a few times a year. I used to be
             | alone for many hours or days almost daily when I was
             | younger. But I'm doing fine. I really do enjoy the moments
             | of solitude but I guess I don't _need_ them as much as I
             | thought.
             | 
             | With this "draining" metaphor you'd think every introvert
             | parent is a mere husk
        
               | jgilias wrote:
               | Recognizing that something takes effort doesn't
               | necessarily imply that the activity is not enjoyable or
               | worth pursuing.
               | 
               | I mean, I do see how someone might believe that just
               | because one finds an activity draining they'd strive to
               | avoid it at all costs. But that really doesn't have to be
               | the case.
        
               | bityard wrote:
               | Well, some of us are. :/
        
       | revskill wrote:
       | From my experience, i don't care if i'm introvert or extrovert.
       | 
       | WHat i do really care, is, how much i understand myself. What do
       | i really need ? How do i say no ? How do i stay motivated ?....
       | 
       | Those are real matters.
        
         | Given_47 wrote:
         | Definitely feel like this isn't nearly as common as it should
         | be (possibly cuz it can be uncomfortable for some).
         | Additionally to what u mentioned, I regularly ask myself why I
         | just did something and try to examine if I truly had all the
         | right motivations.
         | 
         | Now this would probably be detrimental if you couldn't trust
         | yourself to be honest and risk rationalization taking over.
         | Building up trust in yourself is an entirely different topic so
         | won't go there but anyway I've found these sort of exercises
         | imperative to keeping myself in check and on the path of
         | improving as a person, not stagnating or regressing
        
       | PaulHoule wrote:
       | People have different reasons for being reclusive. The social
       | phobic, the agorapohbic, the autist, and the common but complete
       | obscure schizotype (maybe you if you are self-diagnosed
       | "autistic") are all examples.
        
       | nuancebydefault wrote:
       | Usually I feel very comfortable with 1-on-1s, but a lot of times
       | at a point I start either to talk too much about myself, or start
       | asking too many questions and people start to feel a bit
       | uncomfortable or overwhelmed, while I just want to interact and
       | learn. Anybody else recognizes this?
        
         | rochak wrote:
         | You just described me. I actively try to not do this but I end
         | up doing it every single time. I think there may be something
         | wrong with me.
        
           | nuancebydefault wrote:
           | Maybe you would be someone I could easily interact with,
           | without them feeling uncomfortable soon ?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-19 23:02 UTC)