Astrid
Newbie
- MBTI
- In progress.
Extraverts are not necessarily social butterflies
So, I've read different articles about extraverts and introverts. What seemed to be the most accurate is that extraverts need to recharge by external stimuli, and introverts by being alone. But I think this is more complex, since external stimuli doesn't always mean 'people'. For example, I'm an extravert, although I love to be 'alone'. Alone means surfing on the internet, reading articles, thinking, watching movies, and so on. So in this case you actually need external stimuli too, but not by going out, only gathering more and more informations. When I go out, I need to be alone for a few days, or even a few weeks, but this means I will constantly gather informations which I'm interested in, and maybe talk on facebook, skype, forums, chats, etc. This makes sense although, because I think being an extravert doesn't mean you are social and out-going. I think it means you need stimulis, informations from outside or make them things, like using them, changing them, etc. I also heard a few things like 'introverts think ways through, extraverts don't'. Well, I think this is simple E/I racism. When someone won't think through what they do, I call it stupidity. There are introverts out there, who won't think enough, and there are extraverts, who will. I can accept if there's a theory or study that why would it be like this, but reading Jung I found that sometimes he was a little bit bitchy about extraverts, and also making stupid stereotypes about introverts.
"To illustrate this, Jung tells the story of two youths, one an introverted type, the other extraverted, rambling in the countryside. They come upon a castle. Both want to visit it, but for different reasons. The introvert wonders what it's like inside; the extravert is game for adventure.
At the gate the introvert draws back. "Perhaps we aren't allowed in," he says—imagining guard dogs, policemen and fines in the background. The extravert is undeterred. "Oh, they'll let us in all right," he says—with visions of kindly old watchmen and the possibility of meeting an attractive girl.
On the strength of extraverted optimism, the two finally get inside the castle. There they find some dusty rooms with a collection of old manuscripts. As it happens, old manuscripts are the main interest of the introvert. He whoops with joy and enthusiastically peruses the treasures. He talks to the caretaker, asks for the curator, becomes quite animated; his shyness has vanished, objects have taken on a seductive glamour.
Meanwhile, the spirits of the extravert have fallen. He becomes glum, begins to yawn. There are no kindly watchmen, no pretty girls, just an old castle made into a museum. The manuscripts remind him of a library, library is associated with university, university with studies and examinations. He finds the whole thing incredibly boring. "Isn't it marvellous," cries the introvert, "look at these!"— to which the extravert replies grumpily, "Nothing here for me, let's go." This annoys the introvert, who secretly swears never again to go rambling with an inconsiderate extravert. The latter is completely frustrated and now can think of nothing but that he'd rather be out of doors on a lovely spring day."
Yes, all the extraverts are interested in glamour and women, and all the introverts love reading books. Okay, after that there's a text that says introverts are more hesitant, and extraverts open the doors, but I found these stereotypes so subjective and funny. An extrovert can be also interested in books, and an introvert in 'glamour'. What this text is about is that the extravert is a shallow and stupid idiot, and the introvert is a hesitant, sophisticated, shy and clever fairy. I can see Jung's frustration from miles away.
I also find this 'introverts do things coming from the inside' thought quite confusing. I mean, if you do something, of course it will come from you. Gathering informations (by interests) getting ideas, making goals will come from me.
My conclusions:
1. Extraverts don't have to be social butterflies to get external stimuli. Being an extravert doesn't mean you are shallow.
2. Introverts don't have to be clever and sophisticated bookworms, and can be shallow too.
Any thoughts?
So, I've read different articles about extraverts and introverts. What seemed to be the most accurate is that extraverts need to recharge by external stimuli, and introverts by being alone. But I think this is more complex, since external stimuli doesn't always mean 'people'. For example, I'm an extravert, although I love to be 'alone'. Alone means surfing on the internet, reading articles, thinking, watching movies, and so on. So in this case you actually need external stimuli too, but not by going out, only gathering more and more informations. When I go out, I need to be alone for a few days, or even a few weeks, but this means I will constantly gather informations which I'm interested in, and maybe talk on facebook, skype, forums, chats, etc. This makes sense although, because I think being an extravert doesn't mean you are social and out-going. I think it means you need stimulis, informations from outside or make them things, like using them, changing them, etc. I also heard a few things like 'introverts think ways through, extraverts don't'. Well, I think this is simple E/I racism. When someone won't think through what they do, I call it stupidity. There are introverts out there, who won't think enough, and there are extraverts, who will. I can accept if there's a theory or study that why would it be like this, but reading Jung I found that sometimes he was a little bit bitchy about extraverts, and also making stupid stereotypes about introverts.
"To illustrate this, Jung tells the story of two youths, one an introverted type, the other extraverted, rambling in the countryside. They come upon a castle. Both want to visit it, but for different reasons. The introvert wonders what it's like inside; the extravert is game for adventure.
At the gate the introvert draws back. "Perhaps we aren't allowed in," he says—imagining guard dogs, policemen and fines in the background. The extravert is undeterred. "Oh, they'll let us in all right," he says—with visions of kindly old watchmen and the possibility of meeting an attractive girl.
On the strength of extraverted optimism, the two finally get inside the castle. There they find some dusty rooms with a collection of old manuscripts. As it happens, old manuscripts are the main interest of the introvert. He whoops with joy and enthusiastically peruses the treasures. He talks to the caretaker, asks for the curator, becomes quite animated; his shyness has vanished, objects have taken on a seductive glamour.
Meanwhile, the spirits of the extravert have fallen. He becomes glum, begins to yawn. There are no kindly watchmen, no pretty girls, just an old castle made into a museum. The manuscripts remind him of a library, library is associated with university, university with studies and examinations. He finds the whole thing incredibly boring. "Isn't it marvellous," cries the introvert, "look at these!"— to which the extravert replies grumpily, "Nothing here for me, let's go." This annoys the introvert, who secretly swears never again to go rambling with an inconsiderate extravert. The latter is completely frustrated and now can think of nothing but that he'd rather be out of doors on a lovely spring day."
Yes, all the extraverts are interested in glamour and women, and all the introverts love reading books. Okay, after that there's a text that says introverts are more hesitant, and extraverts open the doors, but I found these stereotypes so subjective and funny. An extrovert can be also interested in books, and an introvert in 'glamour'. What this text is about is that the extravert is a shallow and stupid idiot, and the introvert is a hesitant, sophisticated, shy and clever fairy. I can see Jung's frustration from miles away.
I also find this 'introverts do things coming from the inside' thought quite confusing. I mean, if you do something, of course it will come from you. Gathering informations (by interests) getting ideas, making goals will come from me.
My conclusions:
1. Extraverts don't have to be social butterflies to get external stimuli. Being an extravert doesn't mean you are shallow.
2. Introverts don't have to be clever and sophisticated bookworms, and can be shallow too.
Any thoughts?
Text is from Daryl Sharp's Personality Types, Jung's Model of Typology.
Last edited:
