Why This Site Doesn't Use The Words Introvert And Extrovert

You'd think a site like this would have the words introvert and extrovert strewn all over the place, but with the odd exception I purposely try not to use them. It's definitely a more idiosyncratic view of mine, but I'm not really a fan of the terms. Some of these reasons are practical ones, while others are more philosophical.

While this article is mainly about the terms introversion and extroversion, many of the reasons below are also why I hardly ever use other vague terms like 'geek' and 'nerd' on this site.

No agreed upon definitions

Everyone seems to mean something different when they use the terms introvert or extrovert. I'm not just talking about regular people using the term in their day to day lives either. Even different psychological theories or personality tests have different definitions for the concept.

I'm tempted to write up a giant list of all the various traits that have been ascribed to introverts and extroverts by different sources, but I don't think I need to. Basically, the lack of a single definition means that using these terms frequently leads to misunderstandings. One person may use the word introvert to refer to one thing, while the recipient of the message may take a totally different, unintended meaning from it.

Basically, introversion and extroversion are often used as broader categories that a number of sub-traits fall into. On this site if I want to refer to a specific sub trait, I'll talk about it separately and directly.

Just using the words can derail discussions

Since there's no standard definition of what an introvert or an extrovert is, just using the terms can often sidetrack a conversation by starting a debate about what the terms supposedly really mean. I've seen this happen many times online. A writer will put up a piece called something like 'How to be more extroverted'. That author will have had a certain definition of introvert and extrovert in mind when they wrote it, even if they didn't formally sit down and figure out what it was.

Whether the piece is being discussed in a forum or comment thread, it won't be long before someone posts something along the lines of, "Well this writer is saying introverts are x,y,z. That's not true and a common misconception. Introversion has nothing to do with having the traits x,y,z or not. Introversion means someone is e,f,g" Then someone else will disagree, or put up their own definition.

In all this the author's original point is lost. Regardless of what definition they were going on, the writer was referring to some sub-traits that extroversion or introversion is supposed to encompass. Instead of focusing on whether what they have to say about changing those sub-traits is valuable or not, the conversation becomes one about correct definitions.

Too many sub-concepts crammed into one

Another definition-related problem is that whenever I'm reading a description of what introverts or extroverts are supposedly like, the write up always outlines a whole bunch of sub-traits, tendencies, and preferences they have. They're all lumped together to create a profile.

The thing is I think people and their personalities are complicated. It's very likely that many people have some of those sub-traits and not others. Saying someone is X, with the implicit assumption that they have all, or many, of these sub-traits often isn't accurate. When you talk about each trait separately you don't have this issue. Of course, I do understand the value of having a single concept that pulls together a bunch of different ideas, but in this case at least, I think it's gotten way too messy.

False dichotomy

Whatever they mean, introversion and extroversion are supposed to exist on a continuum. A small number of people are clear cut, strongly expressed introverts or extroverts, but most people are a mix and somewhere in the middle. This idea of a subtle scale seems to get a lot of lip service, but in practice people mainly seem to talk as if someone is one or the other. That's way too over simplified, and leads to other problems.

Tends to ignore context

In practice people also tend to use introversion and extroversion to sum up how someone always acts. In reality, someone's behavior and personality may differ a great deal depending on the situation. They may be one way around their close friends and come across totally differently around family or their coworkers. Again, the idea of context being important tends to get lip service, but in daily use the terms introvert and extrovert are inflexible and tend to pigeon hole people.

Associated with an Us vs. Them mentality

Not every self-identified introvert is like this, but I've seen my share of it. Some people who consider themselves introverts see extroverted people as the enemy. Extroverts are supposedly loud and annoying and insensitive. They don't understand introverts or appreciate their strengths. They think their approach to socializing is the only true way and try to force everyone to act just like them.

It's not that I don't think there's no validity in those points, but overall I'm not a fan of this mindset. For one, it reinforces the false dichotomy. Most people are in the middle. It's weirdly hypocritical too. "I'm mad at this group for stereotyping and misunderstanding me, so I'm going to paint them with simplistic stereotypes of my own!" It's also just too angry and adversarial for my tastes. I don't see outgoing people as this evil force that's out to get me.

The terms tend to make people feel defensive

Say a writer's personal definition of 'introvert' is someone who's overly reserved and shy. Not saying that's the correct definition (see the points above), but that's how this hypothetical person sees it. If they write an article called 'How to be less introverted', it'll get a much stronger negative reaction than if it was titled 'How be less overly reserved and shy'.

There will be a bigger reaction to the first article because many people tend to see introversion as an acceptable variation in personality, and not something that they should have to change. I don't really disagree with that either. On the other hand, if you talk about more specific traits, like 'reservedness' or 'shyness' people may still disagree that that's something they should have to change, but they'll tend to look at things on a case by case basis, and it doesn't trigger that immediate "Hey, don't tell me I have to change! I'm not listening to anything this person has to say" response.

Like a previous point mentioned, another reason the words introvert and extrovert can make people feel defensive is that pieces of writing often are operating under a different definition than theirs. If a person reads something like, "As we all know, introverts are shy..." when they believe introversion has nothing to do with shyness, then they'll get annoyed. Some self-described introverts are really vigilant about the term being used incorrectly because they see it as evidence that the world doesn't understand them.

They can be self-limiting labels

According to the reports of many other people who have done it, it is possible for someone who's on the introvert end of the scale to become much more extroverted. However, I think the idea of switching from one side of the scale to the other isn't totally accurate. It's more that people can add new traits, interaction styles, and behaviors to their repertoire, which they can then draw on depending on their circumstances or their mood. They still keep all their previous so-called introverted tendencies, though they might not express those traits with the same degree of strength as before. This point isn't about saying whether its right or not for someone to want to do this, or if they should feel they have to change. I'm just saying I believe it's possible.

But some people believe that their current level of introversion or extroversion is set in stone. They'll say things like, "No, that's not possible. I'm an introvert. I'll never be able to do that" while referring to changes many other people have said they've already made. This attitude may limit someone from growing in a way that would have made their lives more full and enjoyable. Someone may like the option to switch into 'extrovert mode' when they feel it's useful.

Another belief that may come into play is that introverts shouldn't have to change because that would be selling out and letting the enemy extroverts win. Even if growing would make their lives richer, they may resist the idea because of an Us vs. Them principle.