Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

orkohunter.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 473 posts

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#381

Post by taskforcegemini »

HPsquared wrote: post #318
zdc1 wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wonder how much is extraversion vs introversion, and much are other factors like shyness/social anxiety, or as another commenter mentioned, being non-neurotypical. I feel like these discussions are full of mislabelled terms and people who may not be fully self-aware of where they sit. In social media I often see terms like "Introverted Extrovert" get thrown around when sometimes they just mean that they're an in…

I see "introverted extrovert" as a kind of frustrated extrovert who doesn't have compatible people around to socialise with so feels the need to mask and work hard to socialise with incompatible people. Which is of course tiring.

what is an introvert then? because these arguments also apply on introverts

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#382

Post by gosub100 »

blueflow wrote: post #370
fairity wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it matter? OP is experiencing an undesirable outcome, and assigning blame for the problem seems besides the point when the main goal is to change the outcome.

Because you can reverse the situation and criticize them for being offended by everything and difficult for you to work with.

you can, only if you have the critical amount of self confidence, appetite for conflict, lack the fear of losing them, and/or have another group of people who you can substitute after their loss. Thats a big ask for all but the most socially endowed of us.

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#383

Post by electrondood »

sans_souse wrote: post #348
lll-o-lll wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might be a bit autistic, common enough in the software world. Lookup something called “autistic masking”. Source: All the autistic people in my life. I really like autistic people! Find your people and you won’t have to pretend around them.

Please don't try to diagnose people based on a couple paragraphs, on an internet forum, who didn't ask for a diagnosis in the first place.

> might

I found their post helpful, and not an attempt to diagnose.

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#384

Post by andyjohnson0 »

My impression is that (a) extraverts and introverts both have some mutual incomprehension, but that (b) this is greater in extraverts.

Am I just projecting my own introvert bias onto (b) here? Or is there something structural that is responsible for this? Or am i completely wrong about (a)? Thoughts?

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#385

Post by gosub100 »

JasserInicide wrote: post #379
ternnoburn wrote: post #194

This author is deeply deeply misunderstanding other humans. They are applying a "it worked for me, therefore it works for all" mentality. And worse yet, coming to the wrong conclusions. You do not need to be an extrovert at work to get ahead. Full stop. Does it help in some ways? Sure, but you can be equally successful as an introvert as long as you are able to communicate clearly when needs demand it. Plenty of exce…

They are applying a "it worked for me, therefore it works for all" mentality. And then you do the same thing in the next line...

no, they are applying the "I found one counterexample therefore the whole message must be incorrect for the general population". A distant relative of the semantic argument: "the sky is blue", "nuh-uh, not all skies are blue. once there was an atmospheric event, and the sky was a color other than blue. hence you are wrong..."

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#386

Post by mettamage »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #344
frognumber wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now, we increasingly like to stick labels on things, and I'm not sure it's helpful. Autism is a disorder, diagnosed in DSM V. Very few people in your life are likely to be autistic. As with many such things, it's a spectrum. Unless those cross a pathological threshold, it's not autism. Few SWEs are over that threshold. We used to call people "nerdy," "quirky," or other things (and it was okay to be that). That'…

> Autism is a disorder, diagnosed in DSM V. […] Unless those cross a pathological threshold, it's not autism. There is a natural category in the world that shares many members with those-who-meet-diagnostic-criteria-for-"autism", completely unrelated to any "pathological threshold". It absolutely makes sense to describe people as "autistic" whose lives are not suffering. Beyond that, you really shouldn't be treating…

Fairly solid take. And you haven't even mentioned the reproduction crisis and similar issues in the general field. That doesn't make the accumulation of knowledge in clinical psychology any easier either.

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#387

Post by knorker »

vasco wrote: post #266

Most negative self labels have this property, not just introversion. I know people that say "they are always late haha", people that say "they aren't good at math", people that say "they don't like art" and many others, and they just serve to hold you back. In almost every time I hear this, I just hear "I decided I don't want to be or do this". And even if you were truly bad at something that is expected by society,…

Not sure I would say introversion is a negative self label.

> people that say "they are always late haha"

No, that just means "I don't respect other people or their time, haha".

> people that say "they aren't good at math"

There are people who say it as an excuse to not try. But you know, some people are bad at math, so maybe let's have someone else on the team do that part?

But what's the difference to "I don't want to do/learn math"? You don't have to. There's no guard rails on life, you can go out and eat dirt right now if that makes you happy, nobody's going to stop you.

> people that say "they don't like art"

I've not encountered this. Art, like any art? I think this is just not understanding just how much classifies as "art".

> thinking of yourself as bad

I'm not "bad" because I'm an introvert. I'm not "bad" as socializing. What makes you say introvert is some sort of insult?

It's not "bad" of me to be perfectly happy not interacting with anybody for weeks. I don't actually do that, because research shows that this is bad for your long term health, but an extrovert would absolutely not like that one bit. I find it more "bad" if I'm in a waiting room or something and some stranger can't just STFU for 30 minutes while we're waiting.

It says more about you than about introverts that you seem so hostile to it/them.

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#388

Post by croes »

sweezyjeezy wrote: post #375
croes wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equally to what? The maximum success of extroverts or the average or the mean? What exactly is meant by succesful? What's the measure?

Is it really not clear from context? "If introverts made an effort to be more extroverted, would it make them more successful?" Success I don't know what OP meant, but pay, seniority, I don't know that it changes the answer much.

By that logic there exist introverts who are more successful than extroverts.

If they become more successful if they act against their self is questionable, like asking straight people to become a little more gay or vice versa.

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#389

Post by caeril »

gosub100 wrote: post #365
sans_souse wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't try to diagnose people based on a couple paragraphs, on an internet forum, who didn't ask for a diagnosis in the first place.

why? because you don't think we're fully-capable adults here, able to weigh information and accept/reject it with full agency?

[flagged]

Re: The trap of "I am not an extrovert"

#390

Post by cdrini »

blueflow wrote: post #380
cdrini wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue if you asked 100 random people to draw a red Vs not-red line in that experiment you described, short of colour blindness, you would not see very much variance in the position of the line. That is why I believe the terms have converged on a meaning. In fact, I think it would be very hard to construct an experiment where people did not use the term red in a consistent fashion. I agree with you that formal…

My impression was that the variance is high enough that i have to learn / swap new vocabulary with every new person in my social circles. I don't see the convergence you are talking of.

Fascinating, that has not been my experience. Can you give some examples?

Although I will note there is always some variance, the issue happens when it's too great, and some people's definition of a word is barely even overlapping with another person's definition of a word.

Post reply on HN