The Introvert vs Extrovert Squabble (and why it should stop)
When I was 15, a classmate of mine asked me “Why are you so quiet?” I remember feeling confused by the question. The first thing that came to mind was — Why are you so loud?
Just as he was perplexed by my lack of expression, I was equally perplexed by his need for meaningless stimuli. Both of us could not seem to fathom each other’s state of existence energetically.
There are a lot of polarizing issues in the world today. Republican vs Democrat. Russia vs Ukraine. Israel vs Palestine. Soft shell tacos vs hard shell tacos. All are worthwhile debates to have (especially that last one). But there is also the polarizing rhetoric of introverts vs extroverts.
The danger with this rhetoric, however, is the belief that introversion and extroversion are mutually exclusive categories, when they in fact exist in a spectrum. This categorical language leads to unnecessary polarization.
English writer George Orwell was a great believer in the cruciality of words. The particular words that we use when we speak or write is very important, as it literally shapes our perception. In his essay titled “Politics and The English Language”, Orwell talks about how language can be “…inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts.”
The fact that we so conveniently (and inaccurately) categorize people into the buckets of introverts and extroverts is, as Orwell puts it, “foolish”. And because of that foolish thought, we end up using inaccurate language. And because of the “slovenliness” of our language, we continue to reinforce our foolish tendency of bucketing people into these two overly simplistic categories. Foolish thoughts — slovenly language — foolish thoughts again, and so the cycle continues.
Other than the overly simplistic labels of introvert and extrovert, there is also our juvenile tendency to attach ourselves to these labels. Not only do we bucket ourselves in an overly simplistic manner, we also lavish on the particular bucket that we supposedly belong to. Introverts are often proud of their depth of thought and stoic indifference. Extroverts are often proud of their conversational flow and social panache.
Both, it seems, are interpreting the reality of their day-to-day lives in a one-dimensional manner. In reality, like with many things in life, it all just depends on the context.
Put a proud introvert next to a person he desperately wants to impress, and he suddenly becomes a rambling parakeet on steroids. Put a loud extrovert in front of his demeaning father-in-law, and he suddenly analyzes ten words before uttering a single one.
Labels such as introvert and extrovert are not only oversimplistic, it is also unstable. If such aspects of ourselves can be reversed by an alteration of mood, a change of topic, or a change of companionship — we should wonder whether such labels are even worth attaching to, given their instability.
Out of all the personality traits that have been discussed in academia and popular nomenclature, none seem to have dominated the conversation as much as the introvert-extrovert duo. These two labels have become general knowledge and accepted truth in the minds of many millions across the world.
But the joke is on all of us if we take such labels too seriously. It is a mistake to presume that all introverts cannot be socially agile. It is just as ignorant to presume that all extroverts are incapable of insightful rumination.
If you come across a loud mouth in the wild, give him the benefit of the doubt that he does have moments of silence and contemplation in his life. Similarly, if you come across a silent loner out there in the wilderness, it is safe to assume that he does have plenty of thoughts and feelings to share. He probably just prefers to write about them online. Perhaps in Substack. Or Medium.
