“Wait, he’s introverted? That’s so weird because I had such a great conversation with him!” My friend says this with confused enthusiasm as she refers to the first time she met my husband, who works in sales and also loves the beach to himself.
“She’s really extroverted, I don’t get why she didn’t wanna come tonight,” someone says about another friend of mine, who tests as extroverted but often craves time alone to reflect.
“Introvert” and “Extrovert” are terms often thrown around as characteristics to qualify or disqualify someone for certain positions or to measure chances of enjoyment or success. Often, we use the terms to explain and describe ourselves or others. Introversion and Extroversion are categories that are referenced everywhere from job interviews to first dates, counseling sessions to cozy chats with good friends.
Humans love categories, and we need categories sometimes. Categories help us learn about, communicate to, and reference the world around us. Carl Jung popularized the terms Extrovert and Introvert in the early 20th century with the intention to help us learn, communicate, and reference differences in personalities. The problem is that today we often use the terms without understanding their true definitions and implications, and so we miss truly understanding the people we’re talking about.
The terms extroversion and introversion originally developed as ways to understand where someone gets energy from. The very basic definition is that extroverts get energy from other people and introverts get energy from being alone. But before we start using the terms, we need to understand two things:
Most, if not all, of the original minds behind the terms believed that there are no true introverts and extroverts, rather everyone is an Ambivert – a unique point on the spectrum; meaning a beautiful, messy overlap of both extremes. Occasionally, the extrovert needs to be alone (some more than others) and the introvert needs the company of others (some more than others). Different degrees, different occasions, different contexts, even genetics determine the unique place each individual might fall on the spectrum. Jung said, “There is no such thing as a pure introvert or extrovert. Such a person would be in the lunatic asylum." So be crazy but not that kind of crazy.
Since their introduction into our vocabularies, the terms have taken up lives of their own. The mainstream understanding of the terms today is not only different than the original definitions, but also polarizing. We have lost sight of the original intent of the terms and see instead the mythical stereotypes that surround them.
In short, the terms that were never supposed to fully define any one person have developed personalities of their own, and we often use this mutant definition to label someone’s personality. The stereotypes that surround the terms lead to misconceptions and gaps in understanding each other.
So how can we start to peel away the labels to see each other face to face?
One thing to remember is that everyone defies their personality type in some way. As a fiction writer, I am always trying to understand what makes characters realistic. One of my favorite insights is from Robert McKee’s Story. He says characters must have dimension and “dimension is contradiction.” This has helped me understand the apparent contradictions of my own character. Often the “contradictions” are only contradictions to what people have said about me: those helpful categories that result when people mean well, but don’t work hard enough to get to know you (or when you don’t work hard enough to be known). For example, people say I’m an easy-going person. But why does a bad restaurant experience turn me into a vengeful Yelp-reviewer seeking justice over something that doesn’t matter? Because I’m a living-breathing contradiction, thank God. That’s what makes us interesting, that’s the fuel for stories, the stuff plot twists are made of, the thing that makes relationships a constant path of discovery.
Before assigning the people we meet to their “introvert” and “extrovert” teams (and all the stereotypes, myths, and generalizations that come with them), let’s keep in mind that contradiction as an essential human characteristic. Be on the lookout for that introvert who loves dance clubs, that extrovert who hates having Friday night plans.
We need to keep in mind that there are no rules when it comes to these personality types, and to instead be wary of the rules people think are associated with each type. For example, “loud” does not equal extrovert and “quiet” does not equal introvert. Sometimes, even positive stereotypes like “extroverts have the most friends,” and “introverts are more creative,” can end a conversation instead of deepen it.
Labeling yourself can also endanger discovery. Don’t let your personality test results be excuses you make for yourself, like: “Oh sorry, I’m just feeling introverted,” or “Oh sorry, I did that because I’m extroverted.” This doesn’t help the conversation. And doesn’t help people understand you, because it stops at a label.
The bright side is that acknowledging a world of 7.6 billion ambiverts means endless discovery. Your “type,” a.k.a YOU is waiting to be uncovered, a unique contradiction and combination of all the things we know, or thought we knew.