Before we begin our discussion around the history and significance of extroverts and introverts, I want to take an instant to walk through my process for choosing a weekly writing topic.
My Weekly Process
I have a note on my phone with a list of potential topics. Some are simple, some are complicated, some are extrospective, some are introspective. Usually by mid-week I decide on a topic from this running list and begin researching. If the topic has substance, the research process confirms that quickly and vice versa. From there, I draft, edit, edit some more, then publish.
Extroverts and Introverts – Original Idea
I intended this week’s piece to be about the neurobiological basis of extroverts and introverts. After the research process started, though, it became clear this topic, despite having plenty of resources dedicated to it, wouldn’t yield a worthwhile conclusion. I’ll explain why that is later in the piece. For now, just understand a pivot took place regarding this piece’s intent.
History of Extroverts and Introverts
Carl Jung first coined the terms extrovert and introvert in 1921 to describe individuals who are drawn to their outer and inner worlds, respectively. As we know, these two categories are commonplace in modern society and generalized to describe individuals who are either social (extroverted) or antisocial (introverted). However, between Jung’s initial definitions and now, there has been evidence suggesting a neurobiological basis for these two groups.
In 1967, British psychologist Hans Eysenck postulated the primary difference between extroverts and introverts are their levels of cortical arousal – extroverts have low levels of cortical arousal, introverts have high levels. This means extroverts require more stimulation in order to feel satiated whereas introverts require less. In the 1990’s, Cornell Psychology Professor Richard Depue authored and co-authored several research papers further connecting extroversion to high activity levels of the brain’s dopaminergic systems.
Recently, modern brain imaging technology has attempted to substantiate these early claims, but no study has been able to definitively identify distinctions between the neurobiology of extroverts and introverts. It was this lack of conclusive evidence which caused me to change this piece’s intent from discussing neurobiological differences to discussing how the extrovert and introvert categories came to be and why there are several issues when identifying with either category.
The Issue with Identifying as an Extrovert of Introvert
As stated earlier, in modern society these two categories are generalized. Here lies the first issue with categorizing yourself as one or the other – their empirical nature. Carl Jung was an incredible individual but his only evidence came from observing himself and his patients. He didn’t have the support of modern medical technology.
This subjective nature is another issue. In the studies I read, the introductory paragraphs described the participant selection process via personality test or observable traits demonstrating extroversion or introversion. Particularly with personality tests, there is great variability amongst the results and by nature they are limited in their insights. An objective definition of extroversion and introversion supported by neuroscience would’ve addressed this issue.
The final, most dangerous issue derives from the assumption the brain, and thereby yourself, are static. On the surface, identifying with a particular group has a lot of benefits such as a sense of community and self-justification. However, identifying with a group also makes you highly susceptible to group thinking and losing your individuality. This loss of individuality leads to a lack of drive, and ultimately a lack of growth.
The Significance of Extroverts and Introverts
We’ve identified the last issue in other Becoming Polymathic pieces. It’s important to be aware of your presuppositions, but understand they are just that. They are not limitations to your growth. I’m a self-proclaimed introvert. I don’t like loud bars or clubs, I don’t like large groups, and I don’t have a naturally warm demeanor. Yet here I am putting myself out there via my writing: completely opposite to my empirical nature.
We all must do uncomfortable things to have any hope of continued growth. You can and should identify your presuppositions and tendencies to better understand your current state. That process is an important step on the journey of being more. You can’t and shouldn’t let these presuppositions and tendencies direct your life – that is the job of your genuine interests.
Be More.
Become Polymathic.
Quote of the Week: “Beware the quiet man. For while others speak, he watched. And while others act, he plans. And when they finally rest… he strikes.” – Anonymous