Psychology Today had an article called 'Revenge of the Introvert' in one of their past issues. It began with an anecdote from a psychiatrist wondering why she was so tired after seeing her patients for the day. She was so worn out that she, a therapist, had to go see a another therapist. Why? She's an introvert who found the constant interaction with people tiring.
That's just case sample #1- here's the rest of the article. REVENGE OF THE INTROVERT
I have also experienced this phenomenon...I grew up with an extroverted parent and two extroverted friends who thought it was so odd how I liked to be alone all the time. In middle school I was emo (okay, so that was partially because of my My Chemical Romance-esq military jacket and no smile policy), in high school things started to even out. I came into my own and realized that I didn't have to like what other people did. I didn't need to go to dance parties and those stupid teen
clubs where girls do that grinding stuff...this could go off on a completely different tangent about how stupid that makes girls look, but I'll try and stay on topic- I could like reading and drawing and staying home on Friday nights. Screw other people.With love to my introverted friends, I'm putting up some links to their blogs and fan fiction accounts. One of the awesome parts about being introverts is our incredible ability to have so much web presence!
Emily- This Is What I Did Today, CoolStudyGuide's
Amanda- angel-unknown
There are also amazing studies done on the effects of introversion on religious belief and politics. In an article by Neuropolitics.org in March 2006 (I write this to be wary of how old the document in question is and take its findings with a grain of salt...what a strange idiom.)
"Extroverts are usually more religious, more likely to literally interpret religious doctrine, more likely to believe in their political party's platforms, more likely to organize themselves into social groups, and more
likely to align their beliefs to what other people believe in those same social groups."
"On the other hand, introverts are typically less religious, less likely to participate in organized groups, less likely to believe in their political party's platforms, and less likely to give as much weight to what other people believe, inside or outside of their social groups."
I just thought that this was particularly interesting and I'll probably do another post on it later!
I can't help but think that maybe, just MAYBE, this might be a little biased :P :)
ReplyDeleteA world run by introverts, no doubt, would be territorial, solitary, even to the point of aggressive territorialism and solitude. But then again, it would likely be an expansive world of thought. Just as there is good and bad to every mode of thinking and expression, there is good and bad to both extroversion and introversion. The fact that this article is written BY an introvert packs on even more bias. To be sure, an extrovert writing an article about extroverts would likely disparage the introverts and paint their position as the leaders of society in the noblest light.
The truth is that introverts don't want to run society. Why? Simply put, they are introverts. They are not agressive, they don't naturally take charge (this is not to say they are not leaders for, in fact, most introverts I have met have been the best leaders albeit the strong and silent kind of leader who does not actively take up his position as chief), and interaction with other people leaves them emotionally, physically and mentally exhausted. This latter characteristic alone is enough to explain why introverts do not run society; how can the leader of the people be one who is exhausted by people? I'm sure if you asked any introvert about their habits and desires, they'd most likely tell you they'd rather spend time alone, or with close friends, reading a book, or sitting and contemplating, not going out and taking charge and rallying the troops and spearheading a cause. It is because of this natural lack of desire to outwardly express and mobilize that introverts are not the outwardly expressed leaders of our society.
So it must be said that, perhaps, the introverts are the strong backbone of our society. The solid, sturdy foundation. Though they may not be the corporate executive, or the congressional leaders, they are the innovators, the expanders, the thinkers (while extroverts are the doers). Both types rely on the other for a great society. The building is nothing without its foundation, and a foundation is but a foundation without its building.
And now, to address a final issue (I know, I've rambled on for quite a while and you are no doubt sick of me now), the final comments about religion and group joining. Regardless of the accuracy of these comments, they clearly mean to create an image of the introvert and the extrovert. Extroverts are shown to be "joiners", the "lemmings" who think less, and act out of blind desires fed by their mode of thinking while introverts are shown to be stronger, less wavering, more level-headed. This is an incredibly left-sided representation of who each of us are. In no way can it capture the complexity of each type. We are a strange breed, each of us a unique snowflake and, at the same time, we are all the same organic decaying matter (Tyler Durden told me so). To label and classify us with such a biased article and post is to diminish all that we are. I think, maybe, it would be best to accept eachother for who we are and realize that we all contribute to the network of society in different, but equally important, ways.
Rambling over :)