Slashdot Mirror
Introverts Have More Brain Activity?
* * Beatles-Beatles writes to tell us Yahoo News is reporting that introverted individuals tend to have more brain activity in general, specifically in the frontal lobe. From the article: "The attitude that there's something wrong with introverted people is widely shared in society, where fast talk and snap decisions are often valued over listening, deliberation and careful planning. Extroverts seem to rule the world or, at least, the USA, which hasn't elected an introverted president for three decades, since Jimmy Carter."
A. Stop posting stories submitted by this Beatles link spammer. He's using Slashdot to boost his Google pagerank.
B. The first President Bush was an ISTJ and thus an introvert.
I'm recycling a comment from another AC in another Scuttlemonkey/**Beatles-Beatles post. This guy's getting worse than Roland Picklepail:
Am I the only person who has noticed the numerous stories that get posted by *--Beatles-Beatles? Am I also the only person who has noticed that the link used in is name is a constantly changing URL (depending on the story) with pointers to various scammy sites? Is it not obvious what he's doing? He's using the awesome PageRank of slashdot do promote his sites based on searches that have the word Beatles in them.
It's a small price to pay for free advertising. Find a story, summarize it in 5 minutes, post to slashdot, and get a pagerank boost that advertisers would pay hundreds (or maybe thousands) for. (Text links on high-ranking sites is big business - just ask oreilly).
Slashdot should at least put a ref=nofollow in the links to submitters (or better yet, only link the submitter's name to his/her user page).
In closing, a quick bit of WHOIS shows that all the sites linked by **B-B are registered to Carl Fogle. Carl, cut this crap out.
"...fast talk and snap decisions are often valued over listening, deliberation and careful planning..."
:v)
Maybe on your side of the pond, mate.
Vik
He's history's greatest monster !!!
Extroverts try to convince everyone how smart they are. Introverts assume everyone already knows it.
Glog!
...presented badly. Why of WHY did you have politicizing this subject?
Life is not for the lazy.
A while back I read an article in The Atlantic titled "Caring for Your Introvert" by Jonathan Rauch. Absolutely great piece.
Integrate Keynote and LaTeX
This is evindence that all those poeple that do those "fp" posts aren't as active in their brains as those who read the stories!
Finally!
who | grep -i blond | date cd ~; unzip; touch; strip; finger; mount; gasp; yes; uptime; umount; sleep
What about perverts?
Introverted as I am I won't be able to express this but I do have FAR more brain activity than others. I don't think it has to do with my introverted but it's more of a symptom.
For example; today I had an awful day. I'll think about it until tomorrow morning. My extroverted friends will shrug it off as "bad day, tomorrow is another". If in fact I do "think" more, I'll spend less time socializing as it'll cut into my thinking time.
Yesterday at a church event I attempted to be even more extroverted than normal. I was insulted in the course of the evening, a minor misunderstanding of my position, and of course it distracted me the rest of the evening as I thought about how to restate and rectify my position.
So yes, we think more but why would the thinking want to associate with the brain-dead? We don't. We fall back into our shells and think about why the world is as it is.
More information here: http://www.theintrovertadvantage.com/
Here's a quick bit from the site:
Are You One?
We all use both our introverted and extroverted skills, but we are hard wired to be more one than the other. Look at the lists below and determine which one feels more like YOU!
Not every aspect will fit exactly for you because we are all unique. If you don't feel like you fit one side more than the other, even by 51% to 49%, then ask yourself this question: If there is an emergency do you tend to stand still and feel somewhat shutdown or in slow motion? If you have a standstill reaction to stress more often, then you are probably an introvert. In a crisis do you tend to move your body immediately and feel like taking action, maybe without pausing to think? Then you are probably an extrovert if you react with movement. Under stress we can experience our innate temperament. Look over the two lists and think about how you ARE, not as you'd like to be. If your still uncertain, as a last ditch effort, ask someone you trust and who is honest to read these and suggest which one sounds more like you.
Introverts:
Extroverts:
I recommend this book if you think you are or know somebody that you think is indeed an introvert, as this book says alot about what an introvert is and what the article briefly describes.
Another case of the assumption that the USA = The World.
We don't believe in radical loony monotheistic religions from the middle east -- we're Christians.
For introverts, there was also lot of activity in the area of the brain that relates to the visual processing and the desire of red staplers... but that's probably just a coincidence. ;)
"What do you think?" "I think 'What, do you think?!'"
The US has only had one bachelor as a President? And if you've been here on /. very long...
Introverted people tend to seriously overanalize situations and have difficulty relaxing in social enviornments. The result is conversation that feels forced, somthing that most people don't find attractive.
Ever wondered why meeting people is easier when tipsy? It makes your brain shut up.
So basically this is a colony of introverts, and we get a story about how great introverts are. What does that do for us in terms of teaching us? It feels like nerds needed to give each other a pat on the back.
I feel the karma burning, but hey, I got a 4 today, so I can afford a -1.
Jimmy Carter? You're kidding, right? This guy has done nothing but shoot his mouth off about every damn thing, whether any one wants to hear it or not.
....an introvert? No way man.
Don't get me wrong, Habit is a great great thing, but
Plus, I don't buy the brainpower thing either. I mean, the guy presided over an economy with a prime rate of 18% and gas lines like you won't believe. Brainpower....yeah, right.
There is frequently an assumption that the physical (brain chemistry, electrical activity) causes the behavior (introspection), as opposed to the other way around, or some other, independent cause.
Only Women Bleed (Sex, Sharia remix)
I guess it makes sense. The more time you spend talking the less time you spend thinking.
I still have to wonder about the research methodology though... You stick an introvert who likes being by himself in one machine and an extrovert who hates being by himself in another. Is it really any wonder that the person who likes being by himself has more brain activity in this situation? I think it would be better if they could somehow measure an introvert reading a book and compare that to an extrovert mingling at a party.
What are you eating? isItVeg?.
I believe it was the late great philosopher Douglas Adams who stated, "If people stop talking, their brains start working."
This space unintentionally left blank.
Excerpt pokes at the perception that there is something wrong with introverts, but furthers the perception that somehow more brain activity as better. A lot of brain activity has to do with inhibiting other nervous system activity. The brain isn't a processor where cycles per second have some significance. If anything, the morphology of the brain circuitry would have a much bigger impact than any measure of global activity.
Attaching a label to yourself is a great way to start a self fulfilling prophecy, unless you are simply self analyzing. The old "I'm an introvert so I don't get friends" philosophy is widespread and teribly limiting. You CAN be both, and I try to stretch both sides of me.
I try to beleive I'm a little more diverse than one word, the same way I don't describe myself as a Jew, or white, or red head, or whatever. If you are in a situation where you have to describe yourself as one word, you may be around the wrong people.
Heh. I remember Carter. His "introvertedness" if that's what it was, was beside the point. The man exuded a mopey hopelessness every time he spoke. His energy policy consisted of wearing cardigans on TV when he gave his "fireside chats", and telling us he was turning down the thermostat at the White House. His cap on gas prices resulted in gas shortages.
His foreign policy of "USA bends over and spreads them" is directly responsible for the mess that exists in Iran today, and in fact one of the hostage takers of the time is "El Presidente" of Iran today.
Carter may be capable of building houses, and beating off savage attack rabbits with a canoe paddle.
He was waaay out of his depth as a president.
Everyone should have to endure watching the man's speeches to America. Those who missed it won't understand what a dismal time that was.
I wonder if the increased brain activity causes a person to be introverted (they are more immersed in their thoughts and less concerned with the outside world) or if a person being introverted causes them to have more brain activity (they think to fill the "void" where social interaction would fit in in an extrovert)
Ok, so you are saying that recent American Presidents have not had much frontal lobe activity...
You know, we'd guessed....
Find Japanese addresses in English on Google Maps Japan: http://diddlefinger.com/
Supposedly George Smathers attacked Claude Pepper by calling him "a known extravert," with a sister who was a "thespian" and a brother who was a "practicing homo sapiens," saying that Pepper "matriculated" in college and "practiced celibacy" before marriage. Pepper lost.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Abraham Lincoln, sixteenth president
Sir Alfred Hitchcock, film director
Michael Jordan, basketball player and celebrity
Thomas Edison, inventor
Grace Kelly, actress
Gryneth Paltrow, actress
David Duvall, golfer
Laura Bush, first lady [emphasis mine]
Bill Gates, software pioneer
Candice Bergen, actress
Clint Eastwood, actor/director
Charles Shulz, Peanuts cartoonist
Steve Martin, comedian/actor/writer
Harrison Ford, actor
Michele Pfeiffer, actress
Katherine Graham, late owner of Washington Post, author
A snippet from "The Introvert Advantage". Keep in mind that most of these people are self-proclaimed introverts. If you are interested in finding out if you are one, just google for an introvert-extrovert quiz, although if you really want to be sure, take the extra long quiz(es). And if you really want to go into the subject, read up on Carl Jung, who's right up there with Sigmund Freud and Alfred Addler in terms of psychological R&D.
And I'd hate to reply to my post, but I'm afraid by the time I post this it might be pretty far down the page.
Really? Says who? I certainly don't think that.
... specifically in the frontal lobe ...
I thought it was from my mother dropping me on my head as a baby.
As an INTP, I'd like to be the first to say...
obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
Computer geeks across the world rejoice!
There's a common belittling of the sheer amount of complexity we need to deal with to interact in a social environment. There's movement towards acknowleging this with things like "EQ" as well as "IQ" being measured, but it's couched in a lot of New Agey jargon too much of the time. Being able to do complex maths and write good computer programs involves a lot of brain activity, but so does being able to effectively model a person's personality in your mind and interact more effectively with them using that model. I usually score as more introverted than extroverted on MBPT tests and the like, but I still enjoy the process of experiencing social and group dynamics at times, and playing with it in a similar way to the way I'd work on a logic problem.
The Reagan white house was a colony of vampires. It was a pretty dismal time to be a peasant in Guatamala, El Salvador, or Nicaragua. "Moral equivalent of the Founding Fathers" my ass. Unless he meant the slave-rapers.
I have learned that being an extrovert will land you the great opportunities. I realized that no matter how much you know or how good you are, if you can't express your skills during critical moments, you are going to lose a job to an extrovert who can express his skills and demonstrate his communication skills.
There are so many people competing for tech jobs, getting into a good company is very difficult. I used to be an introvert and I learned that in order for someone to compete in this world, they need to start to adapt and become an extrovert.
The main reason people decide on the introvert approach is because people don't actually care. If people actually cared then introverts would have a reason to be more outgoing. Think of it that way.
One key difference among introverts, introverts know you don't really care and stay in their own world. An Extroverts world and entire reality only exists if people in that reality allow for it.
View it like this, if you are an introvert because you don't want an overly dramatic, painful, insane life, and want actual control over your life, thats just the logical way to have control.
If you are an extrovert, you care what other people think of you, you care about others more than others care about you, and I'm not saying its wrong to care about others, but extroverts simply get attached to everyone, or no one, while introverts are very selective with whom they attach to and connect with.
It's just different strategies, if a person can put up with the pain of being an extrovert, then theres nothing wrong with it, but for others being an extrovert is impossible or difficult unless its in a very artificial way. The artificial way of being an extrovert is to pretend to care, pretend to listen to people, pretend to trust people, and pretend to be social. Example, being social at work or at school because you are supposed to, not because you actually like to or need to, this is how an introvert views.
An extrovert HAS to be social or they go insane with bordem. An extrovert HAS to feel loved or they get depressed. An extrovert MUST feel accepted, MUST feel normal, and so on and so forth.
introverts want to simply stay in their own world and enjoy their time here, and are much more time conscious in that they know its a complete waste of time to play social mind games with people.
"Every time you see a story about a serial killer on TV, what do they do? They bring on the neighbor. And the neighbor says 'Well, he was always very quiet,' and someone in the room says, 'It's the quiet ones you gotta watch.' This sounds to me like a very dangerous assumption. I will bet you anything that while you're watching a quiet one a noisy one will fucking kill you! Suppose you're in a bar and one guy's sitting over on the side reading a book not bothering anybody and another guy's standing up at the front with a machete banging it on the bar saying 'I'LL KILL THE NEXT MOTHERFUCKER THAT COMES IN HERE!!!' " --George Carlin
You guys are out of your mind if you think a man that takes off years of his life to travel to every god forsaken section of first his state and then his country in order to meet people and beg for money can somehow be called an "introvert".
This is my sig.
Nothing exemplifies the supposed power of the extrovert more than The Apprentice. All those disgusting Type-A personalities backstabbing each other and ripping the crap out of each other for the tiniest mistakes to make themselves look good, and not only are we supposed to be amused by it, but we're also supposed to believe that that's really how you get real work done. It undoes what few remnants of "cooperation" are left from our positive Sesame Street educations and convinces us that being rude and loud at other people's expense is the only way to succeed.
Read up anything by Eysenck for more information on this. He theorized this around 1970, I believe, and there's been a stream of data since then to support his conclusion.
He has a front man to do the public relations part of the job, of course. But Rove is the one who makes the decisions.
Fast talkers? George v's Tony
serenity now!
An introvert says it, but only after thinking it over, if it is the best thing to say, the timing, thinking about what others say a bunch to try to come up with good things to say, etc. An introvert can "over analyze" things like that.
Other things happen too. When I'm going to meet someone, I'll often think up entire conversations on the way. It isn't purposeful, but I think something along the lines of "I could say X", then that leads to "then they would say Y", and it continues and before you know it I've had a little conversation in my head.
I think about all sorts of stuff. I can be walking down the street and I'll start thinking about something completely irrelevant. I'm not talking about "I remember that one birthday", I'm talking about "how you could build X" which leads to how to solve problem Y, how X would be useful in situation Z, etc.
That is sort of the whole introvert/extrovert thing. Introverts do all this stuff inside. Extroverts might do these things as conversations with other people, or they might fill that "need" in some other way with normal conversation and such.
That's how I see it. I used to be more of an introvert, and I've never been an extrovert so I can't say I've had that point of view (outside of the odd situation).
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
I think it is more about being curious. When someone is curious they become introverted because they don't have a need to speak out. Extroverts try to enjoy themselves, while introverts try to fill this curiosity. Filling the curiosity may bring enjoyment, though.
I have only this to say:
"I think this line is mostly filler"
That reminds me of me exactly. I guess I am not the only one. :)
Some people are built to be extroverts, figure out that it doesnt work, and decide to be introvert. Being an extrovert is nice if you like drama. If you like dramatic emotional situations, extrovert is for you.
If you want to be emotionally stable, introvert is for you. However, the way around it is to simply change your way of thinking, an extrovert can become an introvert and an introvert can become an extrovert. An introvert can become an extrovert simply by faking it.
The difference is the extrovert most likely believes in the illusion that they have a lot of friends while the introvert knows its an illusion and sees beyond it. Yes most people are fake, yes most of us will never know each other on a real life, but the introverts focus in on what they want or need from the specific individual while the extrovert just wants someone to listen to them.
As an introverted-extrovert, while it would be nice in the perfect world, to be social and be real with people, if no ones real its kinda pointless if not painful to try to be real around your fake friends.
Introverted or not, its better to have a few real friends than a dozen fake friends, and the only way to learn the truth of these words is to actually experience the results of surrounding yourself with fake people.
Extroverts simply like attention, like to talk, like to be heard, and would rather believe everyone cares than admit that they dont.
Think of it this way, why would anyone care who you hooked up with? and how exactly is this information good to put out there? I wont say introverts are smarter, but introverts are at least more cautious when it comes to the information they put out and the trust they put into individuals. It should be obvious.
I tend to be a bit of an introvert, especially around new people. One of the main reasons for this is that I start getting this internal filter for everything I say. Like, if I think about telling a joke, my brain kicks in and goes, "How will this be percieved by these people? Will they think it's funny? Will they be offended? Blah blah blah". Before I know it, the conversation has moved on to a different topic, and my comment would no longer make sense.
I guess what I'm saying is that sometimes I feel like I'm an introvert specificly because I can't silence this little internal monologue in my head. I overthink everything, to the point that I end up not speaking at all.
That's why I'm glad I have slashdot, so that I can pretend I'm interacting with people. Hooray!!!!
Being introverted does not necessarily mean that you're a quiet, reflective kind of person in social situations. Being introverted really means that you don't like too much people, for too long a time at once. You need a good deal of "alone-time" to be comfortable.
That can mean that you're also quiet or a wallflower at parties, but does not at all have to be. It may just as well be that you're happily partying and jabbering away - just mostly with people you already know, preferably smaller groups, and not that often.
In fact, I prefer to see introversion as the positive difference of the clingy extrovert who can't stand being alone, who values themselves only through the eyes of others, and who has to fill their time with sounds and voices at any cost, whether if it means constantly blaring TV, spending hours on the phone saying nothing at all, or always having a boy/girlfriend just to have _someone_, since anyone, no matter what kind of creep, is better than being alone.
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
i dont talk much at all, unless i happen to be very thoroughly educated and certain of my position on a topic, because if im not i end up rambling on endlessly as i begin to go over all the possible positions that could be taken up. my wife finds it quite a chore to talk with me. i have to keep reminding her that i need time to think about what i want to say, and how, and that once i have what i need arranged properly in my mind, i can talk to her without rambling on and on about things. it doesnt help that i almost certainly have ADHD (thats by looking at the brief descriptors in the DSM IV of ADHD and realizing that i meet a number of the requirements to be considered as such, not only do i ramble on, but i ramble into a string of varying subjects and ultimately forget what i was talking about in the first place)
when i wrote book reports and essays in high school, i never needed a second draft. the first one was, short of perhaps minor spelling or grammatical errors, exactly what i intended to hand it when the project was due, despite my teachers insistence upon my writing a first draft before a final draft was turned in. i ended up having to intentionally make errors in the first draft to correct for the second, because id spend so much time thinking about the topic that when i put pen to paper initially...i was done. on other subjects, i just ramble in my head until i forget what i was going on about, which i find quite relaxing from time to time, as it seems nobody is terribly interested in enduring me when i speak it all aloud.
By and large, language is a tool for concealing the truth. -- George Carlin
If only you'd ask... I'm afraid to start the conversation...
I'd say that extroverts trust more than introverts.
Introverts quickly learn they will never be accepted, and cannot trust the common individual.
Also, its not like someone who is an introvert cannot fake being an extrovert. Thats the difference. Any introvert can decide to pretend to be social. All you have to do is learn the body language and words which initiate certain patterns, conversations, etc.
Ultimately, if you want to be an extrovert yet be an introvert, talk to people when you have a reason to.
Does more brain activity = good or bad, or neither?
He clearly said The World, which as everybody knows is that popular MMORPG. But it's easy to see how one could confuse the USA with it, seeing how President Stonecold resigned and everything!
So, basically, they figured out the same thing I was taught five years ago in college. It's explained by "Optimal Stimulation Theory." People have an optimal level of stimulation that they try to maintain. Introverts naturally have a higher level of internal stimulation, therefore they seek to reduce the amount of outside stimulation they receive in order to maintain their optimal stimulation level. Extroverts (and "sensation seekers") have a lower level of internal stimulation and therefore seek to increase the amount of external stimulation they receive in order to maintain their optimal stimulation level. So...what's new about this study?
"All jocks ever think about is sports - all nerds ever think about is sex."
The difference being that jocks get invited to sports.
I keed! I keed! I joke-a with yooooooou!
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
This means, extroverts can't keep a secret, can't do something without telling the world about it, and like to gossip.
Gossiping is not something an introvert would ever do because whats the point? There is no logic behind gossip. So think of it this way, introverts are good planners, strategic thinkers, and this is good for certain fields and tasks. Extroverts are good salesmen, good with words, perhaps better with expression.
The problem is, expression without reason is art. Extroverts would make a good artist, but would you really want an extrovert to be handling strategy or any of the planning? All your plans would be gossip and sooner or later all your ideas and plans will be stolen.
So yes, its a catch 22, extroverts are great at marketing, but bad at planning. If you are running a business, it takes more than just marketing, because you cannot even get a patent or use your idea if your extrovert partner tells everyone the idea before you can patent it or actually build a business around it.
The planners therefore have to be introverts. The salesmen have to be extroverts, there can be exceptions for fields such as law in which you'd want to be capable of both.
While I'm sure that many introverts are turning over deep coding problems, coming up with the idea that will change the world, and making keen observations, others are neurotic, anxious, or wasting cycles on trivialities. Not all brain activity is condusive to health, happiness, and success.
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
Beatles-Beatles attempt at politicizing this seems off: Bush I and Bush II also appear to be introverts.
I think you're over-generalizing a little. Actually, a lot. Isn't it possible for a person to enjoy being social without being attached to everyone? Sure, an extroverted person needs to have someone to be extroverted to -- but that's a far cry from needing to be loved and accpeted by everyone, and from getting attached to everyone.
Introversion and extroversion are about what your focus is, not what you need. Some people have all the fun and energy in the world when they're with other people. Some people have a great time just thinking and doing things alone. That doesn't mean that an introverted person doesn't want or need love, or that extroverted people are some sort of incomplete half-humans when they're alone.
I'm guessing that you consider yourself an introvert (or you're a very bitter extreme extrovert) from your comments. That's fine but you seem to have some huge resentment towards more social people. Enjoying socializing is not the same as dependance on others or "play[ing] social mind games". Some people just like to hang out. Others like to amuse themselves.
So yes, we think more but why would the thinking want to associate with the brain-dead? We don't. We fall back into our shells and think about why the world is as it is.
Or, from the other angle, why would people who can communicate their thoughts want to associate with those who can only run circles in their heads?
You're obviously not a nerd yourself.
... but an overwhelming majority of introverts also claim to be afflicted with Asperger's, datelessness, hairy palms, and large anime figurine collections.
Imagine, people who talk all the time aren't as smart as those who shut up and listen!!!
He's the one staring at YOUR shoes.
Thank you, I'm here all week. Try the lobster.
There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
Well, I'm glad to know that I'm not alone. I just wish I knew how to fully harness my method of thinking. I would think that I could get a lot more done if I knew how to use what I've got.
degree depends on situation
Yup. There's other research that shows that the distinction totally breaks down if you track people through different contexts. Or at least claims to show that. Sorry I don't have the reference at hand. But there are contexts where I'm extremely one way or the other. I both have a handful of very-long-term friends and at time enjoy chatting up total strangers. People who are just one way or the other -- wonder if they can learn to switch modes (or contexts) to advantage, there being unique values to gain from each.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
Q: How can you tell an extroverted computer geek from an introverted computer geek?
A: The introverted computer geek will look at his shoes while he talks to you. The extroverted computer geek will look at your shoes while he talks to you.
Q: How do you tell if an Extroverted computer geek is Russian?
A: His shoes look at you while he is talking.
After 2+ years, it still doesn't get old.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Inroverts tend to be introspective. That's a given and even redundant. Perhaps we should consider the mental health issues involved, such as manic-depressive, overt depression, OCD, or whatever the flavor of the day. A lot of the people afflicted with these disorders exhibit the very same "symptoms" of either genius or psychotic behavior.
Sorry, but this is an issue very close to someone in my family.
Thank god for AC posting. Oh. Wait.
I'm not saying that I fall into either category. I certainly do not. I just wonder how mental "afflictions," be they either good or bad as perceived by the collective reflect upon the development and current state of our society.
Who's in charge and how many medications are they taking to keep whatever balance their doctors seem to think is real?
SiO2
I'm actually not trying to be mean here, but I am illustrating what it's like for the rest of us (sounds exclusive, eh?) to talk to a person who isn't so good at putting their thoughts in order and communicating them. I think we all kind of know what it's like -- everyone has moments when they try to articulate what they were thinking but get bogged down because there's just so much of it -- but for those of us who can summarize well it's exhausting trying to extract the point from all your thoughts. I think from your other post that you understand that, but I wanted to explain my post.
No offense to a fellow introvert, but if you really want to get more done, stop patting yourself on the back long enough to work. For being an introvert, that's a whole lot of text all about you, and how great you are. This simply does not work when you are working with a group of people on a group project. Even if you know how to solve a problem, you're probably still going to need help implementing the solution, and for that you're going to have to take a deep breath and explain. Don't be surprised if the rest of the group has their own solutions, or questions your judgement. Your way is one way of many, and your thinking that you're already "past that point and beyond" is what annoys people.
As a Slashdot tagline once said:
In theory, everything works in practice. In practice, it never does.
I think you're about right. I'm extremely extroverted, but I don't mind being alone, either. I find people extremely interesting and entertaining...at least when there's something interesting and entertaining about them. I like being able to talk to pretty much anybody. It's really not hard...just ask them questions about themselves. What do you do? Where are you from? Do you have a family? What do you like to do for fun? The best questions to ask are "why" questions, because they're open ended and make people think, and also motivation questions, for the same reasons. "Wow, what made you want to be a chicken sexer?" usually makes for a very interesting story.
The problem occurs, however, when you meet truly boring people. The guy who works as an insurance claims adjuster and has no hobbies or interests. Thankfully that's pretty rare. Most of the time people have at least one thing about them that's truly interesting and unique, and if you get them started on that topic you can be entertained for quite awhile. As a bonus, they'll think you're the most interesting person in the world, too, since the most interesting people are those are interested in them. You better actually be interested in people, though, or you'll just find yourself getting annoyed.
Oh, but playing social mind games is fun, too.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
From the slashdot article:
I consider myself introverted but I was always excellent applying technology and creating solutions that worked and usually exceeded expectations.
That "exceptional" technology skill got me invited to lots of decision-making and planning meetings and consortiums. But people often expressed afterwards (and sometimes even during) these sessions disappointment in my seemingly lack of participation or unwillingness to "speak up". I always apologized and explained I really couldn't find it in my constitution to say something unless I had something to say.
I usually found myself deep in thought about discussions ongoing but rarely found conclusions simple, even in seemingly simple scenarios. Overall I sometimes wonder how many dings I accumulated for that trait. (I will say, I did quite well for myself reputation-wise overall.)
Curiouser and curiouser.
yeah, but this is a story about the vast differences between introverts and extroverts. Since that's only once facet of most peoples personality, there aren't really any broadly accurate differences. Still, the general differences can be interesting.
Don't you think you are creating a false dichotomy though? For example, I am by no means an introvert, but I sometimes have trouble with doing/saying things impulsively. So where do I fit in? Honestly, I think this whole thing seems a bit fabricated, personality cannot be distilled into two catagories very easily(if at all)
Monstar L
Being an INTP (just found that out recently and it helps explain a lot), I've been a big introvert misfit all my life. In contrast to what TFA says about shyness, I'm pushing forty and have only overcome mine in the past few years through conscious effort. I'm functional, but I'm not going to be running for office any time soon. The Smiths How Soon Is Now? pretty much sums up how I was until some time after I turned thirty. I found liquor helped when going out, but by the time I started loosening up, I could barely talk... They have better treatments for it now, I hear. What I have found that helps is when I have to give presentations in my MBA classes. I've got four coming up over the next two weeks...where'd I put that bottle... Just kidding! Anyways, I hope shyness is not an intrinsic characteristic of all introverts. I'd hate to think that all the other misfits out there like me have had to put up with something so stupid their whole lives too.
as an introvert (to which i would testify in court), i take exception with the categorization of introverts as being loathe to make snap decisions and speak quickly. i hate going to parties or work events, and am most gleeful curling up with my laptop. but i speak extremely quickly and eat and make decisions very quickly. introversion is not the same thing as being shy. it is about whether or not you enjoy the company of other people. i don't. i get energy from spending quiet time by myself, not from other people. that's what distinguishes an introvert -- not social awkwardness.
go get it
erm, I meant extrovert, not introvert. See what I mean?
Monstar L
As the saying goes, "Still waters run deep."
a site where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the characters of their content.
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
I have lived in the USA and in other countries. The only place that I have seen in the world that being introverted or "thoughtful" is thought of as being weird or spooky is the USA. In other places in the world people who think about what they have to say, rather than spouting some clichés and dogma, which seems so common in the USA, are the ones who are respected. That certainly holds true of all the Canadians I've met.
Having said that, there are a lot of very intelligent and thoughtful people in the USA, and yes most of them aren't extroverts :P
So my point is not about how leaders and extroverts in the world are, just that thinking that introversion is a bad thing is probably likely to be a fairly US specific thing.
We don't believe in radical loony monotheistic religions from the middle east -- we're Christians.
I think introverts have more brain activity because they think about things more.
I've heard that Introverts have a generally higher level of arousal (not necessarily the sexual kind), probably caused by hormones, and this is why their brains are busier and they have less interest in interacting with others. People with ADHD, OTOH, have a very low level of natural arousal and so need to do outrageous things or take stimulants to feel normal.
Like many (well, MOST) things in psychology, this is a guide and nothing more. Psychology (like most disciplines) suffers from "Physics Envy"; that is they lack the ability to make concrete statements like Physics has ("Earth's gravity is 9.8 m/s^2").
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
It comes at a price. I can't help but wonder how many introverts also suffer from obsessive-compulsive disorder or any other anxiety disorder. Sitting and thinking about every possibility to every situation amplifies the effects of OCD and makes it much, much worse. Ignorance is truely bliss.
No, that wasn't irony. Don't get me wrong, I like to talk about myself, too. I would describe a extrovert as someone interested in things outside himself...other people and environments. I like to go places and I like to meet people. I look forward to parties and enjoy going out. "Extrovert" does not mean "blathers on about himself to people who don't care." That's the definition of a boor. Extroverts can be thoughtful and considerate, too.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
It's very subjective of you to label all U.S. Presidents since Carter as extroverted. What qualifies you to draw this broad generalization? Do you have substantial basis?
James E. Carter and introvert? The guy who, for most of my lifetime, has been gallivanting around the planet advising and negotiating with anyone drawing breath, publicly criticizing all of his successors, participating in all manner of charitable causes, special interests and important events, and doing interviews for anyone capable of granting airtime? That "Jimmy" Carter? This guy visited TMI while the core was still molten.
Give me a ****ing break. The man has probably forgotten more friends than any ten of you will ever have.
Lurking at the bottom of the gravity well, getting old
well one thing both of you are a little off about is introverts and extroverts "enjoy" acting out as one (or not acting out?). The basis of the test is really to prove whether you feel "recharged" after spending time by yourself or by interacting with others. Although people generally enjoy doing what they feel recharges them, you really can't interchange the two. Personally I'm about as introverted as it gets according to myers-briggs, however I really do enjoy interacting with people who I find interesting and when I feel that they find me interesting however, interacting with people really drains me and after a while of interacting with people I'll naturally just start to appear uninterested even though I'm just self-reflecting so that I'll be able to continue.
As for whoever said, extroverts need others to care about them, that can't be farther from the truth, they really just seem to have a more verbal way of self-reflecting. By talking with others, most extroverts I've known seem to realize more about themselves from either hearing other peoples experiences or just saying something about themselves aloud.
As for the parent poster stating that talking isn't hard, introverts know that, usually we genuinely just don't care and sometimes don't want to know the answer to these questions.
Give a man a match and he'll be warm for a minute, set him on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Who the hell modded this up? The GP has a valid point and this is just some Anonymous Coward crap. Get with it mods.
Turn based strategy game that runs over XMPP. Phalanx
"ntroverted children enjoy the internal world of thoughts, feelings and fantasies..."
;-)
And what fantasies I've had too!
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
I agree with your last statement though. Every once in a while I get the feeling that I could be some genius or invert some mega-successful-help-the-world type thing if I could just get the right idea to start, instead of the random little things I think of.
I don't know if any of history's great geniuses or important people did this same thing. I've never read about it, but I don't really read biographies. Of course, they may never have written something like that down or discussed it. If I become famous or invent that thing, what are the chances someone would find these "moments of brilliance" (as they may call them :) that I post to Slashdot. Another thing only a time machine will solve.
Of course I know I won't be a Newton, for example. By my age he had basically invented optics, single-handedly created Calculus, made the then most powerful telescope known to man (that out performed telescopes 12x it's size by leaps and bounds), and more. Einstein had some of his major work in place by 25.
But maybe I could be another Philo T. Farnsworth. History will see.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
As an extravert, I'm pretty aware that the people I've worked with who are very good programmers are all introverts--ability to focus on hard problems, enjoying working by themselves, etc.
I've concluded that while society values salesmen and take-charge-folks, the the lone author/scientist/programmer/inventor, etc. tends to make the lasting works society in the long run values.
The thing of it is, a lot of what you're describing could be caused by something greater, such as an anxiety disorder. I'm the same way, and I am in therapy for OCD. It's not really a matter of introvert versus extrovert, it's a defect in logic, bad brain chemistry. You get stuck on the one negative comment and you worry about it and it ruins your evening, whereas someone else could hear the same comment and just keep going...their mind lets it go. It's all about perception, really. You can't change what was said, you can only change your reaction to it.
I mean this in the most helpful way, but it's possible you're just obsessive and perhaps depressed. Being an introvert doesn't neccesarily mean you obsess over a bad day for the next day or two.
I don't know about that. A lot of the introverts I know truly have difficulty talking with others. They might want to...they just can't figure out anything to say and feel generally uncomfortable in social settings. Personally, I go to parties all the time where I only know two or three people, and I really enjoy it.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Why do they do it? Could it be:
.bomb wealthy pinkos? The sort who kinda like Howard Dean but wish he would have the guts to REALLY speak truth to power.
1. Slashdot is ran by a bunch of college dropout
2. Are savvy businessmen who understand the nature of their readers. They know that a political thread gets almost as frenzied as a PC vs Mac flamefest, and every reader and poster is generating pageviews, which helps Cmdr Taco save up for his next Powerbook.
3. Both of the above.
Democrat delenda est
Q:How many introverts does it take to change a light bulb?
A:
Q:How many?
A:
Q:Alright, Jeez, I'll just do it myself.
[ ]Clever sig [X]Lame sig
The attitude that there's something wrong with introverted people is widely shared in society, where fast talk and snap decisions are often valued over listening, deliberation and careful planning.
What does fast talk and span decisions have to do with introverts? I talk relatively fast and I certainly make snap decisions and I am introvert.
The article doesn't seem to ever define just what it means by "introvert". According to Wikipedea:
The terms refer to "attitudes" and show how a person orients and receives their energy
This has squat to do with speed of decision making (although I can understand the fast talking thing to some extent).
meh
I work the same exact way, thinking over conversations in my head and what I could say and what they could reply. I do it *all* the time, and that's what makes socializing so difficult. You think of all the negative things that can be said, or you're waiting for the right setup to go into your next bit of conversation. In my self-treatment of OCD, I just have to let go...I have to care less, say something, and let it go through. And it works. Conversations should just flow. You shouldn't have to work for it, you shouldn't force anything. It comes naturally. You just have to be willing to let go and be ready for the unexpected, or you'll end up in a deeper mental mess than you were originally in.
Your comments are a bit black and white. I say this because I'm someone that leads a bit of a double life. When I do go out, I will randomly go up to people and ask them about their life. At work I'll ask almost every person how they are doing, strike up a random conversation with someone just to see how they are doing. I don't care how people feel towards me, I do it regardless. I don't have a need for people to care and love me, and I certainly don't mind if people don't like me. That's life.
At the same time, I enjoy being alone during the evenings. I usually sit in my room doing something quiet, perhaps play a game, or do some reading. While I have many people I talk and converse with, I have a select few friends whom I am quite close with. These are the people that I am quite close with, and would bend over backwards for. At the same time, if I am going out with a group of close friends, I will not hesitate to ask someone that I'm not close to come along with me. I don't get offended if people choose not to come, but I offer the friendly gesture anyways.
I used to be strictly an introvert. Why did I change? Because I found that the people I was closest with and got along the best with were also introverts, and being an introvert myself, that didn't leave me much of a chance to meet other introverts. So I changed, I decided I'd go out and be outgoing. What did I find out? That balancing my social and quiet time is far more satisifying in life then being an introvert, and I ended up meeting some great friends along the way.
(BTW, I won't look up the paper, but they actually did a study on college students to find out what makes them happy/sad-- and they found that the happiest students were the ones that had an active social life. As negative as you make it seem, being social and outgoing does have its pluses)
The main reason people decide on the introvert approach is because people don't actually care. If people actually cared then introverts would have a reason to be more outgoing. Think of it that way.
You assuming that people "choose" a particular approach.
meh
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So are most /.ers intraverts in their REAL life?
-Palal
What if I'm an introvert because I just don't like other people? Maybe I find them irritating.
Perhaps I view the slavish way normal people pursue the goodwill of others as a weakness, a pathetic addiction to the approval of others. Perhaps I am just as disgusted by this addiction as I am by alcohol, heroin, or crystam meth addiction, and view it in a similar light?
Perhaps I just think most other people are stupid, boring, and unimaginative, and don't want to waste too much time on them.
Or, maybe, and humor me here, the only other people I find even remotely interesting are people who are geeks like me, and into the same things (technology, modern visual culture, etc)... Maybe I just don't have any use for anyone else.
Remember -- some of us introverts are freakin' HOSTILE.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
Intellectual masterbation is all the sex some geeks get.
Stroking an introvert just may have a similar effect in terms of that 'comfort feeling' that you get after sex. Dopamine regulation keeps us focused on the task at hand. It's a great feeling to be on the same page without having to beat it mindlessly into someone else.
Disclaimer: Introverted.
So he's complaining about how extroverts make bad presidents, and then his example of an introverted president is Jimmy Carter? This does not bode well for the argument that introverts would do better.
I'm an extrovert who learned to be an introvert after I learned that I don't enjoy being social and was only doing it to be accepted, feel normal, or seem like I had more friends than I actually had. Most people grow out of that in highschool but some people want to be accepted and feel normal all their lives. This is why theres people with eating disorders.
Well, what else are introverts going to do with their time if they (OK, we, being an introvert myself) don't spend it talking?
OK, there's pr0n. But besides that?
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
Or maybe lawful neutral.
You socialize in groups but you are an introvert?
Thats something I'd shy away from, I like to hang out with one friend at a time, and keep my friendships seperate. The one thing I'd never do is bring a complete strange into the mix.
Apple's customers are like no others--a rich blend of the most sociologically elite with those seeking elegant, simple computing... Unlike users of Intel/Windows computers, a significant portion of Apple's users are active , exploratory , avant-garde and early adopters . The activities they enjoy are unique in the way that they more often incorporate rich media such as video and music as well as more active prosumer behavior than many more passive Windows [and Linux] users.
With above-average household income and education levels, the Mac population [is] very attractive [ intellectually as well as physically
Well, then, s/introvert/psychopath.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
I am a 'social introvert' too. I haven't always been.
To me my outgoing work personality and my ability to strike up conversations with random people is learned because being an extrovert is the 'norm' and it will benefit me professionally. It feels very fake and I know it isn't genuine but I've observed people for a long time and I truely feel like I successfully exhibit a non introverted persona intentionally.
Goofus is an extrovert. He enjoys making an ass of himself in the name of "good fun" even if it's self-destructive and unproductive.
Gallant is an introvert. Much of his time is spent up in his head dreaming up new plans for things to do around the house for his family, improving his work skills and trying to stay several steps ahead of life in general.
Goofus, as an extrovert, gets great pleasure from gloating about how "great" he is at sports, work, relationships, driving or whatever. But the reality is that Goofus is seen as an obnoxious self-serving lout by his co-workers, family, girlfriends (nearly all ex) and other drivers on the road.
Gallant, as an introvert, is mindful that he shares the world with other people. He is quiet about his achievments and derives pleasure from simply accomplishing goals so long as they are beneficial to everyone concerned. He sees more value in cooperation than competition and is percieved by all as a kind, thoughtful and genrous individual.
Goofus would far rather socialize by the water cooler even though his break is only fifteen minutes because in his own words, "Gawd!! Work is so borrrrring. Wouldn't it be great if we could find a way to make money and never lift a finger? Haw haw haw"!!!
Gallant takes his fifteen minutes to grab a quick snack in the cafeteria and take it back to his cubicle. "Excellent! If I put in another solid four hours I can finish this Perl script and get some time to work on compiling the latest Linux kernel at home tonight after reading a bit of that Dashiel Hammett mystery. Reading is the greatest hobby"!
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
/. likely attracts more introverts than extroverts, if stereotypes are accurate. Yes, extroverts may want attention and care what other people think... and so do YOU. We all do. Just admit it fer pete's sake. It's part of being human. Quantity isn't quality. Having more brain activity isn't that handy if it's spent endlessly going through possible scenarios that generally trigger behavior that can be called socially unsuccessful. Increased brain activity can also come from an introvert's tendency to be mindful of thoughts, thereby amplifying them. An extrovert's focus will be on others, which places mental activity in a secondary role, one where it has specific purposes instead of being glorified for its own sake.
Extroverts have more sex
-- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount}
I was wondering what affect alcohol has on other introverts. I'm a classic introvert. The last time I took the Myers-Briggs test I was as far I as the test score would allow. In reading some of these other commments, I'm glad I'm not the only introvert that over analyzes *every* situation. Tone, inflection, exact words that people used. As stated above, one misstep can throw off my entire day because I'm worried about what other people think of me and if what I said sounded approprate or not.
In the above examples, I can see myself in every description of an introvert. However, before I go out I *always* predrink. Why? Because it turns me into an extrovert. I tried to go to a bar once with friends sober. I couldn't do it. I almost had a panic attack because there were so many people I didn't know and I felt extremely uncomfortable.
Now, I'm not talking about getting absolutely plastered and not remembering an evening. But after a bit of alcohol. I turn into a social butterfly (as my friends call it). I will talk to anyone about any subject in the bars. My ADHD truely comes out as I feel bad if I talk to one person for more than 5 minutes, because there are SO many people to talk to. My personality pulls a 180 and I will exhibit every one of the above extroverted traits.
I've known people, however, that alcohol has had the opposite effect on. The introverts become more introverted.
I was just wondering, Slashdot. How does a bit of alcohol affect your personality?
Could you believe it? Just a few days after closing down their website (slashGOTH.org) our website (slashDOT.org) gets this news. It would have been interesting to see their reaction.
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
He has a guest book. Spam it with links to Slashdot. Troll it with goatse links. Better yet, use your imagination and do something original. Teach them never to get into a spamming/trolling contest with the Slashdot crowd. We are the experts, let's show them what we're made of.
Here's that link again in case you missed it.
Unfortunately, you are not confined in your behavior and mannerisms like an introvert, thus, you cannot actually understand how an introverted perspective is viewed.
What the parent poster stated is accurate to an extreme degree.
Of the MANY conversations you have, EVERY DAY of EVERY WEEK, can you recall every conversation and connection you make in every one of those moments??
If you answered yes, you're lying. The human mind has not the capacity for such informational retrieval for such vast amounts of detail ALL the time.
If you answered no, at least your an honest extrovert. That being said, what have you gained for all those conversations other than pleased moments that passed the time?? Oh, some would call it networking. I call it social bullshit, but hey, thats how you like to kill your time. So hey, more power to you.
Mind Wide Open summarized this pretty well. Active scans of people working on a problem or engaged in a specific endeavor have shown repeatedly that extra brain activity is not a good thing. It means you're floundering. The more activity the worse you're doing. Your best results are when just that tiny minimum necessary bit of the brain lights up.
Thinking of several pronounced introverts I know I'd have to say this applies; sure they're thinking a lot, but what they're doing is obsessing on little problems and turning them into full-blown crises which they can mull over and over again for maximum horrorific effect.
Of course there are real introverted geniuses. I guess they just channel it better.
Of course ! Extraverts are outsourcing thoughts.
The attitude that there's something wrong with introverted people is widely shared in society, where fast talk and snap decisions are often valued over listening, deliberation and careful planning.
I'm reminded of when I was in high school. I'm definitely introverted, and when I'd get into one of those exchange 'yo mama' insults (yo mama is so fat / so skinny / so ugly / etc) to each other contests with rival classmates. I'd always come to a complete halt when I'd get a really good one thrown at me... but like, three weeks later, I'm still dwelling on it and I'd finally come up with a devastating and awesome comeback that, by itself, would have totally owned back tenfold... but being three weeks later, it was obsolete for the relevant "yo mama" insult contest that it was related to. So I would, at best, hope for an opportunity to use it in the future, which was why I usually initiated those to begin with. And still, they would end the same way, and begin the same way. Graduating highschool was my only way out.
I sort of wish I'd used my brainpower on studying math or something instead of coming up with "yo mama" insults, maybe then I wouldn't have had such a rough time in Calculus and Statistics as I did during my time majoring in computer science in university.
Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
I have no problem boosting an author's Pagerank if his or her articles are good. This article is not. It falls into the category of "scientist discovers what psychologists have known for decades."
I am an extrovert. No, wait! Hear me out!
It seems to me to be a misperception among some of the introverts hereabouts that extroverts don't really care. We're superficial people. We can talk for hours without saying a darn thing. There are certainly people like that out there, but they are a distinct minority of extroverts.
Take for example when I see someone and ask "How was your weekend?" Sure, it's a common everyday thing to ask someone how their weekend was. Introverts may see this question as a pointless, mildly annoying bit of social nicety. But if a friend tells me they had a good weekend that genuinely makes my day a little brighter. If they didn't then I want to hear about it to see if there's anything I can do to make them feel better. Extroverts, in general, talk because we care, even if it seems superficial.
With regard to spewing hot air, it seems to me that some introverts miss the fact that there is almost always deeper communication going on. I had lunch with a friend today, and I'll freely admit that we discussed nothing of substance in that hour. However, I hadn't seen her for a few weeks, so what we discussed was completely irrelevant anyway. The point of lunch was to just spend some time together and reconnect. What I was saying was "blah blah blah" and the message I was sending was "I like you and I enjoy your company." Everyone likes to hear that!
--
I typed this sig manually. Go me!
You can be an extroverted misanthropist, but it is more commonly associated with introversion.
Sick of WoW? Try the thinking man's MMORPG: EVE Online
For example; today I had an awful day. I'll think about it until tomorrow morning. My extroverted friends will shrug it off as "bad day, tomorrow is another".
My brother is an extrovert yet he is known as a real worrier.
That, my friend, is obsession, not introversion.
------ The only greater hazard to your liberty than n politicians is n+1 politicians.
I didn't need a Slashdot article to tell me that I think more than other people :D. But every single introvert I know fits this too...its common sense, really...if smart people get grouped with idiots, the idiots will either (a)slow down the smart people or (b) make the smart ones do all the work. Therefore, the smarter people tend to become an introvert, secluding themselves from anyone, and preferring to work alone, as they can get more done that way.
PS. I haven't read any of the posts up there, so if I'm repeating info, sorry.
-- Cameron Eagans http://cweagans.net
I don't want to talk about it.
Radio on your iPod
I think you point out an important distinction. Thinking more isn't necessarily a good thing. The ability to come to a conclusion on a thought and then shove it out of sight and out of mind is not a bad thing. In your example, you worried on some small slight or perceived insult. Others might have simply discarded that insult and thought nothing more of it other then making a mental note that the other guy is a jerk.
I see this every single day. My girlfriend and I are roughly equal intelligence on most things. That said, I am pretty sure she spends more time firing neurons then I do. I can easily close my eyes and turn my head off and not worry. She on the other hand lives in a constant state of obsessing over past events, worrying about small slights she might have made to someone or that someone made to her, and all manner of things that I wouldn't even think to concern myself with.
I'm an introvert (I think). Why? Because I'm more interesting to myself than a lot of people around me. I know more than they do, and it's frustrating to me when someone doesn't know things that I know. I also have very low tolerance for mediocrity and I very rarely lie to make others feel good. There you go, my reasons to be introverted.
I don't know what it's like to be an extrovert, but I've been around a couple in my life. Conversation can really separate the one from the other--at least, that's what I've noticed.
Seems to me like extroverts _plan_ their conversations. They might be listening to you, sure, but on some deeper level they're busy thinking of what's coming next--or perhaps looking around to see who else is around they can draw into the conversation.
I'm an introvert. I don't like a lot of "change" in my conversations--new people cause repetition, get me off on tangents, or cause the subject to change prematurely. Extroverts plan as they go for this kind of stuff--"Hey, there's Bob. Bob knows Optics. I'll get him over here and see what he has to say." My reaction to Bob's presence--unless for some reason Bob is already part of the conversation--is, "Oh, it's Bob."
Unless I've planned well ahead of time, I'm so busy trying to come up with what to say _as I'm talking_ that I don't have much ability to map out my thoughts. Even when the other party is talking, I'm too busy pondering what _they_ are saying to think about what _I_ am going to say. I converse by inspiration: if the other party doesn't give me any good inroads to a new topic, I have a hard time holding up my end--unless I don't feel the need to pay attention because, for instance, I've heard a story before. Then I'm free to sit and think about what's been said.
If I had to guess at the main mental difference between extroverts and introverts, it would really be that the former can think off the cuff and get along, whereas we introverts are compelled to reflect and concentrate, whether or not we can get along by winging it.
Extroverts bubble; introverts stew.
our new introverted overlords!
Oh, I dunno... He's the last US President you could say at least tried not to be a force for evil in the world. Gotta give him points for that.
My favorite part is when we hear crowing from the righties about how we're only having a terrorism problem because Clinton cut and run in Somalia, not wanting a lengthy and bloody engagement. (I don't recall any Republicans shouting "stay the course!" at the time, but I might be wrong.) This, according to the narrative, showed the world that America was a paper tiger, which would back down if you bloodied its nose a bit, and led to 9/11, 7/7, and whatever else happens.
However, nothing is said about Reagan's Iran-Contra deal. If you recall, this is where we traded arms for hostages. That is, Reagan appeased the terrorists. Which is just about the worst kind of message you can send. It's like writing a blank check to the bad guys. Look, if your citizens are held hostage by these people, plan a daring rescue mission if you can, but if that doesn't work out, mourn them, 'cause they're already dead.
Reagan? Goddamn appeaser.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
When I had friends, I couldn't get a damn thing done; they would always pester me, and if I turned down an offer to go out and socialize, they'd whine and whimper at me and try to make me feel like an insensitive asshole for using choice. I'm glad I moved back to California to get away from all of them once an for all. I care more about my projects and hobbies than I do about seeing some overpriced Jim Carrey movie (since he was the Vin Diesel of the 1990's) on a Friday night.
Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
And what about the Savings and loans fiasco? That was caused by Carter de-regulating the S&L industry. That fiasco cost billions in tax payer dollars. That probably did not HELP the economy whatsoever. It wasn't all a big Reagon conspiracy to make the economy bad so he could get elected. Carter did enough to dig his own grave.
But, if you'd asked me I'd have said "Shut up. I'm thinking!"
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Carter began the process of deregulation, starting with airlines, rail transport, natural gas, oil, and banking. Of course, Reagan kept this going, along with a coherent freee-market philosophy to back it up.
Because introvert and extrovert are polar opposites; however people generally don't reside on one end or the other but in the middle. So I'm going to coin a new term, "middlevert", that describes this phenomenon, and say that 66% of people would be better described as that than introvert or extrovert.
A man walks into a bar. The bartender says, "What is this, some kind of joke?"
Lots of these symptoms are also being linked with ADHD; so; what I wonder is; is ADHD created by the extrovert people making the introvert people to think more? I think ADHD is a society-created disorder; made by chaos, unreliability and speed without thinking. Lots of people do really annoy and hurt me just because of their actions without thinking; sortof "shoot before asking questions" instead of "ask questions before shooting"...
Mostly when those people do shoot before asking people any questions; I got to clean up the mess; which makes me hyperactive by thinking continuesly why that "friend" or employee did that action without thinking twice?...
Being fast and abrupt is not always a good choice; why are people being classified in corners as either introvert as extrovert and not been seen as both? Since; most people WILL think if it'll affect their own personal life by any fast decisions; most should be part of both worlds; but only when it suits them?
No offense intended; but; it's something I've been thinking about for years; and; I guess extrovert people just care less about the people around them because they already have enough "friends" around them... But is a friend neccesary a real "close friend" ?
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
I tend to choose for a mix of empirical/a priori science first and following the findings with a priori science to think things out.. but ok.. What I mean is.. those empiricists didn't thought of the fact that if extroverts start with meditation and introspection they start to get NOT-Extroverted and get more brain activity! You can start life on the extroverted or introverted side but you can condition yourself into something more refined. I for example are just in the middle, tests show 70% or higher introverted, perhaps because I've learned from internet texts about introvertedness and introspection..
Seems you would rather take this opportunity to bash Republicans... as usual.
And you would respond by claiming unpatriotic behavior, instead of refuting the evidence. Like Cheney does.
Years ago I did get such an assessment. It was actually paid for by a company I had applied to. I didn't get the job but the agency wanted to discuss the report with me. Why? Because it said that I was in the top 2% of white collar workers for management aptitude but was more suited to a small company. That was 10 years ago and it was the best advice I ever got. I moved to a small company, was on the board after just a few months, did almost everything, then moved into consulting, still in a small company environment. I didn't get rich (though I am today a lot better off than if I had stayed in large corporates) but I have had a very interesting ten years doing stuff I enjoyed. I would recommend anyone unsure of their job path to get a professional assessment.
Pining for the fjords
If you think critical thinking cannot be made in rapid succession then I suggest you work on your memory skills and your rate of recall. Both types of traditionally classified personalities are ripe with morons. They just express it through their actions differently.
Next.
Certainly better than the current Bush residue [google.com]: Worst. President. Ever.
Still better than Woodrow Wilson, but hey, can't blame dubya for lack of trying.
Extroverts have more sex!!
No, they just talk about it more. That doesn't equate to having more...
Blank until
Bill Gates is extrovert (ENTj) and Linux Torvalds is introvert (INTp - aka "Geek") - note that this two types are very similiar. Steve Jobs is ENTp so he is very diffrent. More info at http://www.socionics.com/
You forgot about the crack.
I entirely second this. I too build some kind of a chart for most of the situations I have to face that don't fit in my daily routine. This is rather brain-consuming (and tiresome) and not too useful, but I can't help it. It also leads to bursts of anguish (oh my, what if...), but I guess it's a side effects of being slighly smarter than most people (or so I like to think).
I think this could be the best /. thread ever. Successive American administrations have fucked up enormously when it comes to foreign policy, meddling in matters that they couldn't fix even if they tried to do the right thing for everyone, and basically being dirty rotten bastards.
The thing about the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan is that the Soviets would have been delighted to know the trouble that that would cause the decadent west as far into the future as 2005. Evil shits.
It's all Hitler's fault you know. Trace all of the ripples of trouble back through the century and where do you end up? Berlin 1945.
When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
...welcome our new introvert overlords
And yet you still can't spell populace right. I'd get a refund.
No, he spelled populous correctly; he used it incorrectly.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
And Berlin 1945 was only possible because of Versailles 1918. And Versailles 1918 was only possible because of Imperialism/Colonialism of all European/Wesetern nations wich was only possible because of trade and commerce which is only possible because of greed. But wait, greed is the recurring theme in anything that has been mentioned so far.
So if you want to do anything about it, fight greed and all it's symptoms.
Just because I can imagine doing a hippopotamus, doesn't mean I'd like to do it.
You know, if it wasn't for the fact that your first link points to nothing but speculation (and very poor speculation at that), and that your entire post relies on inflammatory language and hyperbole, I might pay attention.
As it is, this is just more Doc Ruby bashes one side, which happens to be the side he disagrees with.
When all you ever do is bash one side, you have no credibility Doc.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
Hopefully you(and the gp post) realize that this study is talking about *averages*. What I mean to say is that even as a mighty mighty introverted thinker, your frontal lobe activity could be lower than that of the average extrovert. I don't mean to imply that it is, just that it very well could be.
Also, I'm glad you think when you walk down the street, but what do you think extroverts are doing, concentrating on holding in their drool?
In the end, introversion and extroversion are pretty much descriptions of behaviors. They might have some predictive capacity in relation to intelligence, but no matter what you want to think, there are plenty of crazy bright extroverts and plenty of stone dumb introverts.
There are so many damn people on this planet that trying to cut all of them into two groups with some arbitrary test and then pretending that every member of each group is more alike every member their group than they are alike any member of the other groups is bone headed. Shades of gray and all that.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Vietnam was Nixon and Ford's war? Just like WWII was Trumans war, and Kosovo was Bush's war. Hahah, man you have no credibility, especially with those links. At least you're a step above those loonies thinking 9/11 was an inside job. So I'll give you that.
"In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
and they found that the happiest students were the ones that had an active social life
When studying matters of perception, you can't just come right out and ask people to rate themselves on a vague term. Do you "love" you father, your dog, and your wife? Trying to evaluate that question with any single definition of "love" would make you either really sick, or really cold. So, you ask related questions, hopefully of a more objective nature, about related behaviors and actions, which you can measure.
Behaviors and actions, however, do not adequately express the "happiness" of an introvert. Very few people, even introverts, would describe sitting alone in a room for hours at a time as overly indicative of feeling happy. But give me a good book, and in exactly that externally-visible state, I feel just about as "happy" as I get.
"introverted individuals tend to have more brain activity in general"
This is hard to believe judging by the quality of an average slashdot post.
Nothing sucks like a Vax, nothing blows like a PowerMac G4
The entire Iran Contra affair as far as the "Iran" part, and the story you discussed was retracted by the New York Times, the paper that originally published it. It was completely insane, and required George Bush I to fly to Iran on an SR-71 as it was the only plane capable of getting there and back in time. Have you read the original story? Its a joke. Now, I have no doubt Reagan was selling weapons to the Contras, but so what! They were communists, and the president has that authority.
And Vietnam? What history are YOU reading? Vietnam was a Democrat war, like all wars of the 20th century save the Iraq wars. Nixon was the one who got us OUT of the war! Duh, why were the riots at the democratic national convention in 1968? Because of Johnson and vietnam!
As for Carter, his entire presidency was marked by double digit unemployment, inflation and interest rates. It was without a doubt, the worst time in American history since the depression. His presidency, by every reasonable measure, was a complete total failure and every year since has been remarkably better.
As usual, Carter and the democratic party was voted out of office because the American middle class was getting fucked, and making up all sorts of ridiculous stories like this does nothing to help your cause. You are the victim of the lies here jack, and unfortunately you just weren't alive when any of this happened so you don't know.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
If introverts have more brain activity, that would certainly make them not normal. I think it might be "wrong", too. Remember the Pythons: "He's that most dangerous of creatures, a clever sheep."
"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
I've often thought that this was the reason why we have so many "sciences" now: Military Science, Library Science, Political Science, Waste Management Science. There is a tendency in the West to label everything as a "science" in order to make people think more highly of your chosen path in life. I think it derives from a false understanding of science as "absolute truth" instead of a process for observing and recording apparent consistencies in the natural universe. Which is also the heart of the Evolution vs. Creationism debate, but that's a post for a different story. :-)
First of all, the idea that introverts get their energy from being alone (and are therefore overloaded around others) and that extraverts get their energy from being around others (because they are understimulated when alone) is OLD OLD OLD OLD news. I think I read about this in "Please Understand Me", the original book by the original Myers-Briggs people. Indeed, Carl Jung may have recognized this even earlier than that.
Secondly, people seem to want to be overly binary about this. I know people who get most of their energy from being alone. Those are introverts. I know people who get most of their energy from being with other people. Those are extraverts. I know people who seem to require a balance. What are THEY called?
I find people extremely interesting and entertaining...at least when there's something interesting and entertaining about them. I like being able to talk to pretty much anybody. It's really not hard...just ask them questions about themselves. What do you do? Where are you from? Do you have a family? What do you like to do for fun?
I think that this paragraph perfectly highlights the differences between introverts and extroverts. I have little interest in hearing people's answers to those questions unless I intend on making a serious investment in them and inviting them into my circle of friends in a meaningful, long term way. Small talk typically bores me and when people try to engage me in it, I find myself feeling annoyed because they're interrupting my internal dialogue, which I feel is more productive and more enjoyable than an external conversation would be.
LOL... what's funny is that the majority of my close friends are persistent extroverts that just couldn't take a hint and kept engaging me in small talk until it was unavoidable that we grew to know each other well. Finally, it would get to the point where I'd invested so much time talking to them and learning about one another that it would be silly not to be friends.
There is a distinct difference between introversion and social anxiety. Introversion is 100% natural and part of your personality, and doesn't mean you're socially inept or clumsy---just more thoughtful and deliberate. a listener, not a talker. Social anxiety (aka shyness), in many cases, can be crippling and difficult to deal with, and in my experience is tied closely to depression. Though i would guess it's more common in introverts than extroverts.
using anti-bacterial hand soap is like drying your feet in the middle of a shower.
Maybe that's the source of "bush-isms": he's an introvert who isn't taking the time to think before he speaks because he feels the need to present himself as an extrovert in order to convince the extrovert-loving American public to vote for him.
When I've seen him speaking without benefit of a pre-written speech, he seems to find it hard to speak coherently. Sign of introversion rather than the stupidity so many people seem to take it for?
The US WON the Tet Offensive. Read a better history book sometime. The media started the woe is me crap and now everyone thinks we lost that battle. Thats because the media repeats a lie often enough and you do believe it.
They have only elected 4 presidents since then. So let me get this straight, since the last 4 presidents are extroverted, then extroverts rule the world. I want to live where they do causation like that!!
all the '5, Insightful' comments the Introverts out there are thinking of right now...
(This sig intentionally left blank.)
I know one extrovert who apparently talks so much because that's how she figures out what she's thinking.
uh.... If I recall, schizophrenics also show increased brain activities in the frontal lobe area.
Increased activity != Increased intelligence.
- dj
Now, that's interesting. But I don't think I'm entirely misanthropic; in my case it's just in respect to the general population. There are certain subcultures I'm rather fond of. And once I know someone, and have decided I like them, I'm perfectly friendly, although being an introvert I don't exactly seek out interaction.
Perhaps I'm introverted and somewhat misanthropic, and they're related (even correlated) without having a causal relationship. I like that.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
This dumbass was put into power by the Trilateral commission for one thing. But the guy has gone totally senile. he endorses communist dictators, poo poo's his own country's election process and now the bonehead actually believes that he didn't send in special forces to rescue the hostages in Iran. May the ghosts of those soldiers place a pox on his house!!!
Silly slashdotter... Psychopath does NOT mean "one who dislikes other people in general". It means "one who has no moral constraints or conscience with respect to his dealings with others, who usually behaves in a completely irredeemable, evil way" -- in other words, one who is, for lack of a better word, evil.
I don't believe I said anything about being EVIL. I just said I find all you silly fucks irritating, and this leads to my actively avoiding your presence.
Now, if I was a psychopath (which, thank God, I'm not) I'd find you irritating and poison your twinkies. See the difference?
Crazyphilman: introverted and hostile, but NOT PSYCHO.
Psychopath: introverted and hostile, and poisons your twinkies.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
Since when is an extrovert necessarily a " fast talk and snap decisions are often valued over listening, deliberation and careful planning." Being an extrovert just means you are out going. Introvert just means you are not outgoing. An introvert could be a fast talker who makes snap decisions and throws wit.
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
I'm pretty sure it is stupidity in his case.
"I have as much authority as the pope, I just
don't have as many people who believe it" - George Carlin
it was more JFK - LBJ - Nixon. JFK had something like 50K over there and a lot of Special Forces, who spent their time teaching the Vietnamese how to defend themselves so they could make decisions without being bullied by any side. The program was reasonbly effective as a Spec OPs mission and LBJ was kept out of the loop by the bros from Mass. When LBJ got the program he did what most Americans would do, "if enough is good, too much is better" and turned it into a real war. Nixon's unpopularity alowed the North to perfect a polictical attack method, which we are starting to see again; everytime somebody calls on American Politicians to not "vietnamize" Iraq that's exactly what they are doing.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Yes, what about the S&L heist? Carter's reregulation of the S&Ls made their deposits investable in more than just buildings, and raised the government insurance from $40K to %100K. A measure to increase the investable cash being held by these rich people's banks that they were witholding from the economy, and to lower the risk of investment, by government indemnification.
Then Bush, as VP, oversaw the subsequent reckless deregulation of the S&Ls. Removing their requirements for things like collateral, or sufficient deposits. Reagan/Bush oversaw the recession of 198s which, in combination with their deregulation program, transformed the American economy. The S&Ls invested in new "junk bonds", like craps at a casino: a few big winners, and a guaranteed huge loss overall in these voodoo economic tricks. Meanwhile, the S&Ls also invested in worthless real estate in Southern California and Texas (where Reagan and Bush came from, respectively), pumping billions into the pockets of Reagan/Bush bribers^Wsupporters. Along the way, Bush got the S&L heist smokescreen to cover some "small" ripoffs to finance Iran/Contra, along with his royal Saudi buddies (see previous post).
By 1989, when the S&Ls were collapsing under the weight of all their bad loans, Reagan/Bush had overseen the industry for 8 years. If Carter in fact had done anything to cause it, they had nearly a decade of their "revolution" to undo it. In fact, they did it, and did it to death. And I'm still paying off their heist. Your mistaken assertion is right along the rightwing blinder policy that will blame Clinton for Bush's Iraq catastrophe. You vote for these criminals - you have to take the punches they throw at our country. Don't try to duck the blame when someone like me, who saw it all happen, tells the truth about their crimes.
--
make install -not war
No, Carter began a process of reregulation, which Reagan/Bush hijacked to rip off the economy. Their incoherent strategy was "free market" only in the sense of a gang of thieves free to steal from an unlocked vault. For over 8 years, while they stole some for their own covert CIA Iran/Contra wars. I guess Carter must have also killed Kennedy, too, right?
--
make install -not war
Well, Anonymous Republican whiner Coward, if you showed up and shot off your Republican mouth with a bunch of lies covering for irreparable attacks on America, I'd bash you, too. Why would I waste time "defending Carter", instead of attacking the lying, thieving Republicans you'd present? Typical Republican: thinks every debate is an election campaign, where you just attack/defend your partisan favorite. And where Republicans get outraged when their opponents don't defend themselves the way the Republicans would prefer they do.
When Republicans stop attacking America, when their damage is gone and forgotten, I'll stop bashing them... and ride my flying pig to the pie in the sky.
--
make install -not war
JFK was killed the week he decided to reduce US forces in Vietnam. Johnson's first act was to reverse that decision. Johnson certainly had a lot of blood on his hands for creating that war. Nixon campaigned on a platform of ending the war, then acted to make it permanent. In fact he also kept the war going in 1972 specifically to campaign for reelection. If he hadn't got caught in Watergate, he'd have cut and run in his second term, and installed his successor as President in 1976, probably Bush, the head of the Republican Party. Which is exactly the same strategy Bush is using right now: prop up the catastrophic Iraqis long enough to win in 2004, cut and run in 2006 enough to install his successor in 2008. Too bad his office has committed so much treason that even Republicans are turning against him. I'm looking forward to the full Nixon treatment.
--
make install -not war
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Well, Anonymous liar Coward, if you're going to rewrite the headline to suit you, despite the content of the article to which you linked, you can get as emotional about Bush as your lovey little Republican heart desires. The article in fact states "The second most common response from historians, trailing only Nixon, was that the current presidency is the worst in American history." Since you've got a Bush education, I'll translate: historians most commonly say that Nixon was the worst president in American history, while Bush is second worst. And that's before all the facts are in, and while many historians are Bush worshippers, just like you - before something like impeachment smashes that delusion. Sure, each of those other presidents had their personal bests in worst, but Bush combines all of them into the worst ever. And he's (probably) still got 3 more years to outdo everyone. He can pull that off without even trying - his specialty.
--
make install -not war
If you weren't a Republican apologist who ignores the facts about Reagan/Bush crimes, I might care about what you pay attention to. Instead, you're a lost cause. I mainly just linked to Google searches on a couple of keywords each, which would have turned up some facts defending your boys, if there were any. "The facts are clearly biased against the Bush administration." - The Daily Show (paraphrase)
How about that NEA, huh? At <0.00005% of Bush's budget, it's apparently destroying the entire culture, right?
--
make install -not war
...required George Bush I to fly to Iran on an SR-71
Let's not forget that George was a Navy pilot during the war. This might not be so far fetched...
Find coupons in Greeley
Vietnam was Nixon's war because Nixon took over that catastrophe from Johnson, campaigning that he would end the war. Instead he expanded the war, including covert war on other neighboring countries not otherwise involved. Then he propped up the war in 1972 solely to win reelection. It's Ford's war, because Ford inherited it along with everything else he accepted from the Nixon he pardoned. And WWII was surely Truman's war (as well as FDR's), as he actually ran its ending, along with decisions that ended it more quickly. Your either/or logic is perfectly suited to keeping our moronic president where he can do most harm: in the White House.
Those links are mostly just Google searches on the nouns in the subjects I mention. If there were exonerating facts, they'd be in there, too. You can hide behind your denial, but what's scaring you is the truth: Bush is the worst president ever, and we're (probably) stuck with him for another 3 dangerous years.
--
make install -not war
I'm a bit disappointed. I thought for sure that this post was a troll for comments about our current president's brain activity, or lack thereof. I'm always up for a good trouncing of President Bush and his administration. I guess I'll have to look elsewhere.
When Ronald Reagan became president I realized that many people in this country just don't trust intellectuals. They're more concerned, it would seem, about a president doing something evil rather than something stupid. One problem is that we have laws against doing something evil but there aren't any laws against doing something stupid. Stupid, like the new Medicare prescription drug program, you just have to live with.
"Meaningless!, Meaningless!" says the Teacher. "Utterly meaningless!"
Let's see, VP Bush oversaw Iran/Contra out of the White House, and that required his flying to Iran on an SR-71. What, you get your history from Stephen Segal or Chuck Norris? TOW MISSILES, just for starters - the "Iran" half of Iran/Contra is so well documented (though certainly not completely) that I'm not going to bother arguing about a NYT story you don't even bother to cite specifically, let alone link to.
Reagan's sale of weapons to the Contras was illegal, as was his covert method of doing it, and his coverup.
As for your "Democratic wars" theory - how about the way that those wars are started by Democrats, then prolonged indefinitely by Republicans (except WWII, which Democrats won)? As usual, the Republicans hijack the government to destroy it.
You're as wrong about me as you are about Republicans and war - and everything else you just make up to suit your demented version of history. I watched Nixon resign on TV, after watching his body bags come home. I expect to see your boy Bush follow suit.
--
make install -not war
Must have been the "crazy" in "crazyphilman" that threw me off. It's a joke, son, laugh a little.
If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
C. Anything linked to Jimmy Carter is unlikely to be considered positive.
"Jimmy Carter?! He's history's greatest monster!"
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" P. J. O'Rourke
Unfortunately, for me at least, there's also just something about verbal interaction that feels intimidating. I like to think it's the "real-time" aspect of it, but I really can't say. I like to gather my thoughts and think about what I want to say, but that's just not possible with verbal interaction without some extremely awkward periods of silence.
Still, "small talk" is one of the most boring things I can think of, because, generally, I don't care about those sorts of things. I'm not going to ask someone if they have kids, because chances are, if I have to interact with this person for a significant length of time, that information will come out on its own eventually anyway. If I'm not going to be interacting with this person for any length of time, then it truly does feel like a waste of time and energy on my part.
People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
makes a computer seem very introverted. What's more, if you hook up a scope or measure the magnetic fields around the CPU it looks like it's very busy indeed. It'll certainly run the batteries down faster on a laptop. But it's not exactly very interesting is it?
I'm not sure that introversion/extroversion is a choice. What ever it's causes - nature/nurture - the upshot is that there are measurably different physiological, emotional and psychological levels of activation between the two.
Thinking theres a choice in this seems as counter intuitive to me as thinking I have a choice as to weather I want to be a sprinter. Sure I can exercise, eat well, get coaching and end up being reletivley fast but my body type just wont go as fast as someone with a sprinters body. No one would employ as a sprinter. On the curve of sprinterlyness I just don't cut the mustard.
I'm an introvert. That doesn't mean I can't turn it on, be gregarious and act out. But being introverted doesn't need to be turned on in me, it's something I am.
Ah well, At least I can choose to do something about being a couch potatoe......no wait./
"If you weren't a Republican apologist who ignores the facts about Reagan/Bush crimes,"
I'm a Democrat, and it doesn't surprise me one bit that in response to genuine criticism you rely on an ad hominem attack.
Just more of the same from you.
And conveniently, you ignored the most important part, your utter lack of credibility.
The other guys get it right sometimes. Your failure to admit it illustrates how biased you are, and how worthless your opinion is.
While I may come down on the Republican's side from time to time, I do the same for the Democrats.
"How about that NEA, huh? At 0.00005% of Bush's budget, it's apparently destroying the entire culture, right?"
Perfect example. I put that there because it's a travesty that so little is spent. Read that again. It's a travesty, and it stunned me that the entire budget for art is so small. More importantly, it's a tool to gauge the biases of people who respond. Look how YOU responded.
What does it say about you that you assumed you knew why I put it there, and attacked me based on that?
Of course, there will be no admission from you that you made a mistake. You'll make up some excuse, then find a way to blame me.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
It's telling that half of your examples date back to the second world war. Here are a few more recent examples of the brilliance of American foreign policy.
Guatemala. Iran. Dominican Republic. Chile. Nicaragua. Panama. Afghanistan. Angola. Pretty much anywhere the disgusting, disgusting Kirkpatrick Doctrine took effect.
I find myself trying to look up an instance where the CIA did something right for a change.
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
"You're as wrong about me as you are about Republicans and war - and everything else you just make up to suit your demented version of history."
As soon as you admit you screwed up and made assumptions about me, then you can call others out for mistakes.
But you haven't, so stop being a hypocrite.
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
This is exactly what you always do Dic.
Someone posts a link to information you dispute, and yet somehow you turn somehting with "Deregulation" into reregulation.
It's amazing to watch someone twist reality so much and still try to pretend they're right.
And you still haven't owned up to what you did. Hiding Dic?
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
I didn't realise it went back that far (for the US), I was about two then. I did meet a Frenchman who told me he served in Viet Nam in 1954, that was the year I was born.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
This is like saying that extroverts have more physical activity. While it's generally true, it doesn't mean anything beyond what you could know by reading the definitions.
The introvert's inner world is usually more interesting than the outside world. Maybe not always as much fun or gratifying, but more demanding of attention. So the only way to do that is in your head.
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
Do you really want a psyche profile for presidential selection? Should we give em a physical and genetic screening? Use the Probulator 6000 to check for cancers and test limits?
Here's a plan:
Let's just let the brave souls with the financial and popular backing make a go of it in contest of ideas and ideologies to lead our country with constraint that true change shall be governed by a diverse representation of the people.
Or something like that. Bottom line is that the mindset of a president does not dictate the greatness of the president or the outcome of his terms. It is mostly luck, perception and historians sifting through the garbage.
Democrats and the same thing as Republicans. The blinders are well in effect for you, too, with your ignoring all the ridiculous crap that Democrats have done. BTW, I think both parties are pathetic and the people that go on and on about one being better than the other are blind to the real world.
Carter screwed up big and repeatedly, as did Reagan, both Bush's, and Clinton. Carter is the only one that probably isn't a criminal, but he was trying to be an honest man in a profession that requires deception, which makes him foolish. Just because he wasn't a lying, stealing, asshole doesn't make him a *good* president, it just makes him less of a bad president than the other four.
Your belief that Reagan and Bush orchestrated a massive multinational conspiracy to have terrorists keeping hostages, to overthrow governments, and to ruin the economy - just so that Carter lost the election - sounds like something a crackpot website would go on about. It is ridiculous in magnitude, and even more ridiculous in value. If they wanted Carter out of the White House, they only had to ruin him personally, and it would've been much easier. Plus, it wouldn't have screwed a whole region over, as well as nearly throwing the US into another depression. Seriously here, how can *anyone* believe this kind of filth; if they had the resources to arrange all the conspiracy-nut things, they had far more than the necessary resources to much more easily and permanantly ruin just Carter, or even the entire Democrat party.
Unlike fascists, I actually love the extroverts when they love me. I'm not declaring war on the extroverts who actually care about people.
If a salesman wants to sell me something which helps me, I'll consider the salesman to be a good salesman, but if the salesman tries to sell me something which hurts me, then my previous comments are correct.
I'm an introvert by that definition too. After my university studies began i have attented many parties and i'm slowly beginning to be more extrovert, because i really want to make new friends. I just don't always know what to speak to them or, more importantly, how to express myself in an interesting way :-(
Who is John Galt?
Not all talking in social situations is "small talk." I don't think anybody likes small talk. Extroverts have a genuine interest in other people. The small talk is the way you find out what's interesting about this person. It's hard to just ask somebody "what's so interesting about you?" I like to get stories out of people. The other day I was talking to some completely non-descript dude, forcing small talk about where he was from, or what his family was like blah blah...and then somehow he mentioned he hiked the entire Appalachian trail. After that we talked for over an hour about that. I found it fascinating. That wasn't small talk...I was genuinely interested in what the guy had to say, and what his experiences were. Small talk just gets thing started.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
If people who essentially talk less are more intelligent, what about people who sing?
The brainplace: http://amenclinics.com/bp/articles.php?articleID=Be nice to your brain.
--
Harsh generalizations are never true.
As for your "Democratic wars" theory - how about the way that those wars are started by Democrats, then prolonged indefinitely by Republicans (except WWII, which Democrats won)
What about World War I? Did you forget Wilson was a Democrat too? The same president who gave us every single major oppresive federal agency from the FBI down? And how did Nixon prolong the war? What did you want the guy to do? Just pull out? The fact remains he was re-elected, so if you believe in the powers of democracy, you should stand by the reality that the majority of americans in 1972 did not agree with you.
I don't follow either party, but the politics of the moment is class division. The rebranding of the Democratic party as the hip, peace party during the 1970's is one of the greatest scams of the 20th century. Wake up!
Also, the "illegal" sale of weapons to the Contras was by any reasonable measure an abuse of executive authority. The president has exclusive control over the military and ordinance, as well as foreign policy. It is hardly as cut and dry as you think. At the very least, it was on par with the indictment of Clinton.
It was partisan politics, nothing more.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Is the wolf greedy because it is hungry for the lamb?
Life is killing and exploitation. It is nature you wish to fight, not human vice or virture.
Until the unlimited right of reproduction is ended and intelligent selective breeding takes over, humans will fight over scarce resources, land, and abilities. Such is life.
Don't be a pussy, stand and defend yourself. To die in battle is one of the greatest honors. How will you die? A miserable wretch, alone in a dark room, an embarassment to the fucked up children you have spawned to replace yourself? It sounds to me that your conception of life is sick and pathetic. It is whining of a runt for the bone it can't have.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
I hate to say it openly, but that was the point. I'm not saying the man didn't have some "issues", but if you look at his governing, he's holding up pretty well.
Come out from under your AC, put your hand in the air, admit you bought the R.M. Nixon commemerative stamps, and loudly say, "I'm a Republican Centrist, and I'm Proud!"
the more accurate the calculations became, the more the concepts tended to vanish into thin air. R. S. Mulliken
Well, I read your ambiguous .sig's meaning wrong. But then, it just pointed at a fact mentioned by hardly anyone but Republicans - your .sig is just part of the chorus of rightwingers who scream that the government spends any money, on the NEA, on art, on anything. So you fooled me, I admit - by being indistinguishable from a rightwinger.
Which fit the rest of the context. I didn't exhaustively compare pros and cons of Democrats and Republicans. I replied to a post blaming Carter for "the Iran hostage crisis, the Russian invasion of Afghanistan, the horrid handling of the oil shortages, the terrible economic conditions, the absolute failure to accomplish any of his campaign promises, the continuation/reinstatment of the draft programs, and the policy to consider Taiwan as a part of China". To which I replied only correcting only about half those lies. You complain that I linked to "nothing but speculation", when I just linked to a Google search for "reagan hostages". Readers can decide for themselves, as I have, from the available evidence and reasoning. You don't like that, because you're a Democrat who apologizes for Republican crimes. Your kind of Democrat is one of the reasons I don't belong to your party, either. If you're not going to realize the Republicans have been screwing the Democratic Party harder than even America for years, you're the one with a credibility problem. So it was easy to mistake your NEA statement as a complaint it's getting any money at all. Maybe sometime you'll learn to take a strong stand in favor of your politics in an effective way. Not just attacking people with whom you claim to have so much in common politically, to no effect. When your fellow "Democrats" do more standing up, we might have less of the blight your duopoly enables in the Republicans. Meanwhile, I see no reason to go out of my way to point out irrelevant correct actions by Republicans while I make the simple point that they have screwed up so much, on purpose, and we need to get rid of them. Perhaps if you understood that, your party might win elections more often, and I wouldn't have quite as much to complain about.
--
make install -not war
There's also the conceit that powerful people have, that they can control the dangerous, powerful forces they unleash. They often get short-term gains, and longterm destruction.
--
make install -not war
I'm glad you compared Clinton's indictment for appearing to lie about a blowjob (when it turned out he hadn't, legally). Because Reagan's weapons sales weren't just "technically illegal". He was overseeing an illegal war in Central America, not only without Congress' explicit consent, but against several laws passed explicitly to stop him, including the Boland Amendment, which he violated with the Iran/Contra secret fundraising, too. You can spout your personal political theories about peace, hipness, class division or whatever else. But if you're going to compare a legal, white lie about a blowjob to illegally arming not only narcoterrorists in nearby countries, but also arming our enemies in Iran, you've got nothing worth hearing about politics. Naturally you make a nonsensical point about Wilson and WWI, seemingly to say we shouldn't have entered it, while claiming Nixon was right to lie about both ending the war, and his coverups of the covert wars in nearby countries he waged instead. And his propping up the war solely to help win reelection in 1972, as he admitted. It's no surprise you don't understand that "Watergate" was when Nixon's gang got caught breaking into Democratic Party headquarters as part of their absolutely criminal campaign that year - all part of that victory you claim justifies the crimes they committed to win. That is partisan politics, and your willful ignorance, equating a lie about a blowjob with illegally arming our enemies and rigging wars to win elections, is precisely the partisan payoff, whether you can see it or not.
--
make install -not war
Yeah, the French had colonized what is now Viet Nam (was French Indochina ) back in the 1800's and were there until the Battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954 where they were badly defeated and pulled up stakes and left Indochina. Then in 1956 Vietnamese President Diem cancelled elections scheduled for later that year igniting the fire that was Ho Chi Minh, who had reason to believe the Communists would fare well. The ensuing skrimishes with the Viet Cong from the northern provinces of Viet Nam became too much for Diem's government to contain and they requested aid from the U.S. and we (stupidly) stuck our noses under the tent and got it bitten off (IMHO).
ASCII a stupid question, get a stupid ANSI!
OK, now that I admit I misinterpreted your .sig as consistent with the rest of your crypto-Republican post, I'll remind you that I disputed their false assertion with links to evidence, describing the truth. You're the one trying to twist reality, if you're pretending that Carter created the Savings & Loan heist. You're such a great "Democrat" that you're falsely attacking your own party's president, as well as me for pointing out the truth about him. You're the one with the twisted reality and pretense.
--
make install -not war
Democrats and Republicans have each sold out to different corporations. That's the difference between them, and the reason I've never been a member of either party.
You can cite the popular media myth that Carter was a nice guy, but I'm talking about specifics: Carter didn't create the Savings and Loan heist, though the post to which I replied made that up. I never claimed he wasn't a lying, stealing asshole, or a good president - that's your hobbyhorse to ride, your strawman to argue.
Just like your overblown distortion of the facts I presented about Reagan, Bush, hostages and the economy. Your own buyin to the "Carter's decent" media image shows how hard it was to attack him personally. And if you don't think it was worth screwing the hostages for a year, creating a recession to blame Democrats to smokescreen the damage done by Republicans in Nixon's criminal career, and getting 12 years to exploit the country as "Reagan/Bush", then you're just proof of how well it worked. You're omitting Bush's years running the CIA under Carter, ease of making a deal with the Iranians - as demonstrated in the 1980s when they made even more complicated deals to arm the Iranians. You really don't understand anything about politics and covert actions our government commits. You're just in denial, with the "it's too hard" excuse your only safety from the terrible facts.
--
make install -not war
!!!
and how much military action have you seen? How old are you by the way? Does your mum know you're up? To die fighting to _defend_ your country may be an honourable thing, but please... and please don't give me that "Iraq had noo-killer weapons" rubbish.
I reserve the right to be wrong.
Moderation 0
30% Insightful
30% Flamebait
10% Offtopic
If pointing out the truth to a violent gang of ignorant Republicans is "Flamebait", whose fault is that? It's the Republican flamers, of course - to say nothing of the Republican TrollMods.
--
make install -not war
I wonder what environment the test subjects were in when they measured their brain activity.
I think it is more likely that they were measured in a lab with not much social activity, than at a party.
i.e. In an environment where introverts work better.
Perhaps if they were measured in a social environment, the extroverts would do better.
bits and peace
Nicholas Daley
If they really didn't want to talk about it, you move on to something else. But if you were really interested, there's a lot of questions you could ask..."How does one become a chicken sexer?" "Is it something you want to keep doing, or are you holding out for something better?" "What's going on in the chicken sexing industry? Are you worried about your job being outsourced to chicken sexers in Bombay?" etc etc. If they're simply not passionate about it, you just change the subject. The point of small talk is to find something you have in common with someone else, or something they're passionate about discussing, and then the conversation just takes care of itself. For instance, I'm really passionate about my job, and if somebody asked me about that I'd talk their ear off, but my family is completely boring, so I wouldn't have much to say about any of that.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Again, fuck the Boland Amendment. Congress has no power to restrict how the Comamander and Chief can fight utilize the active military.
Where were the democrats complaining about such activity with the Bay of Pigs Invasion? The Vietnam War? Korea? The endless missle strikes against various Arab targets in the middle east? Like there was congressional authorization for any of those activities? Typical democratic hypocricy.
There is a long and established tradition of American presidents, of both parties, aiding in wars like this. Given the tens of millions of people who have died under communism, that seems to be a worthy cause. The difference is, Republicans have ALWAYS been against communism. Democrats only supported anti-communism when it was proven half of Roosevelt's cabinet were communist traitors. Here you are whining about Watergate when Roosevelt sold out all of Eastern Europe and gave us the cold war. The Bay of Pigs invasion was just politics, simply to prove that Democrats weren't infact internationalist communists.
You are just a brainwashed idiot, who has listend to all of your liberal professors, and marvelled at the endless pro-Clinton propaganda on MTV. Get a grip! The democrats controlled congress for 40 years, and every program they ever advocated is a complete failure. The democratic party will never rise again, they are proven hypocrits, just as you are here. Focus on the future, not this warped vision of the past . The future is not the democratic party or their failed policies.
40 years of failure, that's what you want to return to?
And what is this ridiculous accuastion I am justifying anyone's crimes? To be perfectly honest, I'm a dedicated fascist and look at fools like you as evidence for why democracy must be abolished. The mere thought that someone like you has a say in the future of human civilization makes me sick. Its the pandering for votes from morons that corrupts politics and leadership.
A true leader acts because it is the right thing to do, irrespective of the popularity of his actions. Your political creed makes him a slave of the masses, and decay and destruction is the result.
I'll see you at the front.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
Yeah, crazy me, destroying America with my insistence that only Congress exercise its power to declare war, to make laws, to represent the people of the United States. But why should we argue about the Republican crimes of yesteryear? Your asshole president has now taken the Congressional authorization to protect America, if necessary, from Saddam Hussein, and turned Iraq into an actual threat instead of a Republican wet dream. When we impeach Bush for lying us into war, you and your gang of traitors will say it's a "liberal plot", not enforcing the law or protecting the Constitution, and us, from your favorite tyrant. Why do you hate America, you warmongering fascist? BTW, thanks for claiming Bush for the fascists. I'd like to thank you with a baseball bat. Drop by any time.
--
make install -not war
My problem is that the things you call facts don't have any concrete backing. I could believe that it was all a set up purpetrated by the likes of Reagan or Bush, same as I can believe that it was just how things happened. It's much easier to believe that it was the flow of things without having data to the contrary to work off of. If you have any definitive source to back your claims, then provide it.
I don't trust the CIA worth a damn, and they've certainly done things of that ilk before and after. I also don't trust the RNC, DNS, or mass media, which are where your facts seem to come from. As you said, they've been wholly bought by corporations. It's one of the many reasons that I'm not a member of either party, and why I don't waste my life on TV. If you didn't get it from a primary source, there's a good chance that it isn't true, and you have no way to verify it.
The reason I was saying that Carter is a nice guy is because of a combination of the post-presidency work he's done and that he's never been slammed with criminal accustation. I still don't like him. He's very gullible, lacks the follow-through to finish situations, and doesn't know when to shut his mouth. The "Carter's decent" image you think I have is about him personally; he was incompetent in the presidency and should never have been elected. If the only two I had to choose from were Reagan and Carter, I wouldn't vote, but if I was forced to, it would be Reagan. I don't play the lesser of two evils game, though; everyone loses in that.
I'm not sure if you're replying to someone else's post or if you read something into what I wrote that I'm not seeing. I'm not a back-patting kind of guy and I never consider myself the smartest person in the room. In fact I feel more than a little inferior when I attend our monthly all-eggheads meetings at work. As for this being a whole lot of text about me, well, yes it is which I don't find at all surprising considering I discovered something new about myself in a forum of similar people. That doesn't strike me as odd.
A wise old owl
Sat in an old oak,
And the more he heard,
The less he spoke.
The less he spoke,
The more he heard,
Why can't we all be more like that wise old bird?
remember to loot and pillage before you burn!
As someone that fits most definitions of introvert pretty well, I would say you have hit pretty close to the mark. The reason I don't care to involve myself in most social situations is simple. Most people that occupy these events are self serving idiots that have no interest in my thoughts short of however they can use me in some self serving manner. It is much easier and simpler for me not involve myself in it in the first place.
However it is not that I do not care at all for the plight of others, I do care very much about the misfortunes of others and the world in general. I just don't care to expose myself face to face to what is usually superficial whining, someones lightly reasoned pitch of their world view, or worst of all meaningless babble just to 'make conversation'.
I do enjoy well reasoned, even to include non-sophist contentious discussions on any of a wide variety of topics. However it seems that 98+ percent of people are either incapable of or at least disinterested in such discussion. I do not care to engage in empty yap about trivial stuff that I have zero interest in. I especially do not care to engage in political or spiritual discussions with the typical brain dead FOX news fan. In short most social encounters either bore me to tears or tick me off.
Matthew
"Well, I read your ambiguous .sig's meaning wrong. But then, it just pointed at a fact mentioned by hardly anyone but Republicans - your .sig is just part of the chorus of rightwingers who scream that the government spends any money, on the NEA, on art, on anything. So you fooled me, I admit - by being indistinguishable from a rightwinger."
No, you made an assumption because your biases rule your decision making process.
Since you've shown NO evidence of making any attempt to actually listen to me, but rather just spun more garbage and insults, I'll end this discussion.
Think about that. Your post was insulting and derogatory, while mine was not.
Why do you have to resort to such tactics if your position is so strong, especially when you're not being attacked in the first place?
How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
>Reagan? Goddamn appeaser. Um, yeah, but Clinton's policy appeased to terrorists with an equally bad effect. If you look at what bin Laden actually cites as examples of American weakness, it's the pull-outs from Mogadishu (Clinton) and from Lebanon (Reagan)... not Iran-Contra.
Oh my god, an extrovert with social anxiety!
And his blind brother has a phobia of the dark!
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
I might have argued with you all through this tread, but the moderations on posts like yours are bullshit. You got slammed for linking a bunch of google queries that you were using as facts, and I got slammed for reiterating things printing in textbooks, encyclopedias, newpapers, and press releases. We both got slammed for fighting for our opinions. The only negative moderation that was appropriate on these really was Offtopic.
I'd say it's pretty equally Democrat asshats *and* Republican asshats doing most of the moderation on this one.
Listen to yourself. how have I supported any position Bush has taken? You are such a fucking puppet! it is rare the disease of parlimentarian politics is so painfully demonstrated.
I don't give a fuck about Republicans OR Democrats. All political parties should be banned, period. There should be no professional politicians.
The point is a simple one: you are not motivated by any principle or virtue. You are a political tool. You haven't made a single criticism of republicans that hasn't applied to democrats, sometimes more so. This tells me you are blind to the truth when it doesn't suit your agenda.
And as far as the coming battle, fuck off. I'll see you at the front. You pansy liberals will never survive the coming global crisis and breakdown of civil society. All your endless talk about rights, you don't give a fuck about duty and that's why you will all cry to your grave.
For your information, a casual look at the members of Bush's cabinet should make it quite clear he is no fascist. There is also the whole issue he was umm, elected. Fascism is the repudiation of democracy, and the rejection of egalitarianism. Of course to a brainwashed fool like you, it is just a political slam word, but it has real meaning, unlike "democratic".
Like I've said, a look at the Democratic party record since WWII proves their party is a failure. Democracy is a failure and is failing all over the world. You are supporting a sinking ship. Republicans have had their decade, and it mostly sucks, but 10 years of failure is a far cry from nearly a half century.
I don't read or respond to AC posts
i have a cousin who is 'introverted'. as 'introverted' as is possible. the outside world has no meaning to him. i am sure there is incredible power in there somewhere, but there is no outlet. you see, my cousin is autistic. there is a point when there is too much introversion. i barely function in society. but i function. he does not. the abilities of the inroverted are only as useful as their ability to use them. which is a function of extroversion.
-verlorenModus-
I was kidding you, too, hence the twinkie poisoning. Admit it - the concept of poisoned twinkies is at least amusing. Ah, well.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
Try this test to see which one you are:
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm
(based on the Jung - Myers-Briggs typological approach to personality)
I see no reason to believe that the many people in the journalism workflow are any different from the TrollMods in these threads. Collectively they filter away real facts that threaten either their vested interests or just their preconceived notions. Fortunately there's still some diversity in this big world, so different filters allow different facts through. Searching the Web, corroborating and invalidating, is a way to find more of the complete picture.
--
make install -not war
Yeah, yeah, you talk tough. But when I invite you to a beatdown, you pussy, you retreat into meaningless political jabber. It's all just a bunch of words for you, a simulated personality you strut for yourself to compensate for your cowardice.
--
make install -not war
Ok, so know we have found a validation to jung's idea that introverts(which he percieved himself to be) are somehow more evolved. This what the article is stating. The more brain energy as a result of internal operations is better. Forget the idea of difference being good. Forget the idea that introverts work on an internal world, and extroverts an external (locust of control). If you are not an introvert then you my friend are out of luck. Meh, The whole point of extroversion vs. introversion was the very idea that while different both where usefull.