Introverted Extraverts and Duality

[ClaudiaM]

Does anyone here consider him or herself to be an extravert who is not always social/gregarious?

And what does this mean for intertype relations, specifically duality? Does it change it at all?

I have been in a relationship with both my dual (LSI) and my activator (SLE), and while both were good relationships, duality was better overall. It lasted much longer, and we are still friends today even though he is with someone else now.

The thing about it is, I am what is considered an "introverted" extrovert, and when I was in a relationship with my dual, we became quite socially isolated. I have read that this can happen with introverted activity partners, but I don't recall hearing about it happening with duals. Is this to be expected in dual relations where the extravert is "introverted," or was it a unique case or perhaps a result of duality being a "closed system"??

[WVBRY]

I am an introverted extrovert. Was your dual an introverted introvert or an extroverted introvert? In any case thats not the reason. The LSI-EIE pair is defined by "a certain isolation from society", said Valentina Meged.

[Cat King Cole]

I think it's because duality is a closed system. Any relationship is when it first starts, basically, as you start getting to know your partner in-depth.

Something I notice about LIIs is that I become more socially extraverted and less inhibited in their company, I guess because they need my more than I do.

[Galen]

I test fairly high on the MMPI as introverted, so I suppose I do think of myself as introverted.

[Gilly]

I test fairly high on the MMPI as introverted, so I suppose I do think of myself as introverted.

External lolcus of controlled

[Jonathan]

I think one needs to be clear what one means by "introverted extravert." On face value, it means that one is introverted by one system/criterion, but extraverted by another. Probably on this forum, it usually means someone who's believed to be base Xe but acts like an introvert (e.g., doesn't generally approach others, prefers them to approach him/her, likes others to deal with the external world, tends to spend most of his/her time in some "inner" world by him/herself, etc.). But if someone is so far from the typical understanding of that person's type, I think it pays to understand why.

Of course, I understand that in this context, if you consider yourself an introverted extravert (as opposed to other people typing you as such to convince you that you're some other type than how you see yourself), maybe you just mean that you're a "shy extravert" or "socially inhibited" extravert in some way.

In any case, it makes sense that if two people are really into each other, they'll end up spending more time with each other, which means less time with other friends. I think this is the case whatever the types involved are.

[WVBRY]

I think one needs to be clear what one means by "introverted extravert." On face value, it means that one is introverted by one system/criterion, but extraverted by another. However, it matters which system/perspective one's talking about in each case.

Probably on this forum, it usually means someone who's believed to be base Xe but acts like an introvert (e.g., doesn't generally approach others, prefers them to approach him/her, likes others to deal with the external world, tends to spend most of his/her time in some "inner" world by him/herself, etc.).

But if someone is so far from the typical understanding of that person's type, I think it pays to understand why. Often, this conversation comes up when people are trying to convince someone of being another type. E.g., a person self-types as IBCd, and someone says "Have you ever considered that you're really an introverted EBCd?" Usually that's because people's speech, interests, and behavior don't always fit the IM element categories associated with any given type. Or possibly the person is neither of those two types.

Possibly. But keep in mind the behavior of the big 5 categories doesnt correlate to socionics. Socionics is a theory of cognition, not behaviors.

I think that subypes have alot to do with this introversion/extroversion mixup. Also use of functions; even an Fe-ENFj can act extroverted because theyve started using more of the dual seeking function, similarly an Ni-ENFj can behave more extroverted than the aforementioned type because they may use their hidden agenda more often.

[Marietta]

it was told somewhere that introverts are usually sure they are introverts, extroverts don't know who they are .

I think I'm generally more towards extraversion, but I sometimes doubt it cause I can behave in a very introverted way, sometimes for long periods of time. When in company of someone obviously extroverted I usually withdraw. I don't like big groups, but I don't like being alone either, I don't get energy from that (contrary to the introverts that I've met). A company of 1 - 3 people is perfect for me. If these are the people that I like and feel comfortable with, then I don't care for anyone else or making new acquintances with other people present. I feel that I'm being most "myself" when I behave in an extraverted way, which naturally happens when I am with IP introverts.

[ClaudiaM]

I think one needs to be clear what one means by "introverted extravert." On face value, it means that one is introverted by one system/criterion, but extraverted by another. Probably on this forum, it usually means someone who's believed to be base Xe but acts like an introvert (e.g., doesn't generally approach others, prefers them to approach him/her, likes others to deal with the external world, tends to spend most of his/her time in some "inner" world by him/herself, etc.). But if someone is so far from the typical understanding of that person's type, I think it pays to understand why.

Of course, I understand that in this context, if you consider yourself an introverted extravert (as opposed to other people typing you as such to convince you that you're some other type than how you see yourself), maybe you just mean that you're a "shy extravert" or "socially inhibited" extravert in some way.

In any case, it makes sense that if two people are really into each other, they'll end up spending more time with each other, which means less time with other friends. I think this is the case whatever the types involved are.

EDIT: I should have said "gregarious" or "social" or somesuch. My mistake!

....

Possibly. But keep in mind the behavior of the big 5 categories doesnt correlate to socionics. Socionics is a theory of cognition, not behaviors.

Yes. Thank you.

[squark]

But keep in mind the behavior of the big 5 categories doesnt correlate to socionics. Socionics is a theory of cognition, not behaviors.

Yep. This.

I think that subypes have alot to do with this introversion/extroversion mixup. Also use of functions; even an Fe-ENFj can act introverted because theyve started using more of the dual seeking function, similarly an Ni-ENFj can behave more extroverted than the aforementioned type because they may use their hidden agenda more often.

hm.

[ClaudiaM]

I am an introverted extrovert. Was your dual an introverted introvert or an extroverted introvert? In any case thats not the reason. The LSI-EIE pair is defined by "a certain isolation from society", said Valentina Meged.

He was a traditional "introvert" as well as a socionics introvert. Perhaps I would be better off with a more "extroverted" LSI.

I don't think I had read the "certain isolation from society" bit, but that does sounds quite correct. Could you please link me to that article?

I think it's because duality is a closed system. Any relationship is when it first starts, basically, as you start getting to know your partner in-depth.

Something I notice about LIIs is that I become more socially extraverted and less inhibited in their company, I guess because they need my more than I do.

Yes, I relate. I come alive, in some ways, more when I am around an LSI to give my energy to.

it was told somewhere that introverts are usually sure they are introverts, extroverts don't know who they are .

I think I'm generally more towards extraversion, but I sometimes doubt it cause I can behave in a very introverted way, sometimes for long periods of time. When in company of someone obviously extroverted I usually withdraw. I don't like big groups, but I don't like being alone either, I don't get energy from that (contrary to the introverts that I've met). A company of 1 - 3 people is perfect for me. If these are the people that I like and feel comfortable with, then I don't care for anyone else or making new acquintances with other people present. I feel that I'm being most "myself" when I behave in an extraverted way, which naturally happens when I am with IP introverts.

Regarding the bolded: YES!! That is exactly right. It took me quite a long time to settle on my type, and even now I sometimes question it as I don't honestly feel I know quite who I am; I am forever figuring it out.

As to the rest of your post, I relate very much as well (except that for me it's Ij introverts)

[ClaudiaM]

....

Thank you, but I do know what it means -- in simple terms, a person who may at times seem traditionally "introverted" but who is in fact a socionics extravert. (Before this gets to a "Re-Type ClaudiaM" thing, let me just say I am definitely an extravert, despite not constantly being wildly sociable.)

This thread was more aimed at "Introverted Extraverts and Duality," in particular.

[Marietta]

Regarding the bolded: YES!! That is exactly right. It took me quite a long time to settle on my type, and even now I sometimes question it as I don't honestly feel I know quite who I am; I am forever figuring it out.

As to the rest of your post, I relate very much as well (except that for me it's Ij introverts)

I'm glad you relate . I was thinking EJs are the most extraverted in traditional sense, since the descriptions stress that EJs have to spend their energy. and EIEs I know are all over the place . but maybe it's more related to life experience or just the company of a compatible temperament?

Besides, being somewhere more in between than obvious extroverts I feel that I don't benefit that much from being extraverted. sometimes I wish I could be an introvert, just shut myself at home and fuck it all ^.^ (ok, ok, I know they have social needs too ).

what I like about socionics is that E/I is not necessarily as obvious as in traditional Big Five or Eyesenck simplistic dichotomies. you have to consider it differently in terms of different clubs and quadras, it feels more adequate.

[ClaudiaM]

Regarding the bolded: YES!! That is exactly right. It took me quite a long time to settle on my type, and even now I sometimes question it as I don't honestly feel I know quite who I am; I am forever figuring it out.

As to the rest of your post, I relate very much as well (except that for me it's Ij introverts)

I'm glad you relate . I was thinking EJs are the most extraverted in traditional sense, since the descriptions stress that EJs have to spend their energy. and EIEs I know are all over the place . but maybe it's more related to life experience or just the company of a compatible temperament?

Besides, being somewhere more in between than obvious extroverts I feel that I don't benefit that much from being extraverted. sometimes I wish I could be an introvert, just shut myself at home and fuck it all ^.^ (ok, ok, I know they have social needs too ).

what I like about socionics is that E/I is not necessarily as obvious as in traditional Big Five or Eyesenck simplistic dichotomies. you have to consider it differently in terms of different clubs and quadras, it feels more adequate.

Recently, it has been the company, or lack thereof. I am on a longterm travel assignment for my work, and I do not speak the language in the country where I am staying. I rent a room from a couple who do speak my language, but I feel like an outsider with them despite that I have tried to be very friendly. It makes me sad, but they only seem to see me as a rent-payer, not a human, so they don't care to be very nice to me and as a result I spend quite a bit of time alone in my room when I am at "home." It was a very nice thing this afternoon to go for coffee with a group of English-speaking people. I got the chance to be lively and engaging again, and it was lovely.

This whole situation is making me feel even more "introverted" than usual, but even when I am in my own country, after long days at work with people, I have been known to turn down social invitations (making me feel and look introverted).

I agree with you that the E/I think is not nearly so obvious in socionics as it is in other systems. It shows, but is not always as consistent as those systems would have you believe.

[ClaudiaM]

Edit: Ah, I see... yes, you're right, Ashton. "Gregariousness" is what I meant. I changed the title and opening post (would have driven me crazy to leave it wrong!)

[Marietta]

Recently, it has been the company, or lack thereof. I am on a longterm travel assignment for my work.........

it's exactly what I have experienced some time ago. I was in a foreign country, renting a flat with 2 guys, we could communicate more or less in one language but it ended with me being in my room mostly, having little contact with them. I engaged myself with a lot of stuff I like (books, music, movies etc) but after spending some months like that I felt completly drained, lacking stimulation. It was really bad :/

[ClaudiaM]

Recently, it has been the company, or lack thereof. I am on a longterm travel assignment for my work.........

it's exactly what I have experienced some time ago. I was in a foreign country, renting a flat with 2 guys, we could communicate more or less in one language but it ended with me being in my room mostly, having little contact with them. I engaged myself with a lot of stuff I like (books, music, movies etc) but after spending some months like that I felt completly drained, lacking stimulation. it was really bad :/.

Yes! It *is* really bad! I purposely buy only a little food at a time, so I will have a reason to go out shopping again the next day and try and interact with other people.

I don't know how long I can stand this, but fortunately I will have steady business engagements for the next couple of weeks. I feel like a caged animal or a wilting flower

[Marietta]

Yes! It *is* really bad! I purposely buy only a little food at a time, so I will have a reason to go out shopping again the next day and try and interact with other people.

I don't know how long I can stand this, but fortunately I will have steady business engagements for the next couple of weeks. I feel like a caged animal or a wilting flower

it was the same for me. how long are you gonna be there? maybe you can find other foreigners to make friends with or become an english teacher or sth?

[WVBRY]

I don't think I had read the "certain isolation from society" bit, but that does sounds quite correct. Could you please link me to that article?

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ad.php?t=36699

[FDG]

I've never met an extravert that seemed "introverted". I've met gregarious introverts but their energy kind of feels strained when they are being consistently gregarious for a relatively long time. Conversely, an extravert which is comfortable with the social environment he's in will invariably start acting in that typical, annoying (lol) extraverted way.

[silverchris9]

None of that introvert stuff you posted fit me, Ashton. But I'm completely an introvert.

It means just what it says on the tin. Do you spend more time/energy facing out, or do you spend more time/energy facing in. That's the basic meaning. The socionics meaning can be a little more nuanced, but that's the basic thing.

Extroverts exist out and move in; introverts exist in and move out. Locus of motion, perhaps. Do you move or do you come out of yourself and move? Stuff like that. I don't think it has anything to do with flamboyant colors. I can think of plenty of introverts who would wear flamboyant colors---but they would do it in a very deliberate way, in a way that "indexes" bright colors (that is, metaphorizes them--uses the bright clothes to consciously take some of the associations people have with bright clothes and transfer those associations to themselves).


Anyway, re: duality, I think I'd like to be with an introverted SLE. I like introverted SLEs. I think we're sort of a dream team together socially, covering each other's weaknesses. This is why I generally subscribe to the Producing subtype with producing subtype and accepting subtype with accepting subtype theory. i.e., LSI-Ti with EIE-Fe; LSI-Se with EIE-Ni.

[silverchris9]

.

ah, I see. well then yes, I agree. socionics I/E and everybody elses I/E are largely similar, and I suppose a more nuanced conception thereof can be applied equally to all systems employing the metric.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

I'm active, energetic, .... as long as I'm not around other people. Other people 'drain my batteries.' But when I'm alone, truly alone, I'm actually very active. You just can't see this though because I can't act that way around other people as it's too tiring/draining.

So yeah I'm an introvert.

The theory I have is this:

Introverts are actually giving their energy to others when socially talking to them, which drains their own energy. Extroverts are stealing energy from other people "How are you? What did you to today? What's up. I haven't seen you in awhile. Hey there. How are you? What are you doing for a living?" blah blah.... which energizes themselves and drains the other person.

Two extroverts can get along but it can feel too much like a competition. They just tend to....clash in a physical way. Two introverts can get along but they have a tendency to get way too subjective about things. Their hearts can bruise too much. This is because as introverts, they aren't going to play as much privy to social norms....they will instead cut straight to the heart more often.

An introvert has more deliberate actions and they are planning their lives more than extroverts, on a more ideal relationship that they really want and will make them happy- an extrovert has a kind of bipolar-ness that they can't decide on exactly what they want without another person giving them something. Because extroverts need other people to feel whole, sorry but they are all vampires. Introverts to be fair, are more like narcissistic Gods.

Nobody can give like an introvert, as they tend to charge themselves up greatly when alone and then come at you with a huge bang all at once. Nobody can receive like an extrovert, because they are absorbing so many things socially at once. To an introverted, shy person this drains us but to them they're like 'Oh my god please, more of this thank you!'

[Gilly]

Does anyone here consider him or herself to be an extravert who is not always social/gregarious?

Yes. I am sometimes very gregarious and boisterous when I'm in the right mood/drunk, but the majority of the time my energy levels in social interaction are relegated.

And what does this mean for intertype relations, specifically duality? Does it change it at all?

Well duality has more aspects to it than sociability, their are plenty of introvert-sub introverts who are outgoing. I'd agree that extroversion is a factor in sociability, but not the direct cause of it.

I have been in a relationship with both my dual (LSI) and my activator (SLE), and while both were good relationships, duality was better overall. It lasted much longer, and we are still friends today even though he is with someone else now.

The thing about it is, I am what is considered an "introverted" extrovert, and when I was in a relationship with my dual, we became quite socially isolated. I have read that this can happen with introverted activity partners, but I don't recall hearing about it happening with duals. Is this to be expected in dual relations where the extravert is "introverted," or was it a unique case or perhaps a result of duality being a "closed system"??

I think most couples tend to become more socially isolated. I don't think it's really Socionics related.

[Jonathan]

Socionics is a theory of cognition, not behaviors.

Well, I think that's somewhat in question. Jung clearly saw the functions as being evidenced in identifiable behaviors. Augusta and the other people who developed Socionics clearly saw their interpretation/extension of Jung as also relating to identifiable behaviors. The way I see it is that Socionics uses ideas about cognition to explain behaviors. But to divorce them completely...to say that there are no identifiable behaviors related to the various quadras, types, dichotomies, etc., is completely against anything written by mainstream Socionists. There is a current, a school, at least on this forum, that thinks otherwise.

If one were to say, "well, I'm interested in Socionics as a model of thought process only, and I'm skeptical about what classical Socionics says about how that manifests in behaviors," well that's fine. But to say Socionics has nothing to do with behaviors is actually to redefine Socionics away from its roots.

I think that subypes have alot to do with this introversion/extroversion mixup. Also use of functions; even an Fe-ENFj can act extroverted because theyve started using more of the dual seeking function, similarly an Ni-ENFj can behave more extroverted than the aforementioned type because they may use their hidden agenda more often.

I think you meant to say that an Fe-ENFj would act introverted? What you seem to be saying is that an Xy subtype acts in a -y fashion: e.g., Xi acts extraverted and Xe acts introverted....because they're both using the dual block functions so much that this has a bigger impact on whether they act introverted or extraverted than their ego block.

That's an interesting theory. I would be curious of any support for it. I'd think the more mainstream view would be that the ego block has the more obvious impact in most cases.

[silke]

Does anyone here consider him or herself to be an extravert who is not always social/gregarious?

You might want to take a look at the instinctual stackings: http://theenneagram.blogspot.com/200...stackings.html. They seem to make quite a difference. For example I knew an ILI guy who was either so/sp or sp/so and socially he was quite outgoing despite being an introverted NT. He had lots of acquaintances and would frequently seek out groups of people to hang out with. Contrary to this I know an ILE woman sp/sx who is actually much less social/gregarious than the ILI guy, though by socionics she is classed as extravert.

[WVBRY]

Well, I think that's somewhat in question. Jung clearly saw the functions as being evidenced in identifiable behaviors. Augusta and the other people who developed Socionics clearly saw their interpretation/extension of Jung as also relating to identifiable behaviors. The way I see it is that Socionics uses ideas about cognition to explain behaviors. But to divorce them completely...to say that there are no identifiable behaviors related to the various quadras, types, dichotomies, etc., is completely against anything written by mainstream Socionists. There is a current, a school, at least on this forum, that thinks otherwise.

If one were to say, "well, I'm interested in Socionics as a model of thought process only, and I'm skeptical about what classical Socionics says about how that manifests in behaviors," well that's fine. But to say Socionics has nothing to do with behaviors is actually to redefine Socionics away from its roots.

Of course. I am not denying that. Behaviors often correlate to cogntition in socionics, all Im saying is that socionics isnt primarily about behaviors, so one shouldnt look at that to determine type mainly.

I think you meant to say that an Fe-ENFj would act introverted? What you seem to be saying is that an Xy subtype acts in a -y fashion: e.g., Xi acts extraverted and Xe acts introverted....because they're both using the dual block functions so much that this has a bigger impact on whether they act introverted or extraverted than their ego block.

That's an interesting theory. I would be curious of any support for it. I'd think the more mainstream view would be that the ego block has the more obvious impact in most cases.

Actually what Im saying is that super-id functions might have just as much influence as ego functions. This is supported by most socionists who beleive that the super-id block is just as influential as the ego block, and that a person's super-id functions can influence behaviors just as much as ego functions do.

[FDG]

Technically Fe-ENFjs are peak-constructivism and focussing on a limiting function, thus they can easily be more introverted than Ni-ENFjs. For dynamic types, producing subtypes are empowering, thus IP-Je and EJ-Pi usually come across as more environmentally open than accepting subtypes.

[Suz]

I consider myself relatively shy and quiet as far as gregariousness, but people that know me have been surprised that i think of myself this way. And people here in the forum have commented that I tend to talk a lot, which I never really noticed about myself until it was pointed out to me. I thought i was talking a normal amount.


I do think, however, that it depends on the environment-- if i'm in a new place and/or feel uncomfortable (from an Fi-standpoint) for whatever reason, I'll tend to not say much and just observe mostly. If i'm among friends i'll usually be pretty gregarious. I am cautious about new acquaintances though. Sometimes I'll get an instant read on people and open up quicker (if i like them), sometimes not. And I tend to start out getting reads on people from a distance, then approach.

[Jonathan]

all Im saying is that socionics isnt primarily about behaviors, so one shouldnt look at that to determine type mainly.

The problem though is that if you don't look at behaviors that can be assessed by others, all you're left with is self-assessment and VI. (If you say, well a person talks or writes in a way that suggests a certain IM element, that's a behavior. )

My understanding is that at least originally, Socionics sought a more external, behavior-oriented approach to type assessment. Augusta described behaviors associated with the IM elements and didn't rely on self-assessment measures.

Interestingly, self-assessment is precisely where I think people are most likely to go wrong on introversion/extraversion. A person "feels" introverted or extraverted, and therefore assesses him/herself as one or the other. But when you look at a person's behaviors and how thins are working functionally, that's where you sometimes get a good argument that the person who considers himself "introverted" is actually a Socionics extravert, and vice versa.

Actually what Im saying is that super-id functions might have just as much influence as ego functions. This is supported by most socionists who beleive that the super-id block is just as influential as the ego block

Sounds reasonable, but where do you get support that most socionists think that?

[Jonathan]

Usually when behavior is spoken of in context of psychology/personality, we're talking about behavioral trait attributions—whether a person seems 'outgoing', 'upbeat', 'aggressive', 'obnoxious', 'friendly', 'analytical', 'industrious', and these sorts of things. Not just "any kind of observable data whatsoever about a person."

Okay, I stand corrected in my use of the word "behavior." I was just meaning the word in the ordinary sense, the way socionists talk about observable traits as in http://www.socionics.us/theory/ext_int.shtml. I didn't mean standard dichotomies from other theories used by psychologists. Maybe we can call it "socionic behaviors" instead of "behavioral behaviors" in a technical sense.

Hence the emphasis away from behavioral 'black box fallacy' methodologies, towards more cognitive and phenomenologically based approaches.

Sounds very scientific and precise; what I see discussed in socionics is people making judgments about what IM elements people are using based on certain behaviors (in the vernacular sense of the word). Maybe we should have a thread about some of the more advanced methodologies you're talking about.

As to phenomenological approaches...I'm surprised to hear you say that. I thought you were against that...that you thought IM elements are all about something hard-wired in the brain, rather than phenomena in a more general sense. But maybe your views have evolved since then...

[krieger]

Usually when behavior is spoken of in context of psychology/personality, we're talking about behavioral trait attributions—whether a person seems 'outgoing', 'upbeat', 'aggressive', 'obnoxious', 'friendly', 'analytical', 'industrious', and these sorts of things. Not just "any kind of observable data whatsoever about a person."

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/behavior

be·hav·ior   [bih-heyv-yer] Show IPA
noun
1. manner of behaving or acting.
2. Psychology, Animal Behavior .
a. observable activity in a human or animal.
b. the aggregate of responses to internal and external stimuli.
c. a stereotyped, species-specific activity, as a courtship dance or startle reflex.
3. Often, behaviors. a behavior pattern.
4. the action or reaction of any material under given circumstances: the behavior of tin under heat.

it primarily means exactly what you say it doesn't in the context of psychological discourse. i suggest you adapt to people with the proper understanding of the term rather than the other way around.

[Gilly]

Big 5's definition of Extroversion seems to have numerous elements of what socionics defines as External and Involved factors, which is what I generally see as the main emphasis in the typical perception of the word "extrovert" that is anomolous, by way of these implicit emphases, compared to the more precise Jungian/Socionics sense of the word.