I even see them in real life in bars.
And they quite often tend to be Libertarians and Conservatives
I think you’re describing a really weird anomoly.
There are of course, the isolated militia type like Timothy McVeigh. But they’re pretty rare among introverts.
Now what you might be describing is what Bob Altymeyer described in the authoritarian personality, which something quite different than the extroverted authoritarian. It was the dominater type. They’re the ones that come along and give the extroverted authoritarians something to follow -much like Hitler who was a reticent type.
Plus that, I think you failed to recognize the main point about the introvert/extrovert spectrum. It’s not about being shy or social, it’s about an orientation to the world of objects. The person you describe may do so because they’re more into accumulating objects than they are being around other people.
Sorry, bud, but I have to disagree with you on this point.
Nice try though.
I think you missed the point.
My point is that we allign the system such that it agrees with our baises and makes us out to be the hero.
I think I get your point on this. And you may well be right that I did miss your point. But you’ll have to elaborate and refer it somewhat to the history of this particular exchange between us.
Given the decency and intelligence you’ve showed so far, I have to assume that your point warrants some consideration. But you’ll have to elaborate.
Perhaps what merits consideration is politeness.
Be as obtuse and shallow as you wish…but do it nicely.
We’ll all listen…with gaping mouths, as if something awe inspiring is being stated.
The British were masters at this.
They never produced any thinkers of any merit, besides an odd few, but they spoke with such eloquence and civility, and that stiff-upper lip that feigned reasoning, that all stop to listen to them speak.
All feel like something intellectual is being said when they read from a phone-book, or when they recite a verse from Cat with a Hat.
Even an imbecile is raised to the heights of enlightenment, when he is allowed to listen.
All I’m saying is that a conservative introvert is likely to think that all good rightist are introverts and all good introverts are rightists. Likewise, a rightist extrovert is likely to think that all good rightists are extroverts and all good extroverts are conservative. An introverted leftist will think that all good introverts are leftists and all good leftists are introverts. An extroverted leftist will think that all good extroverts are leftists and all good leftists are extroverts.
I’m saying it is a matter of personal bias, more than anything. I’m an extrovert and a raging leftist. Consequently, it follows that I think there is a relationship between extroversion and leftism. I’m guessing you are an introvert and a leftist, so you observe a relationship between introversion and leftism. Likewise, Saully is a known introvert, so it makes sense that he would provide a citation that lauds the introverted world view.
That is all.
Yes, we do have to consider the egocentric dilema involved in this.
But you do make good point,Xunzian. Right on!
But I’m not totally convinced there isn’t a correlation between extroversion and conservatism. For me, it lies in the inherent logic of the the two. But once again, as Jung admitted himself, we’re talking about a mental model and not reality itself. All we can do with it is apply it to reality and see how it works out.
I’m just saying that you are liking introverts with the Aristotelian concept of the virtuous life and extroverts with the Aristotelian concept of the base life. I disagree with such a perception.
Indeed, I’d argue that is why introverts tend to be conservatives because in shunning healthy social behavior they turn everything into a commodity. An extrovert doesn’t find their energy in other people as a function of their perceiving those other people to be a commodity. Commodification represents the worst sort of reactionary conservatism.
No, that was not my intention at all. And I apologize if it came off that way. For one, we’re not talking about an either/or dichotomy here, but rather a spectrum in which most of us tend to lie somewhere in between. Secondly, even with the inherent logic, there is still any number of variation that might occur. For instance, a lot of those who lean toward the extroverted side, may be particularly a-political because a preoccupation with day to day matters. And there may, as well, be introverts who, because their tendency to shun the outer world, might choose, for instance, to become poets or artists with little to no political concern. I consider Rob Zombie a highly introverted artist. And as far as I know, he’s said little to nothing as concerns his political views. And if he did, it wouldn’t surprise me to find out his orientation was more toward a kind of libertarian conservatism due to his flirtations with satanism -which is explicitly libertarian.
Nor would I argue that being an introvert makes one immune to evil. Similar to your argument, I would argue that the kind inwardness at issue here could very well lead to the kind of solipsism typical of serial killers. Especially given the kind of push-pull relationship the introvert has with the world of objects. But no more than I would argue that extroversion equals evil, I certainly wouldn’t argue that introversion automatically assumes solipsism or the potential for serial killing.
Solipsism, due to our egocentric dilemma, and the leap of faith required in assuming the other has a perceiving thing, is a general disposition among introverts and extroverts alike. And this why I have to disagree with your attempt to make comodification the exclusive property of the introvert. It seems to me, given the extrovert’s orientation to the world of objects, they would be equally prone to commodification: the utilization of others as a means to an end. This can certainly be seen in the activities of players (who are clearly extroverted) who tend to see each other as a means to sex.
That said, my primary point was working from the given political positions to the introvert/extrovert spectrum. It just seemed to me to explain the positions that a lot of my conservative friends take: positions that tend to center around material well-being. It also explained their propensity toward popular opinions and assumptions, with what is apparently little relflection, since these opinions and assumptions are decidedly “out there”. Further, it explained to me the tendency of progressives to be more self-deconstructive and self scrutinizing which finds expression in their less assertive manner of stating positions. While this has been their strength in building their arguments, I also think this has been their liabilty in the general political discourse. They’re too hesitant and timid for their own good. I would also argue that this why more introverts turn to art and tend to be more successful at it -not the the so-called leftist conspiracy of the media many conservatives tend to embrace.
The main thing to keep in mind here, Xun, is that you can’t talk about causes, especially in the social sphere, as much as you can contributing factors. No matter what theory we present, it will always be incomplete. And it certainly wasn’t my intention to pose the personality types as causes. I was merely pointing to possible contributing factors.
I can agree with much of what you wrote, I’m just saying that for an extrovert “the world of objects” isn’t about material things, it is about other people. Hence extroversion. By saying that the extrovert begins and ends in the world of objects rather than beginning and ending in the worlds of others I feel you are commodifying other people, which is bad. And also misses the point.
Well, I would argue that the world of objects consists of material things. But on that we agree to disagree. However, to that extent, both introverts and extroverts have to form some kind of relationship with with the material. Also, I would point out that introverts don’t necessarily shun a healthy Social life. It’s usually given their inwardness they’re often not as successful at it. But once again, I do agree there is a solipsistic potential for the introvert. I suppose a lot of difference on this comes from our different experience of the issues at hand.
Have you stopped beating your wife?
There’s a loaded question my friend.
Thank God I’m not married. Otherwise I would have to answer that question.
But extroverts are directed towards the material . . .
You’ll have to elaborate on this one.
The terms you are using are too loosely defined for you to find a definite correlation. I’ve heard leftists describe their ideal model for society anywhere from a state run economy to anarcho-libertarianism and I’ve heard rightists describe their ideal model of society anywhere from a theocracy to anorcho-libertarianism. The same can be said for the terms liberal and conservative. Even introversion and extroversion aren’t as black and white as you might think. Its not quite a spectrum… It’s more like a multi dimensional model. It’s very difficult to attribute certain characteristics to either extroverts or introverts. I’ll try and show you what I mean… follow this reasoning.
Extroverts enjoy communicating because they are more confident. Introverts are shy and insecure and thus they stick to themselves. The logic seems reasonable… am I right?
How about this…
Extroverts need constant affirmation from people around them since they feel insecure about their own beliefs. Introverts are confident enough not to need this constant affirmation and can thus be comfortable to spend more time by themselves. This also seems reasonable.
What I am trying to say is that a person can be driven to extroversion/introversion because of either a surplus or a deficiency of (insert attribute) and perhaps there is a bit more to this argument than saying all introverts tend to be A while all extroverts tend to be B. I think a more efficient approach would be to identify many specific attributes that you think are associated with extroversion/introversion and find many specific attributes that are associated with liberalism/conservatism and then find attributes associated with leftism/rightism. Then you can probably find some overlap. At that point, you will notice that you will describe a conservative differently than he/she will describe him/herself and that you will describe an extrovert differently than he/she will describe him/herself.
Svet, I’m with you to the extent that such categories are little more than categories: a linguistic way of grouping a given phenomenon in order to make it easier to think about. And you’re right: the reality of people we tend to try to fix in such categories never seem to stay perfectly describable by said categories. Whatever we produce in our mental labs, it will never stand up to reality we are trying to describe with it.
That said, I think I should explain my sense of what it means to be an introvert:
If you were to ask me to keep a journal for the next thirty days, what you would get would not be a description of what I had done from day to day. What you would get, rather, is a description of an abstract process going on in my head. This is why I suck at Facebook.
Now as Jung described it:
For the extrovert, everything ends in the world of objects.
For the introvert, everything starts in the self and ends in it. The introvert is like a groundhog that goes out and collects reality, then takes it back into his own little hole.
From the way you described them an introvert kind of sounds like an individualist while an extrovert sounds like a utilitarianist. I believe that both political orientations have a heavy representation of each… However If I had to chose, I would guess that conservatism would have a higher correlation with introversion due to the emphasis that each places on individualism.