everybody knows that there is truth to grouping people into personalities and temperaments
but it’s difficult to be scientific about something when you don’t even know what you’re testing for
mostly because the traits that go under these two words are a mixed bag of things
may as well assign a zodiac sign like ares or something, for a choleric, pisces for melancholic etc
example, i don’t think it is as cut and dry as cholerics cannot be introverts
it’s not even entirely true that introverts can’t be social
which is why the best way to go about it is statistical psychometrics (Big5)
so that you arrive at the essential nature of the traits
it helps to understand extraversion as a combination of enthusiasm and assertiveness
my own example is that I’m pretty fucking assertive
but my enthusiasm is very very low
which lands me at introvert
so when i need to go somewhere and achieve a goal of any kind, i do it, because it is what i want
regardless of my lack of desire to be there, or contempt or lack of interest for the people there
when I complete my objective I just leave
and if by any reason I find myself enthusiastic about something
I am indistinguishable from an extrovert
there’s a great variety of possible personality trait combinations
and the fact that many of them tend to be accompanied by others
does not rule out the existence of unusual combinations
which is a lovely thing
because sometimes you come into an exchange expecting something
and then they surprise you
it’s like finding truffles