Some thoughts on introversion

[helgi]

When I read Jonathan Rauch's article Caring for Your Introvert in the Atlantic Monthly a few years back, I had an immediate recognition of what he described, about feeling drained by social interaction and about wanting to be alone whenever possible. I then went on to read books like Party of One by Anneli Rufus, Celebrating Time Alone by Lionel Fisher, and a nice little collection of quotes called The Wonders of Solitude.

I've been gaining a new perspective on the nature of my wanting to be alone lately, and have found that it's not really about wanting to avoid other people after all. I haven't yet formulated this into a concise theory or anything, but the gist of it is that the reason I want to avoid social interaction is that it activates my ego and forces me to play out reactions and patterns on the level of form identity.
Playing a person, reacting, participating in the acceptance/rejection game was becoming harder and harder for me to do, and I had started to find being with other people incredibly draining, up to a point where I would sometimes find it hard to even talk after a few hours of constant interaction. When I got the chance once in a while to spend a few days mostly by myself, I felt a sense of becoming more centered and more at ease, but as soon as I got into the world again I felt like I was being somehow scattered all over the place and constantly straining to keep up with the demands of responding to other people.

As I've been going through a process of awakening, a lessening of the ego/person and a corresponding lessening of pain and fear, I've found it much easier to be with other people. And that got me thinking about the possibility that interacting with other people wasn't the issue, that there was a possibility for me to feel as good with other people as I did when alone. When contemplating myself in social situations, there are some things that have helped me identify the source of the problem and which have made me realize that the issue lies entirely within me and not out there. That the source of the problem is my own identification with ego, and the realm of ego in general.
The painful part of being with other people was always the interaction, and feeling the demand for a reaction. So if I simply let go of the level of reaction all together, the pain went away with it. One particular area of human interaction that repelled me was male banter, the almost completely meaningless surface chit chat between men, a very ego heavy form of interaction.

Contemplating the possibility to simply stop speaking was one pointer that brought out the real source of the issue, and through it I found that I could respond to people without the reactive patterns having to be activated. The response then comes from a deeper place, and there is space between the demand for a response and then whatever response I give, if any. I'm then responding intuitively, bypassing the reactive patterns altogether.
Other pointers I've used is imagining myself as invisible or as not being there at all, asking the question "what would I do if it weren't for myself?" in a situation to see if I got a different perspective on it.

After having dealt with this issue for years and gone through a sort of trial and error process with it, I think that the differences between introversion and extroversion have mostly to do with the nature of the person's ego identification, and the level of tolerance for playing it out. As in my case, I start to feel uneasy and drained of energy very quickly when I start playing out ego patterns, when I've inflated my sense of self in some way or when I interact with other people on the level of ego.

Right now the challenge for me is to approach the world and other people on these new terms, on this deeper level, interacting with people in a way that's not necessarily going to be accepted by everybody. I recognize that if I go through with this fully, which I need to do of course, it might seem to others at times that I'm detached, or even that I'm ignoring them when I don't respond immediately to their demands for a reaction and so on. I've managed to personally offend more people than I care to remember with the simple act of turning off my cellphone, or leaving it at home when I go out for a walk. And when not participating in casual banter and small talk and simply not saying anything, people think that you must be judging them or rejecting them in some way. So I'm still not always able to let go completely of the reactive level, afraid that if don't react, other people will feel offended and rejected, and reject me in turn.

Now, this has been a bit of a ramble, a jumble of thoughts I'm not sure I can even string together in my own head, but I suspect many of you will recognize some of the issues I'm talking about. Regarding introversion and so on. And also this half baked theory of mine that introverts don't necessarily want to keep away from other people, but simply want to avoid having to participate in the realm of ego, which is definitely worth exploring some more methinks.

Thoughts?

[Andrew Michaels]

Actually...that sounds about right.

It's never been that I'm shy, at least not for many years anyway, but I've always preferred to be alone.

I'm a great speaker, I aced my public speaking classes in college. People laugh at my jokes. I can usually come up with something to say in conversation, but the strain always bothers me. There's a mental anchor that I've always felt burdened by whenever I'm out amongst others, and I don't know quite what it is.

I've never liked banter, or talking for the sake of talking. Why must there always be conversation?

I think you may be onto something with your theory. Could you expand a bit on how you change your mindset?

[Mnemosyne]

helgi,

This is an interesting subject, I've never thought to ask *why* a person would be introverted.

I am deeply introverted myself and have been this way for as long as I can remember, even as a very young child.

"the gist of it is that the reason I want to avoid social interaction is that it activates my ego and forces me to play out reactions and patterns on the level of form identity."

Do you think this applies to people during every/any stage of development? In other words, would a very young child interacting another very young child involve ego activation?

After giving it some thought, I cannot pinpoint *why* I'm so interverted. Part of it seems to be that I feel different from the majority, but I don't think that's it. Does anyone else have any ideas as to *why* a person would be introverted?

[Andrew Michaels]

I just read that Atlantic article, and it was very good.

I'm glad it shows introverts as just people who like to be by themselves, or just with others on a limited basis, skipping the normal label of antisocial bastards who are are orally awkward.

[helgi]

Originally Posted by Andrew Michaels

Could you expand a bit on how you change your mindset?

I guess the key to the practical application is to let go of other people's reactions, because the impulse to react I think is largely based on wanting to avoid making others feel rejected and avoiding rejection yourself. It's this big hassle of constantly having to manage personal relationships and other people's expectations, of being locked into the constantly fluctuating polarity of acceptance and rejection. And it's painful because the ego relies so heavily on other people's validation.
So, the change in my mindset is to relate to people on a level that is deeper/higher than the ego, which requires that I let go of whatever the result of this approach may be. Maybe people will feel rejected and offended etc., but the bottom line is that I don't want to play on the level of ego anymore, and so need to let go of it completely.

Steve recently wrote an article that relates to this called Soulful Relationships, and come to think of it I'm sure it must've had something to do with all of this clicking together in my head.

Originally Posted by Mnemosyne

Do you think this applies to people during every/any stage of development? In other words, would a very young child interacting another very young child involve ego activation?

I think that in general it must be the same thing in some way, although only as complicated as the level of ego development. It's probably just a sensitivity to external stimulus that only becomes a problem because of an extraordinarily noisy and demanding environment; being born introverted into western society is almost like being born a penguin in a rainforest. And then this feeling of not being at home in mainstream society blends into the universal human dilemma of form identification, and introverts develop particular issues that have to do with ego and external stimulus.

[Lychee]

Hm, interesting perspective on the ego-identification of extraverts.

Playing the role that was "expected" in certain social situations really exhausts me and I sought out to lessen my exposure to such interaction with people but instead seek out interaction which moves the heart and soul. Unfortunately it seems like most people get caught up in the persona we present to other people and this level of...pretense? is what bothers me. Maybe it isn't even pretense, but normal social interaction does not satisfy me completely.

It's this big hassle of constantly having to manage personal relationships and other people's expectations, of being locked into the constantly fluctuating polarity of acceptance and rejection. And it's painful because the ego relies so heavily on other people's validation.

So, the change in my mindset is to relate to people on a level that is deeper/higher than the ego, which requires that I let go of whatever the result of this approach may be. Maybe people will feel rejected and offended etc., but the bottom line is that I don't want to play on the level of ego anymore, and so need to let go of it completely.

I agree. People expect you to do things and act a certain way.

I've been trying to relate to people on a level higher than the ego (which is what satisfies me most anyway - getting to the person's soul) but how do you go about doing so? I try to engage in conversation which is most comfortable to the other person to establish common ground with them, while trying to gently ask them contemplative questions that would open them up to me about deeper issues in their life so we can form a more intimate bond.

So helgi, you've decided to released your attachment and expectations of other people and situations. You're going to act how you want to act and not worry about acceptance or rejection. Do you sometimes worry that people operating at different level may betray your trust? In a way, aren't you trusting them by being so open and unattached?

[Andrew Michaels]

Originally Posted by Lychee

I've been trying to relate to people on a level higher than the ego (which is what satisfies me most anyway - getting to the person's soul) but how do you go about doing so? I try to engage in conversation which is most comfortable to the other person to establish common ground with them, while trying to gently ask them contemplative questions that would open them up to me about deeper issues in their life so we can form a more intimate bond.

I've tried something like this myself, and found that it just doesn't work. I've never successfully expanded a conversation beyond the banal to anything of meaning with any new acquaintance. My only positive experiences are with people I've known for years.

When you start asking questions which really probe deep, I find people recoil. Not in the sense that they find your questions inappropriate, but almost like they would never put themselves in a position to question themselves that deeply, and so just can't really deal with it.

Originally Posted by Lychee

So helgi, you've decided to released your attachment and expectations of other people and situations. You're going to act how you want to act and not worry about acceptance or rejection. Do you sometimes worry that people operating at different level may betray your trust? In a way, aren't you trusting them by being so open and unattached?

That's my issue too. A complete surrender of the ego would bring about a state of such uncaring, but I'm not there yet. I am worried about what people think, not because I worry over lost opinion, but simply because people have a hold over your life and where it can go. We are forever trapped, playing our roles, exhausting as they may be.

Oh...The introverts dilemma...

[Lychee]

I've tried something like this myself, and found that it just doesn't work. I've never successfully expanded a conversation beyond the banal to anything of meaning with any new acquaintance. My only positive experiences are with people I've known for years.

I wish it didn't have to be that way. There is so much we can learn from each other but I can't help but feel people in general have become less trusting and too competitive, not cooperative.

I've also tried without success to move conversation topics towards something more meaningful with people but nothing seems to work. I think that asking people these questions overwhelms them. Perhaps they've never asked these kinds of questions to themselves before.

When you start asking questions which really probe deep, I find people recoil. Not in the sense that they find your questions inappropriate, but almost like they would never put themselves in a position to question themselves that deeply, and so just can't really deal with it.

I agree. I think because introverts spend so much time alone that we can't help but ask ourselves these questions so we are more comfortable with them than others. It's a relief to get away from the world where everything can become a distraction, pulling your mind in a million different directions leaving little or no time for anyone with their inner world.

I greatly enjoy answering and listening to these questions. How can it ever be a bore? Learning about someone's life, emotions, thoughts, etc. is fascinating and helps you to better understand yourself and others.

That's my issue too. A complete surrender of the ego would bring about a state of such uncaring, but I'm not there yet. I am worried about what people think, not because I worry over lost opinion, but simply because people have a hold over your life and where it can go. We are forever trapped, playing our roles, exhausting as they may be.

I guess in a way people do have a hold of your life, even at this stage where you still care what they think since we are bound by their opinions.

Do you think if even when/if we reach this level of uncaring or unconcern for other peoples' opinions that we'll somehow be safeguarded by their own beliefs? When I say safeguarded, I mean those individuals who may be dishonest towards you, or who may hurt you.

Maybe we are trapped playing our roles, but it's better that we are cognizant of our decision to play these roles rather than to be completely oblivious to what lies beyond these formalities.

[helgi]

The thing is, I've experienced how approaching people on this level can change everything. It's amazing, and really what's more likely to occur than rejection and offense is that people become more calm and peaceful.

And it's not really so much about trying to get people to open themselves up or steering a conversation to something more quiet -- the change takes place at a level previous to any words or actions, more at the level of cause than effect. When you let go of the reactive patterns and are at peace with the possibility that maybe you simply won't say anything in response to someone, your response will automatically be the best one for that situation. It then comes from somewhere deeper than the thinking mind, and the words themselves are less important than the state of being which they come out of. You're then approaching someone that wants you to play along in the reactive game, but you decline the offer and invite him or her to join you at a more peaceful level instead, all without necessarily saying or doing anything in particular.

In practical terms, as I experience this myself, it is a question of trusting that whatever comes out of that deeper level is going to be the best possible response in any situation. The world will continue to bombard you with demands for reaction, but when you've let go of that level entirely it's almost as if all of it goes through you. And in this way no one is ever able to drag you down to the level of form, which can only happen if you react.
It then no longer feels like you've been pulled out of yourself in all directions, and interacting with other people is then no less peaceful than being alone.

I remember seeing this in interviews with the Dalai Lama, how he seems distant sometimes, almost like he's not listening to the person talking to him, but then out comes a response that you can tell didn't arise on the level of effort and reaction.

[peter]

Originally Posted by helgi

After having dealt with this issue for years and gone through a sort of trial and error process with it, I think that the differences between introversion and extroversion have mostly to do with the nature of the person's ego identification, and the level of tolerance for playing it out. As in my case, I start to feel uneasy and drained of energy very quickly when I start playing out ego patterns, when I've inflated my sense of self in some way or when I interact with other people on the level of ego.
...
Thoughts?

According to Socionics, each of us has a certain psychological type. Trying to act as another type can be from mildly irritating to damn right frustrating.

Acting in alignment with your type is a very satisfying experience and from a psychological point of view is what is indicated.

The whole introvert/extrovert thing is seriously misunderstood. To people wanting to know more about this I recommend at least the description found on this page.

Steve wrote about going from an introvert to an extrovert BUT I don't believe he had such a transformation. He might have become more outgoing, more sociable BUT that does not equal extrovert, not by a long shot.

[Michael Chui]

Originally Posted by Andrew Michaels

I am worried about what people think, not because I worry over lost opinion, but simply because people have a hold over your life and where it can go. We are forever trapped, playing our roles, exhausting as they may be.

I read this over the summer: Carl Jung's Diagnosis, Bill Jensen's Treatment

Originally Posted by Lychee

Do you sometimes worry that people operating at different level may betray your trust? In a way, aren't you trusting them by being so open and unattached?

Trusting them with what, really? It is one thing to know something, and another to care about it. I know, for instance, that global warming is occurring. But I do not care, because I do not believe it is a crisis.

I am a strong introvert myself, and simply being in the same room with a lot of people can drain me pretty quickly. When I hold a conversation in person, it is difficult to talk at my peak intellectual level, because it takes me a moment of reprocessing to understand them. (It's far easier with textual conversations, because I can re-read ad nauseum.)

But I have gained respect nearly everywhere I have gone, by being me, by doing what I believe is right. I refrain from making enemies; I work to cause good things to happen. I have two rules in life: don't be afraid, and don't be stupid. I know that I deserve what respect I have, and don't deserve what I do not have. But I do not care about this respect. It is useful, because people are more inclined to listen to those they respect, and it is easier to accomplish things when people listen to you, but I can and do live without it.

I don't need to trust people. I trust myself. I trust myself to gain the respect I need to do what I want to do, and no more.

[helgi]

Originally Posted by peter

The whole introvert/extrovert thing is seriously misunderstood. To people wanting to know more about this I recommend at least the description found on this page.

That was an interesting comparison -- I admit that I have only just skimmed the surface on the research available on this, and base most of what I'm saying on how I experience it myself. And the reason I'm so excited about what I've been discovering lately is that I can see a way for introverts to overcome the discomfort of social interaction without the need to become more extroverted at all.

The two options available to introverts as I've seen discussed is either to avoid people, or attempting to "become" extroverts. The former is a good way of avoiding suffering and the latter may work to some extent in the short run, but the only true solution as I see it is to go beyond it without needing to resort to avoidance or effort.

[peter]

Originally Posted by helgi

The two options available to introverts as I've seen discussed is either to avoid people, or attempting to "become" extroverts. The former is a good way of avoiding suffering and the latter may work to some extent in the short run, but the only true solution as I see it is to go beyond it without needing to resort to avoidance or effort.

Actually from my experience as an introvert those 2 are not at all options.
The only option I see is to become a better introvert.
Socionics can help a lot by providing insights on how people are and interact.
If you discover your type and push in the direction of your type you will become a more valuable individual because your energy is spent on what other people need you to spend it
Spending your energy in your true call, turns you into a pure gold mine for your dual.

One of the traps I've fallen into as an introvert is not enough exposure... (first option) This is bad, really bad because we are social beings and we need to be among others...

Exposure does not equal extroversion... I too feel unease at parties but that does not mean that I hate them all together... Going once in a while to a party together with a buffer group (someone to provide a safe haven in the midst of all the commotion) is a good thing. Also, joining groups is another good thing.

The key to turning all this dreadful things into something to enjoy is having the buffer, having the protection of an extroverted friend, the protection of someone who feels like a fish in the water at these kind of gatherings.

[Traffic]

Good stuff about the ego, I've been thinking along many of the same lines myself lately and I've dicovered that it's a big part of my social fears. By the tone of your post I'm assuming that you've read at least one of Eckhart Tolle's books, but if you haven't I think you'd benefit from picking one up (try A New Earth).

I've heard the argument so many times that introverts and the socially anxious don't have egos. That couldn't be further from the truth, the perceived 'niceness' is almost always a fabrication of their ego in order to please people and gain positive reactions. Most introverts, including myself, have massive egos and it is their efforts to maintain the ego, or the perception of themselves that forever lead to negative consequences.

[Lychee]

Trusting them with what, really?

I meant trusting them with your emotions, thoughts, and especially if you feel that the relationship with this person has potential and are more free with the information you share. But at times people will turn out to be someone you don't expect in that case you have no one to blame but yourself for your blunder if they ever use that information against you and you end up being hurt by it.

-

Letting go of peoples' reactions. I've been trying to try that on for size today and it's going ok. I feel "lighter" if that makes any sense. I don't feel burdened (at least, not as much as before) by what people perceive my intentions or my actions to mean in response to something they say to me. I just don't care at some level, but a part of me wants to care. Without caring can you ever feel pain? Without pain can you ever truly understand and be appreciative of the good?

So I guess this level of unattachment means also...not caring? I still have this desire to form a connection with people. Are you saying that letting go if this desire to connect with people will paradoxically help me succeed in connecting with people, instead of actively trying to?

I don't need to trust people. I trust myself. I trust myself to gain the respect I need to do what I want to do, and no more.

Turning attention away from people and your reactions to them means turning your attention to yourself. I think this concern with your self is healthy and not a form of conceitedness.

[helgi]

Originally Posted by Lychee

So I guess this level of unattachment means also...not caring? I still have this desire to form a connection with people. Are you saying that letting go if this desire to connect with people will paradoxically help me succeed in connecting with people, instead of actively trying to?

It may appear to others that you don't care, but in fact you can only ever care about and connect to people in any meaningful way when it is on that deeper level. If all your attention is on trying to display an appropriate response to people, whether it is to show that you care or that you accept him or her, you're only connecting with that person on a level of form. When people interact mostly on that level, through heavy and complicated thought forms and labels, it may seem that they are connecting with each other when all they're really doing is putting on a performance between two fictional personalities.

And even if some people may interpret your detachment as offensive, insensitive or whatever, most people will sense that deeper connection and find themselves becoming more peaceful because of it, instead of wanting to engage in conflict. As you keep practicing this, you'll see that not only will you attract quieter responses from people, but you'll start to attract quieter people as well. It is almost an act of inviting people to join you at that higher/deeper level, which they can then either refuse or accept.

So it's important to remember that refusing to engage people on the level of ego is actually an act of kindness, even though it may seem uncaring or dismissive on the surface.


Traffic: Yeah, I've read and listened to Tolle's teaching quite a bit

[Andy]

Originally Posted by Lychee

I meant trusting them with your emotions, thoughts, and especially if you feel that the relationship with this person has potential and are more free with the information you share. But at times people will turn out to be someone you don't expect in that case you have no one to blame but yourself for your blunder if they ever use that information against you and you end up being hurt by it.

When you say hurt, I'd also ask what exactly is being hurt in this case? If it's emotional hurt then it's true that opening up and telling someone something about yourself can allow them to use it in insulting you. However you can realize that you basically control how hurt you are by what someone does. I think a big issue that introverts face is taking things too personally. I previously believed that I should take offense if anyone had a mean/negative intention behind doing something to me, such as someone making a personal attack to try and make me feel bad. Because otherwise, if I let it pass I'd be allowing them to walk all over me.

But after awhile, around the time I was adapting to the subjective reality mindset I realized that it is actually never in your best interest to take anything personally. Why? Because anything that anyone does to you doesn't really have much to do with you at all. They're pretty much expressing some need from within themself and it's actually in your better interest to understand this about people's actions. You can still use their reactions to look at your behaviors objectively and improve them for your own benefit. Basically, distinguish your own behaviors, actions, beliefs from the true you, which is untouchable. Then you can react rationally to situations, use them to improve, and realize that you can't ever really be hurt.

Originally Posted by Lychee

Letting go of peoples' reactions. I've been trying to try that on for size today and it's going ok. I feel "lighter" if that makes any sense. I don't feel burdened (at least, not as much as before) by what people perceive my intentions or my actions to mean in response to something they say to me. I just don't care at some level, but a part of me wants to care. Without caring can you ever feel pain? Without pain can you ever truly understand and be appreciative of the good?

Yes I've always wondered about the whole thing of needing "badness" to provide the necessary contrast to "goodness." It's a sound theory but I've found it to be completely bogus in experience. While pain or something horrible happening can be very useful to provide perspective, you can achieve perspective just fine in other ways.

About people's reactions.. only care about peoples' reactions in regards to the context of the situation. Look at it as feedback, feedback that you can use to improve how you act in the future for whatever result you'd like to have with others. Just make sure not to misuse this feedback by using it to make judgements on yourself or others since that's more or less wasting it.

I think the whole "not caring" about something just means to not care about it in regards to how it could possibly affect you in a bad way. Why? Because at least from my experience as an introvert, we generally way way WAY overexaggerrate the negative consequences of doing something. Know that your ego can't be hurt if you understand it can't be hurt, that right there will take out a lot of the perceived negative consequences. And for the rest, looking at the possible outcomes rationally and realizing that regardless of what you might think, you can handle every single possible outcome. Only thing is, if you attach your ego to anything changeable, then it's hard to believe this. After some time you can develop the perspective of being able to want something with a passion, but at the same time be perfectly fine with not getting it. There is no attachment to outcomes, only a preference.

[Lychee]

There is no attachment to outcomes, only a preference.

And this is where the LOA comes in. I guess if a relationship with someone does go sour for example, you can just let it go because it'll make room for new ones. You haven't really lost anything because things are constantly evol