E vs. I - Not About Socializing

[Ivy]

Yep, me too. But then, by that definition I think like 98 percent of people would be E. Almost everybody needs external stimulation of some kind.

I don't think so. It's true that most everybody needs external stimulation, but most everybody needs to reflect somewhat, too. We're just normally oriented towards one or the other as a preference.

 

[OrangeAppled]

yeah yeah i know what ya mean...i'm not saying i am introverted or even that i necessarily seem introverted just saying that some may describe me as quiet or soft spoken...which you don't usually associate with extraverts....just wondered how many other extraverts are that way, ya know?

I'm on the same page as you actually.
I notice many ENFXs I know in person (who aren't into MBTI) will claim introversion and even say they are shy because they are not the stereotypical loud, social butterfly extrovert. From my perspective though, they seem outgoing.

 

[Tallulah]

I need external stimulation sometimes to give me fresh input for the constant stream of reflection. Otherwise, it kind of cannibalizes itself. I also tend to get external energy from really loud music (of my choosing), a movie, shopping, observing others, etc. Socializing can energize me briefly, but there's a big crash later. Loud music that is imposed upon me or that is a style I don't like, big crowds (even if I don't have to interact with them), constant activity around me, all sap my energy immediately. When I lived in NYC, I never had any energy at all.

 

[Jaguar]

See if these resonate with anyone:

"behaviour directed externally, to influence outside factors and events" (E)
"behaviour directed inwardly to understand and manage self and experience" (I)


"preference for the outer world and one's own action and effect on it." (E)
"preference for inner self and ideas to understand and protect or nurture it." (I)

 

[Nonsensical]

Why didn't I think of that.
Sure.

If it's in the MBTI books, then it simply must be true.
Question nothing.
You are not allowed to have independent thought.
You must think only the thoughts of those who have gone before you.

But didn't they help define in it terms of MBTI? I could be wayyy off on that one, though.

And whether or not somebody is social doesn't have any effect on whether someone is an I or E. You'd think people would pick that one up after a while.

Really? You'd like to argue that the definition they give is wrong? I see what point you're trying to bring up, but if anybody goes by the book, it isn't me. I was simply stating that nearly every book I've read, and a lot of what I have read online as far as definitions and fundamentals goes, that extroversion/introversion are how you draw energy.

And that's EXACTLY what I'm saying..or other people are, because I guess I'm just "think only the thoughts of those who have gone before me".

But certainly, I'm not stopping you from being a rebel. You go man! F the books, you make up your own stuff!

 

[Jaguar]

And whether or not somebody is social doesn't have any effect on whether someone is an I or E. You'd think people would pick that one up after a while.

I agree.

Really? You'd like to argue that the definition they give is wrong? I see what point you're trying to bring up, but if anybody goes by the book, it isn't me. I was simply stating that nearly every book I've read, and a lot of what I have read online as far as definitions and fundamentals goes, that extroversion/introversion are how you draw energy.

I think different people respond to different types of wording.
That's when someone says: "ah-ha!"
IMO, the larger the number of perspectives someone can gain on any matter,
the better the outcome.

You'd be surprised how something simple such as E/I, can present a problem.
People need to make up their own minds, rather than having some arbitrary result,
shoved up their proverbial ass.

But certainly, I'm not stopping you from being a rebel. You go man! F the books, you make up your own stuff!

That's me, rebel with a cause.

 

[Wonkavision]

........
But certainly, I'm not stopping you from being a rebel. You go man! F the books, you make up your own stuff!

Yeah, I mean, people have the RIGHT to use words however they want.

But in order for people to actually discuss something, they have to speak the same language.

When discussing MBTI, I think it would be helpful to use MBTI terms as you find them in the original MBTI literature, rather than all these obscure personal definitions that no one can seem to agree on.

Agreeing on standard definitions does not limit discussion, it makes discussion possible.

 

[Nonsensical]

I agree.

I think different people respond to different types of wording.
That's when someone says: "ah-ha!"
IMO, the larger the number of perspectives someone can gain on any matter,
the better the outcome.

You'd be surprised how something simple such as E/I, can present a problem.
People need to make up their own minds, rather than having some arbitrary result,
shoved up their proverbial ass.


That's me, rebel with a cause.

Agreed.

 

[Darkéy]

Agreeing on standard definitions does not limit discussion, it makes discussion possible.

Once there are some standard definitions or at least some that everyone agrees on, we can actually discuss the topic at hand and not just the framework of the topic at hand!

Then again I personally find peoples' opinion on the framework interesting in itself but hey... it doesn't take much to distract a magpie eh

X.

 

[Virtual ghost]

The reason why I said that we have a problem with introverted sensor group is because they are socially withdrawn and reserved. However they are quite focused on the outside world because of their sensing.


The problem with this definition is that someone who lives all his/her life alone in the wildness and survives by hunting animals, gathering eatabe plants and it is quite happy as a person is technically an extrovert. What simply don't make too much sense.

 

[Wonkavision]

This is a great post -- I, too, get sick of the social/anti-social dichotomy. But I've always been uncomfortable with the "get their energy" yardstick because I'm not sure what that means because I can get energized or excited or enthused or whatever word you want to use just as much by things that happen in the outside world as I can by what's going on in my brain. I've always liked the illustration used by Paul & Barbara Tieger (I think they might have got it from Isabel Myers) about the General and the Aide. The General is your primary function and the Aide is your auxilliary function. In introverts, the General plans his battles from inside the tent while the Aide deals with visitors outside the tent. In extroverts, the General is outside the tent working where everyone can see him and the Aide is inside. What this attempts to illustrate is that with extroverts, it's pretty easy to find out what's important to them but with introverts, you may have to get past the Aide and inside the tent to find out what's really going on.

Yeah, I wonder if interaction with the outer world is draining for Introverts because they primarily use their "weaker" secondary function, rather than their "stronger" dominant function, to deal with the outer world.

I vaguely remember reading something to that extent somewhere. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[Wonkavision]

Yeah, I mean, people have the RIGHT to use words however they want.

But in order for people to actually discuss something, they have to speak the same language.

When discussing MBTI, I think it would be helpful to use MBTI terms as you find them in the original MBTI literature, rather than all these obscure personal definitions that no one can seem to agree on.

Agreeing on standard definitions does not limit discussion, it makes discussion possible.

Actually---I think BallentineChen said it well:

The goal is thoughtful, stimulating conversation without the impediment of having to put up with having to clarify basic concepts.

 

[Cybin]

E/I just represents which world is viewed at a higher value, the internal or external.

Introverts pass everything through their internal filter and everything that goes is in subject to self perception. Extrovert's, on the other hand, inner world is subject to the objective world. Introverts are more likely to feel that their mind is less dynamic and more reliable than the outer world, and vice versa with extroverts.

I've heard, and tend to agree with, the assessment that introverts are more likely to change their surroundings and extroverts are more likely to change their inner life if the situation so calls for it.

'Needing external stimulus' is correct but overly simplified as pointed out by the ISxxs in this thread. ISxx thrive on the external in so much as it feeds their inner world. It is still very much secondary to their own perspective.