Zompist Bboard Again

How would a society composed entirely of extroverts look like?

I mean the Big Five extraversion which is composed of several facets
- Gregariousness
- Friendliness
- Assertiveness
- Excitement Seeking
- Activity
- Positive Emotions

Really? You can't find an example in the world?

Vardelm wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 7:32 am Really? You can't find an example in the world?

How? There are no fully extroverted human populations, just equal mixes of introverts and extroverts with most people actually being in the middle.

Otto Kretschmer wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 7:38 am

Vardelm wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 7:32 am Really? You can't find an example in the world?

How? There are no fully extroverted human populations, just equal mixes of introverts and extroverts with most people actually being in the middle.

It's true that most people aren't "fully" extroverted or introverted. But it's not an even split between those we can easily say are extroverts and introverts. The difference is about 75-25 in favor of extroverts. You could easily have a small group that are 100% extroverts. Now as to whether it would stay that way or for how many generations? We don't know. But if there isn't somewhere that naturally had less than 3% or even less than 1% of people as introverts, I'd be surprised.

Otto Kretschmer wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 2:52 am How would a society composed entirely of extroverts look like?

I mean the Big Five extraversion which is composed of several facets
- Gregariousness
- Friendliness
- Assertiveness
- Excitement Seeking
- Activity
- Positive Emotions

I wanna say they'd be like bonobos, but more likely they'd have a chimp-type society.

(bear in mind there may or may not be a difference between "friendliness to all" and "friendliness to friends" by that definition you've provided)

keenir wrote: ↑Tue Nov 09, 2021 11:07 pm

Otto Kretschmer wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 2:52 am How would a society composed entirely of extroverts look like?

I mean the Big Five extraversion which is composed of several facets
- Gregariousness
- Friendliness
- Assertiveness
- Excitement Seeking
- Activity
- Positive Emotions

I wanna say they'd be like bonobos, but more likely they'd have a chimp-type society.

(bear in mind there may or may not be a difference between "friendliness to all" and "friendliness to friends" by that definition you've provided)

Big Five Friendliness/warmth does not have anything to do with friendly vs antagonistic attitude. This is what Agreeableness factor is about, not Extraversion.

Friendliness/Warmth facet is about showing positive feelings to others. If you are low on friendliness, you may have lots of positive feelings towards others but simply not show them.

http://www.testsonthenet.com/Factors-fa ... traversion

It seems (but it's a vague impression, but nothing more) that American society values extroversion more than other cultures.

Vardelm wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 7:32 am Really? You can't find an example in the world?

Ares Land wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 8:06 am It seems (but it's a vague impression, but nothing more) that American society values extroversion more than other cultures.

Bingo!

'extrovert' and 'introvert' are not natural categories but labels on a spectrum, it seems to me: people can be more or less extroverted and so the reference magnitudes would move mapping points in the distribution. to say it numerically, let's say average extroversion now is 2, and very extroverted people are 4: if you had a culture with an average of 7, then they'd call 8s extroverted and 5s introverted, even those their introverts are more extroverted than our 'in the middles'. maybe a better question is what would a society look like if its mean introversion was much higher, provided that introversion-extroversion describes a magnitude of some real quantity. The concept itself of extraversion-introversion is not unlike the myers-briggs: it was first introduced by Jung, who tbh is more like a mystical writer than a psychologist in the scientific sense, so it's not totally clear that this is the case: he was a sort of Jordan Peterson of his age, public intellectual with a background in clinical psychology, many opinions and probably a bunch of billionaires very interested in his work: to this day, his ideas are extremely influential in management, even though they're known to have no scientific backing.