wp:paragraph
The polarization of ideas in our society
From children they taught us how to polarize how much idea we were going through the way. Deporter or intellectual? Warm or cold? Left or right? Of course, in a world composed of societies and constructions necessary for organization and evolution, the creation of such premises and labels is understandable. But in practice, it does not take that there are grays and that in fact most of us identify ourselves more with these media points than with the opposite poles.
By defining whether a person is sociable or not, he usually resorts to the “extroverted” terms to define who enjoys the company of other people and finds their comfort in that, and introverted to those who prefer to enjoy their own company and perhaps it costs him more to expose himself to certain situations of socialization.
However, the truth is that this classification is, although correct, not comprehensive. This is because, although there are people who can be easily included and determination within some of the two options, some, like me, costs us a little more.
Psychoanalysis focused on solving this problem by introducing a new term: ambiverted. But before we deepen this concept, in this field, the most historically used classification between extroverted and introverted is that of Myers-Briggs, which even has a test that takes about fifteen minutes to solve, which tells you in which of the two categories fits its personality. According to the Myers - Briggs theory, the introverts get their energy from their inner world, while the extroverts receive from their outer world. Nowadays in every way, for other specialists, one must leave aside the concept of energy, and be based more on that sociable is or not a person.
However, for psychoanalysis it was always clear the tactical impossibility of defining people completely as extroverted or completely as introverted. According to Carl Jung, no one is purely introverted or extroverted, and if anyone were, it would be closed in a manioc. Thus, the concept of ambiverted arises, which does not merely respond to those who have much of one category, but also a little of the other, but to those who really are in the midst of both.
The first to make use of this term was American psychologist Edmund S. Conklin, who considers this type of personalities the healthiest, for their ability to adapt and flexibility. Although I must say that I allow myself to differ with Conklin in this since, although I consider myself ambiverted person, I would not be sure to consider myself the healthiest - anxiety entering the chat. Well, besides the jokes or the subjective appreciations we can do about this kind of personality, the truth is that there is and more than one identifies with this gray.
The ambiverted, with his good and bad things, is that person who cannot strangle, like many, in any of the opposite poles. Why this is that the characteristics of your personality are so varied that they cannot be defined as extroverted or introverted. For example, an ambivert can have ease and affinity towards others, (and thus obtain energy from your external world), but perhaps there is a point where this interaction drains the energy and needs to recover it while being alone (i.e. obtaining its energy from the inner world).
Anyway, in a world full of nuances like this, it's no surprise to conclude that maybe we're not as slack or labels as they taught us we are. And the best thing is that this is extremely positive.
If you are interested to know better and thus improve your relationship with yourself or yourself, you can take the Myers - Briggs test, and guide your response further.
Comments