For most of my childhood I quietly thought introverts were a worse kind of person. Probably because I was an introvert. This was not something I said out loud. But just a kind of justification I used to explain why my social life wasn’t always smooth. The introvert was the one who didn't know what to say, who couldn't warm a room, who let silences go cold. I assumed that this was because introverts were less confident, had lower EQ, or just had less experience with people. Extroversion wasn't a preference to me, it was the goal, so I worked at it. Learned to start conversations, hold a room, lift the energy a little when I walked in. Somewhere along the way I think I actually became an E.

But then all of a sudden this thing called MBTI’s started popping up in my feed. “Are you E or I?” Here, E and I aren't more and less of one good thing in that language, they're just two directions, like left and right. Some people are just born different, and have different personalities. I frowned. That was weird. It seemed way too embracive.

I don't actually think every personality is equally good, and I don't think most people believe it either. A caring person is better than a careless one. A thoughtful one is better than a reckless one. That's the whole virtue theory thing, that some traits just help a creature flourish and others don't, and flourishing isn't whatever you decide it is. So then why isn’t introvert and extrovert also like this?

I mean, if you think about it, being able to socialize, to talk with people is such a crucial skill in society. Connections, opportunities, showcasing yourself, they all require you being able to connect with people easily. The friend who can walk into a new room and talk with everyone inside, they just do make more friends, meet more people, get more opportunities. Sure, an introvert can also learn to do that, but it is extremely more harder for them. They go against the grain, paying in energy, willing the reps the E just enjoys. So from the fact that introverts need to learn what extroverts can do naturally, doesn’t that, in some sense, show that extroverts might have a natural advantage?

Sure, introverts have virtuous qualities too. They can enjoy time by themselves. But looking from an objective perspective, this seems way easier than the challenge of socializing. It also seems less important.

Now that I think of it, I think the same story applies for J and P as well.

MBTIs reminds me of Nietzsche. In his genealogy of morals, he describes how reframing things, especially with language, can change the moral value of certain things. The reframing of E and I, "all types valid," feels like a transvaluation, the way a thing's whole moral weight flips just from how you name it.

Maybe the key takeaway here is that life is not fair. There is a lot of moral luck. Some people are born more virtuous than others, closer to flourishing. But people can’t control or choose what personality they are born with, so we shouldn’t judge based on this. Even though some are objectively better in the flourishing sense, we still have to act like they are still all neutral, because it seems unfair to judge someone as better or worse base on something they didn’t choose.