It is More Preferable to be an Extrovert Than an Introvert in Modern Western Society
First Round is For Acceptance.
Introvert - "the state of or tendency toward being wholly or predominantly concerned with and interested in one's own mental life
Extrovert - "the act, state, or habit of being predominantly concerned with and obtaining gratification from what is outside the self
Preferable - Generally more advantageous in terms of several individual and societal factors.
1. No trolling
2. 10,000 character limit
3. First round is for acceptance
Thank you for accepting this debate. I hope it will be intellectually stimulating and a learning experience for the both of us.
“Extraversion tends to be manifested in outgoing, talkative, energetic behavior, whereas introversion is manifested in more reserved and solitary behavior.”
Society is a concept which human beings, through their very social nature, put into a reality. Society is where humans come together through their goal of achieving a life where they can pursue their grandest desires, and live in a world where their suffering is as minimal as possible. However before this can be achieved the key part is that in order to achieve such a society we must first achieve what society in definition entails, which would be a coming together as individuals in order to achieve something greater than what the individual can do alone. Social interaction is therefore necessary to put this into effect. Now social interaction is not something outside the introverted mindset. Introversion simply means that one is a more inward, and self-focused person. Society though is a very outward and “people-focused” plane of living. In Western society, it is a near necessity to be able to interact with others. In a society where people must interact to achieve powerful societal roles, it is only logical to believe that extroverts have the upper hand here. This is especially true since in a large society you must have a very outward and attentive stance on what is going on around you, which is contradicting with the inward, self-focused personality of introverts.
One scientific study showed that introverts react more sensitively to external stimuli whereas extroverts are generally underwhelmed by external stimuli and require a more stimulating environment. One experiment showed that introverts are at a disadvantage in a work place where there is a lot of background noise and many things around trying to grab attention whereas extroverts were perfectly fine in such an environment. In contrast, another experiment showed that extroverts were widely under stimulated when placed in a white room whereas introverts felt at ease in such a space. 
Does society mimic a noisy workplace constantly trying to grab your attention, or does it mimic a white room full of silence?
Modern Society Has A Bias Towards Extroverts
“The core element of extraversion is a tendency to behave in ways that attract, hold, and enjoy social attention, and not reward sensitivity.”
Susan Cain argues that modern society undervalues introverts and has a cultural bias towards extroverts. An example of this bias is in the education system, which tends to have bias towards extroverts even if not on purpose.
“In a way education by its nature favours the extrovert because you are taking kids and putting them into a big classroom, which is automatically going to be a high-stimulation environment.”
She takes it further when comparing the nature of modern society to that of the nature of introverts and extroverts.
“ Western society is based on Greco-Roman ideals of the person that can speak well, a rhetorical ideal. We have always been to some extent a society that favours action over contemplation. But this really reached a pitch when we moved from an agricultural society into the world of big business. And that's when it really became the case that to stand out and succeed in a company, with people that you had never met before, the quality of being very magnetic, very charismatic in a job interview suddenly became very important.”
Western Society is a very fast paced and highly social atmosphere that kids are put into from a very young age by the education system. Just by the nature of modern society, extroverts seem to thrive in this kind of atmosphere. This would be due to how extroverts are actually energized by a fast paced social environment. Introverts on the other hand, are actually at a disadvantage in this sense because such an atmosphere is tiring, and forces them to “reenergize” via alone time.
In addition to all of this, you have to remember that it never ends if you want to go along the route of societal power. This is especially true in a society that has such high focus on the big business industry which requires businessmen to have huge social interaction with others, businessmen to constantly find new exciting ideas in order to draw people, and even for the potential workers who must make themselves appealing to their interviewers.
In accordance with the social attention theory, humans who are extroverted are more likely to hold the attention of others than introverts. In addition, this attention promotes further extroversion therefore promoting further attention ect. ect.  Extroversion is an unending cycle of advantage in a society that constantly demands new, exciting, charismatic, outgoing, highly social behavior from others in order to be very successful.
The “Ideal Self”
“Our culture values and rewards the qualities of extroverts. America was built on rugged individualism and the importance of citizens speaking their minds. We value action, speed, competition, and drive.”
Although subjective, many people see the ideal person as an outgoing, happy, charismatic person who is comfortable in the spotlight. In Modern Western Society, the ideal person seems to be the one who takes risks, takes things quickly, is competitive with others yet knows how to work together with others to achieve something greater than what they can do alone. Although both introverts and extroverts can fulfill at least some of these things, extroverts are psychologically built for these qualities.
“The archetypal extrovert prefers action to contemplation, risk-taking to heed-taking, certainty to doubt. He or she favours quick decisions, even at the risk of being wrong, works well in teams and socialises in groups.”
The Introvert’s own needs are neglected in a society where the extroverts are the talkers and the introverts are the listeners. Everyone assumes that the way to live is how I had just described when in reality there are people whose personality dictates that they live a different lifestyle than the dominant extroverts, who outnumber introverts about three to one. 
Extroverts outnumbering Introverts tends to mean that extroverts social “roll over” introverts. This seems to have been the cause for why little attention is given to the introvert lifestyle and a lot more is given to that fact that people think everyone should live under the “extrovert ideal.”
The Power Roles of Society
Politics, teaching, and social media which are basically the “power roles” in society are all careers which are directly suitable for the extroverted mindset. Politicians require constant interaction with those around him and especially the outside world. Campaigning is drastically in favor of extroverts seeing that it puts the politicians directly in the spotlight, while requiring them to not only socially interact with a huge number of people, but to also be charismatic in doing so. Teaching is a position that is great for extroverts since it requires the teacher to be able to connect and interact with the students, focus attention on each individual student, keep every student on as equal a level as possible, and even help them with personal problems when it calls for it. Social media although it doesn’t necessarily require social interaction, it does require a very keen eye on the outside world, and require that the outside world to be given much attention. Even business people require a keen view on the outside world and that requires social interaction also.
All of these roles are some of the most important careers that society has to offer and they are all appropriately suited for the extroverted mindset. I do not deny whatsoever that there have been introverted people that have been successful in fulfilling these roles. I simply argue that these roles are best suited for the extrovert.
Society has ignored introverts and their lifestyle and has given extroverts distinct advantages. These advantages include the being well fit for the power roles of society, fitting into the biased image of the ideal person, and being given more attention throughout life due to their outgoing nature.
Thank you for reading. I await your response.
Thompson, Edmund R. (2008). "Development and Validation of an International English Big-Five Mini-Markers". Personality and Individual Differences 45 (6): 542–8.
Ashton, Michael C.; Lee, Kibeom; Paunonen, Sampo V. (2002). "What is the central feature of extraversion? Social attention versus reward sensitivity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 (3): 245–52.
 Helgoe, Laurie (2008). "Introvert Power: Why Your Inner Life is Your Hidden Strength". Naperville, Illinois: Sourcebooks, Inc.
Sorry for any errors. The end of this was a little rushed.
There are a couple things I want to get out of the way before I begin, not because my opponent committed these errors, but because introversion and extroversion are often misunderstood. One of the most common myths is that shy people are introverts. Any extrovert can be shy and often are. The kid who sits in the back of class with his shoulders hunched and never speaks up, could easily be an extrovert. Introverts are not anti-social, isolated or awkward individuals and extroverts are not well spoken, likeable, natural leaders. Those attributes could apply to either extroverts or introverts.
Introversion in other countries
We cannot realistically have a debate about introversion vs. extroversion in society and only look at a few choice parts of society. The United States is one of the highest extrovert nations in the world so I'm sure it suites pro fine to focus mainly on western countries. However, the balance of extroverts to introverts is not so heavily tipped in other nations and since we are speaking of society as a whole, that is very important. For example, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Japan, Latvia, Sweden, Switzerland are 11 introverted nations according to one article. 
Extroversion is much more the standard in western countries than in Eastern ones. In the west, extroversion is praised. However, in Asia silence is esteemed. "Chinese high school students prefer friends who are humble, altruistic and honest, Cain writes of one study, while American high school students seek out the cheerful, enthusiastic and sociable." 
I need not only mention introverted countries but also introvert friendly countries. It is easier to be an introvert in some countries over others even if those countries are extroverted. Pro's focus has been too narrow centered so that he frequently generalizes.
Social factors and rolesExtroverts are generally more social than introverts but introverts still have the upper hand on a few social factors. First, while extroverts like to talk, this does not mean they are good communicators. Introverts have the advantage of being able to process information more deeply and more per second. This allows them to judge social situations and give reasoned responses. In societies where talkers are the majority, introverts make very good listeners and make valuable points, when they do talk, due to their ability to think deeply and general higher level of knowledge. It is not as if extroverts value only other extroverts. Introverts make the perfect companion sometimes because they complement each other. Many times a relationship involves one member dominating the talking while the other listens most of the time.
Introverts can fill in roles usually thought to extrovert dominated. Television hosts for example. "Johnny Carson, former Tonight Show, host Jane Clayson, host of CBS Morning Show, Matt Lauer, co-host on the Today Show and David Letterman, host of the David Letterman Show". My opponents own source shows that Johnny Depp is an introvert and Abraham Lincoln was as well. This is not entirely important. I just wanted to note that, while extroverts are better fitted for some positions, some of the most famous people in those positions are introverts. Introverts can succeed in those areas. It does not take an extrovert to do well in them.
In terms of achieving higher positions in society, introverts are actually often the more successful. Introverts tend to be smarter, more thoughtful and more practical. The role of a leader tends to be dominated more by extroverts, but that role is hardly the only kind in society. Extroverts and introverts lead in different ways. Extroverts are good at motivating and leading but introverts are good at listening to the group and getting their opinions. Introverts think before talking, exhibit calm and value depth. Written or typed communication is especially suited to them.
The ideal self
Extroverts and introverts both have different ideals. In an at least western society dominated by extroverts, both in number and social voice, it is no surprise that the ideal self set forth by this society is an that of an extroverted person. In other countries, as I have noted, introversion is valued more highly. This is highly problematic, however. The ideal self varies from individual to individual. The risk-taking, competitive, fast-paced individual that pro mentioned probably wouldn't appeal to introverts. Preferences differ from one person to the next. For example, a happy, good-natured, well-spoken person who is comfortable in the spotlight could be an introvert and that is not very different to the ideal self pro set forward.
Moreover, introverts do not care as much about how others think of them, so if they don't fit in with society's standards, it makes no matter. In fact many people who are different enjoy being different. Remember, introverts seek contentment from within. Extroverts need social approval. It is enough for an introvert to approve of himself by his own standards. This has advantages as they are not pressured as much to conform to society's standards whereas extroverts need always be worried that they are in the norm.
The needs of the introvert are actually quite basic and less complicated than extroverts, making it easier for them to gain contentment. They only need a few friends and not a high amount of social activity. Humans spend much of their time alone whether they want social interaction or not. Introverts are good at finding ways to content themselves in such situations. It is hard to avoid times of social isolation, whereas it is not hard to avoid social situations usually. A shy introvert is more comfortable than a shy extrovert because introverts are already comfortable with their own thoughts.
I highly doubt many introverts share the ideal pro asserts. In extroverted societies, it's no surprise that the ideals shared most by extroverts would be more standard. Even if it is the most common ideal, introverts are the minority and try to conform to different ideals. Perhaps ideals that are acceptable to extroverts yet are still introverted.
If anyone actually believes that everyone should live under the extrovert ideal, as pro states, than these people are quite simply ignorant and probably unintelligent. It is highly unreasonable to make one single ideal that everyone should conform to and also unreasonable to push change on others whose personality is the way it is and can't change to such large degrees.
The only way this could be relevant is if this significantly hinders introvert's wants. Are politics and media, positions which introverts really want and can't get? Perhaps some of time but that is the case for most people. The main point is that power roles are not significantly sought after by introverts because those roles are tedious to them and not best suited to their own preferences. It does not set them at any preferential disadvantage because it's more of an extrovert want, not an introvert.
Introverts are highly valuable to a society and thus can always find a place. Introvert's skill sets are different than extroverts and they are often more comfortable under certain environments that extroverts are not. For example, introverts make good market research analysts, computer programmers, accountants, or a paralegal career. Also 40% of executives describe themselves as introverts.
Thank you for your response.
My opponent makes many fatal errors in his response. For example, my opponent seems to come out of nowhere talking about countries outside western society and how those countries prefer the introverted mindset over the extroverted mindset. This is entirely irrelevant to the debate. As stated in my round two opening argument, “Western society is based on Greco-Roman ideals of the person that can speak well, a rhetorical ideal. We have always been to some extent a society that favours action over contemplation. But this really reached a pitch when we moved from an agricultural society into the world of big business. And that's when it really became the case that to stand out and succeed in a company, with people that you had never met before, the quality of being very magnetic, very charismatic in a job interview suddenly became very important.”
In addition to this, my opponent concedes many of my main points such as:
“Extroversion is much more the standard in western countries than in Eastern ones.”
“In the west, extroversion is praised”
“The role of a leader tends to be dominated more by extroverts”
“In an at least western society dominated by extroverts, both in number and social voice, it is no surprise that the ideal self set forth by this society is an that of an extroverted person”
“introverts are the minority and try to conform to different ideals”
Every one of these things directly and absolutely works against what Con is trying to debate. I will address these later.
Please note that my opponent completely concedes the argument that modern western society has a bias towards extroverts, which is perhaps one of the largest arguments of this debate.
Introversion in Other Countries
As mentioned in my introduction, this entire argument has very little to do with the topic at hand. This isn’t about any country outside of western society.
In fact, I have to argue very little here because your own argument worked against you.
Here you mention that extroversion is praised in western society and extroversion is standard in western countries as opposed to eastern countries.
I am sure you know of your mistake and I don’t believe I need to argue any further. To put it simply, you contradict your own stance and your argument is entirely irrelevant to this debate.
Socialization Among Extroverts and Introverts
My opponent differentiates socialization among extroversion and introversion. He then speaks of advantages in being an introvert and also in being an extrovert. It is undeniable that both personality traits have their own advantages and that they even complement each other. Though the true question here is whether it not the extrovert tends to have the upper hand in society in terms of socialization. Considering that extroverts make up a strong majority of society, it is fair to say that socialization tends to cater more to the extroverted personality than that of an introvert. The problem here is that extroverts tend to steam roll over introverts in social situations. Many introverts find extroverts overbearing in fact, and this can easily negatively affect how they feel in a given social situation. The reason this is all so important is because western societies are widely extroverted. Being widely extroverted inherently means socialization is a given, and with that socialization is therefore an important aspect in western societies. Even worse, introverts tend to feel as if they must conform to extroversion. As Susan Cain puts it, “Introverts living under the Extroversion Ideal are like women in a man’s world, discounted because of a trait that goes to the core of who they are. Extroversion is an enormously appealing personality style, but we’ve turned it into an oppressive standard to which most of us feel we must conform.” 
This directly affects the happiness of introverts. Research concludes that some of the keys to happiness lie within self acceptance and a high self-esteem. 
Societal Roles and Positions
My opponent weakly argues that since introverts can fill extroverted roles in society, the argument is implied to be irrelevant. In the same you could say extroverts can fill introverted roles in society. The point isn’t what they can do, the point is what they’re better suited to do due to their personality type.
The entire point is that a majority of some of the most powerful, high-paying jobs in western society are simply better suited for the extroverted mindset.
It has gone uncontested that political roles (which are huge in western society, considering that these societies tend to be very large, active and social), high power business roles (from the manager to the CEO), and social media (anywhere from actors to news forecasters) make up a huge part of western society. All of these societal roles are largely extroverted.
My opponent then argues that all of this would only be significant if it hindered the wants and needs of the introvert. My opponent says it himself, “The main point is that power roles are not significantly sought after by introverts because those roles are tedious to them and not best suited to their own preferences. It does not set them at any preferential disadvantage because it's more of an extrovert want, not an introvert.”
The thing is, introverts lack the opportunity to pursue the power roles of society. If the power roles of society catered to the introverted mindset you would surely be saying that introverts are at an advantage. Fact is western society forces individuals to conform to the extroverted standard or be “cast out.”
Since much of western society conforms to the extroverts wants, they have more of an opportunity to pursue their goals. This is because an extroverted society produces extroverted desires.
The wants and needs of the introvert are to be able to pursue their own desires, which are largely looked over and given little attention in an extroverted society.
The Ideal Self
My opponent goes off track many times talking about eastern society and “introverted” ideals.
The introverted ideal is near nonexistent in extroverted societies. This is very bad seeing that this means introverts are largely looked over by extroverts because they do not conform to the wants of extroverts.
It doesn’t matter whether the extroverted ideal it appeals to introverts or not. Since extroverts make up the majority they get to decide what the ideal is. Extroverts have a general idea of what their ideal is, and it generally has many extroverted characteristics within it. This means that introverts either must conform to the extroverted ideal, betraying their true selves, or be themselves, and be rejected by society. Extroverts don’t have to deal with this and can truly blossom in a society that wholeheartedly supports them.
If society did conform to the introverted ideal then introverts would surely be much happier, but they are denied that since society conforms to the extroverted ideal which in turn makes extroverts happier.
Social activity is everywhere. School is a social place, work is generally in a social atmosphere, and then after all that many people go home to their family which is a social unit itself.
It’s not that everyone should live under the extroverted ideal, its simply that western society puts much emphasis upon the extroverted ideal and largely ignores the introverted ideal, putting introverts at a societal disadvantage.
My opponent drops my argument that modern society has a bias towards extroverts. In addition, he goes off track from the debate multiple times and contradicts his own stance multiple times. He has given no reason to believe that extroversion is not more ideal in western society.
What I am arguing
I would like to clarify this before the debate continues. As pro has the burden of proof, all I need to do is make sure the resolution is not proven, not that it's reverse is true. My job is to show that we do not have adequate reason to believe extroversion is preferable to introversion in western society, not that introversion is preferable. I will argue that introversion is preferable in a number of ways, and perhaps I will succeed in proving it is more preferable overall. At the very least, however, all I need to do is show that pro has not given us reason enough to believe that it is overall more preferable to be an extrovert in Western society.
Pro entirely ignores the important parts of this argument, assuming that I was only talking about Eastern societies, when in fact, only one of the eleven countries I mentioned was Eastern.
In regards to my argument about Eastern societies favoring introverts, I will obviously drop that as I had misread the resolution. However, not all the countries I mentioned were eastern and pro never responded to those. Pro's arguments are mostly applicable to America and a few other countries, but these are just the most extroverted countries. He has actually left a lot unproven by ignoring the rest of the Western world.
Last round I mentioned a number of European countries that are introverted. The countries were Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Sweden, Switzerland. These are ten of the most introverted countries and all are Western. If pro's case seems convincing to you, the readers, consider that his scope has been heavily narrowed. If it is indeed true that it is preferable to be extroverted in an extroverted society, then there are many Western societies where it must be preferable to be introverted since those societies are introverted.
I don't see why pro thinks it of such importance that I concede points. It would be absurd of me to argue introverts have it better in every possible way just as it would be absurd of pro to argue extroverts are better off in every way. It does not contradict my stance, as pro implies, to admit extroverts have it better in some ways. That would be like saying a Liberal who agrees that Conservatives are more correct about gun laws is himself contradicting his being a Liberal.
At any time where it seemed I was saying Western society as a whole is biased towards extroverts, it should have been evident that from my former argument, regarding other countries, I did not admit that. Many Western countries are introverted but pro has focused only on the extroverted ones.
Socialization among extroverts and introverts
Pro ignores much of what I stated last round. Introverts do not need to socialize as much as extroverts, so it is not entirely significant that extroverts are better at socialization than introverts. Pro also ignores the fact I pointed out last round, that introverts do not feel as much pressure to conform as extroverts do. Extroverts look for outside approval whereas introverts are more inward.
Western societies having a bias towards extroverts does not in itself mean it is better to be an extrovert. That would be like saying if society were biased against happy people, it would better to be depressed.
In regards to happiness it takes more for an extrovert to be happy and this can be explained scientifically, "a chemical called “dopamine” is released by our brains whenever we experience something positive. It’s an automatic reward center and makes us feel good! Extroverts need more dopamine to feel an effect, whereas introverts have a low dopamine threshold. They don’t require a lot of stimulation to feel rewarded." In regards to studies in the matter, it is, however, unsure which of the two groups are actually the most happy. 
This goes with what I stated last round. It is easier for introverts to find ways to content themselves. They don't need a fast paced environment and life to thrive. A book, a game, a movie, some music, or a walk are easy access ways to experience simulation for introverts. For their social life, they need only a small circle of friends. Extroverts on the other hand must seek more for entertainment and relationships.
Societal roles and positions
I never stated that introverts such as Johnny Depp and Abraham Lincoln make this contention irrelevant. I was just noting that it does not take an extrovert to fill these roles. I even stated it was not entirely important but somehow pro still gathers that it was used to imply his argument was irrelevant. It's one factor of my counter-argument but does not in itself refute pro.
Pro cannot claim the majority of the most high paying jobs are best suited for extroverts. I don't recall him proving this. He mentioned power roles and a few others. I, on the other hand, already showed that 40% of executives (remember introverts make up only one third of the total population) call themselves introverts and other high paying jobs such as in computers and in science are very suited for them as well.
Last round I noted that politics and such, do not appeal widely to introverts, so it doesn't matter that those roles aren't suited for them. Pro responds but in no way that actually forms a refutation. All he says is, "If the power roles of society catered to the introverted mindset you would surely be saying that introverts are at an advantage". Eh, no not really. My argument would be the same. Certain powerful positions are suited better for certain types of people but the type of people they are not suited to would not like that sort of life so it puts them at no preferential disadvantage whatsoever. Pro could just as well be saying it's better to be a man since women aren't as commonly politicians.
The major factor is that introverts don't aspire to the same roles as extroverts. Politics would sound utterly dreary to plenty of introverts but pro seems to think it puts them at a loss that they are not as suited for the task.
I already mentioned numerous ways where introverts dominate leadership roles and other qualities but pro never responds. Pro's own source even states introverts make excellent leaders. I'll mention a few other factors as well as reiterating. Introverts exhibit calm, know how to take advantage of silence, are great at preparation and don't have to "wing it" often; they're thoughtful, think before they speak, listen, focus on the big picture and know how to improve due to their tendancy to self-evaluate. These are all excellent qualities for any business or leadership positions as well as in regards to life in general.
Pro's next statement makes me wonder if he's not getting a little too caught up in his "extrovert bias" idea. Pro saying that society takes on the attitude that you must conform to extrovert ideals or be cast, is a wild exaggeration that I will get to latter.
The ideal self
I hardly see how introverted ideals are off track but if pro wants to toss it off as irrelevant, all the better for me.
I also do not really know what pro means by introverts being "looked over". Introvert wants and introvert ideals are their concern and within their ability to accomplish. It is not so dependent on the rest of society to recognize them. Furthermore, introverts may be a minority but one third is still a significant fraction. It is not as if they are overwhelmed by extroverts. Pro saying the introvert ideal is near non-existent in extroverted societies is just an assertion. Pro already stated it's subjective and never answered the contention that introverts try to conform to different ideals than extroverts. The majority ideal is no the only ideal and just because it is the majority who aspires towards it, does not mean those who make up that majority care whether introverts and others have different ideals to which they aspire to.
I would really like to know how pro can say introverted ideals are almost non-existent in western societies. The majority ideal might be extroverted, but that is only because the majority is extroverted. Look at it this way, the majority of society wants to be the competitive, social, out-going leader that pro mentions but that is already because the majority of society already possesses these qualities in part. In other words it is easier to accomplish and they do not need to change their whole character. Introverts on the other hand have different ideals entirely because they are introverts. People tend to want to improve their character but not change it altogether because they want to keep the good parts about them. There are good things in extroverts and in introverts. Introverts, therefore, want to conform to ideals fitted to their personality, not the majority extrovert ideal.
Pro keeps assuming there is one sole ideal. This is highly unreasonable. Extroverts don't get to choose "the" ideal because there is no "the". That is a highly narrow minded way of thinking. I don't see how anyone could believe that, "since extroverts make up the majority they get to decide what the ideal is", but that is an exact quote from pro. Especially since pro has already stated it is subjective. He probably does not believe that but he continually assumes it.
Pro highly over exaggerates the oppression of introverts. Society is not going to reject introverts because they does not conform to the extrovert ideal. If the extroverts in the extroverted societies are really the narrow minded oppressors pro makes them out to be, every introvert should be glad he's not one of them. Thankfully they are not however, which means most extroverts do not care if you are an introvert so long as you are a good person.
It would seem that my opponent seems to misunderstand my arguments.
To clarify, I am arguing that it is generally more advantageous to be an extrovert in modern western society. This statement would be logical seeing that it is only reasonable to believe that an extrovert will be able to thrive better in an extroverted world than an introvert would.
The reason pointing many of my opponent’s seemingly contradictory argumentative statements are because they directly support my case, even if my opponent didn’t realize this.
My opponent states that extroversion is praised in western society, that the ideal self in an extroverted society mimics the mindset of an extrovert, and that introverts are a minority that must conform to different ideals.
My opponent tries to save himself by claiming that because some western countries are introverted, it therefore isn’t a big deal even though western society as a whole is has a general consensus of being largely extroverted.
This would mean that even by chance, it would be better to be an extrovert since you are more likely to be born into an extroverted country than an introvert country in the western world.
Introverted Countries in the Western World
My opponent was correct that I assumed the countries he listed were all Eastern countries. This would be due to my opponent’s confusing statement saying, “I’m sure it suites pro fine to focus mainly on western countries. However, the balance of extroverts to introverts is not so heavily tipped in other nations and since we are speaking of society as a whole, that is very important. For example, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Japan, Latvia, Sweden, Switzerland are 11 introverted nations according to one article.”
The way he words it makes it seem as though he is talking about eastern countries, which I incorrectly assumed.
Although even so, my opponent’s argument isn’t particularly relevant considering that introverted countries are a minority in the western world.
“Western society openly favors extraversion. Hills and Argyle (2001) write that in “modern
western society […] extraversion, the personality traits that is commonly associated with [the
enjoyment of friendship and happiness] is seen to be socially desirable.” Happiness is a close
friend of sociability and outgoingness, which is in turn a sign of confidence and high self-esteem,
the mark of a properly-adjusted and successful individual as determined and stressed by parents, peers, schoolteachers, colleagues and book-selling “experts” ad infinitum.”
It is only logical to believe that since extroversion is more favorable in western society, it would therefore be better to be an extrovert.
It doesn’t matter if introverts can also thrive in some circumstances, because the fact is that western society is built for the extrovert.
It isn’t that my “scope is narrow,” it’s simply that I am correctly generalizing the western world as extroverted.
Socialization among Introverts and Extroverts
The reason it is relevant that extroverts enjoy socializing and social atmospheres, is because much of western society is one big social atmosphere. From the moment you into the classroom and the work place you are put into an inherently social setting, where those who enjoy such a setting thrive.
Extroverts actually enjoy seeking social approval and that acts as a fuel for them to better themselves with other individuals. I could hardly see this as the disadvantage my opponent is trying to make it look like to be.
Extroverts and introverts have different interests. We must both agree on this. Extroverts like socialization, seeking social approval, stimulating environments, ect.
Introverts like reading, watching movies and other solo activities perhaps along with a few close friends.
The reality is western society generally caters to what makes extroverts thrives more than introverts. Introverts may be able to appease themselves on their own, but society hands the desires of the extrovert to them on a silver platter. Both extroverts and introverts obviously enjoy appeasing their own needs, which is why it is irrelevant how hard it is to achieve those desires. Society though, can allow extroverts to thrive extremely well since the societal environment is directly suited for the extroverted mindset.
Western society’s bias towards extroverts is absolutely huge! In western society, people generally like outgoing, fast-paced, people who take action quickly and speak their minds. The education system is set-up for kids to be put into a highly stimulating environment where extroverts thrive. Societal power is given to those who possess these traits. This is because western society is a fast-paced social environment, which caters to those who posses complementary traits to the nature of society.
Societal Roles and Positions
It is very difficult to argue against my opponent since extroverts and introverts have different desires. When I state that politicians are a power role suited for the extrovert he responds that it is irrelevant since introverts wouldn’t want a role like that any way.
Let me be clear, the whole point of the argument isn’t that certain roles are suited for extroverts over introverts, but that society allows extroverts to thrive more than introverts in the sort of options that they offer.
By arguing that being politicians is a power role directly suited for the extrovert, the point I am trying to make is that extroverts have the option to pursue their interests to a higher degree than introverts in western society.
To put this in nerdy game terms:
You are playing an RPG. You have a sword and an axe. You can upgrade the axe to level three, but you can upgrade the sword to level 5. Even though the axe and the sword are different weapons perhaps used to slay different monsters, the sword ultimately has more opportunity to be of more use since the game caters to the sword by allowing it to reach a higher level than the axe.
This being said, even though both extroverts and introverts may pursue different societal roles, societal roles generally cater towards extroverts more than introverts.
Both introverts and extroverts can be looked up to as leaders, that as is obvious. However, since western society has bias toward people with extroverted traits, extroverts generally have more of an opportunity to pursue and land a leadership type role. 
The Ideal Self
The reason that the ideal values of the introvert are irrelevant is because introverts don’t make up the generally mass of the people in western society, and therefore don’t get to set the ideal which society dictates.
The reason the majority ideal is important is because it sets a social norm, which many individuals feel compelled to succeed in. This sets pressure against introverts to either conform to the extroverted mindset, or be themselves but deny the social norm and therefore be “socially rejected” (although I think that term may be a bit harsh.) This is what I mean when I say introverts are looked over. This is because the majority doesn’t pay attention to nor recognize that an introvert ideal exists and that people want to fulfill it. This is the reason that the majority ideal being that of an extroverted mindset is relevant to the topic.
There is no one sole ideal. There are multiple ideals; however the one dominant ideal is the one that caters to the extroverted personality. 
I have shown that western society has a huge bias towards extroversion, which my opponent has done very little to contend to. I have shown that much of what my opponent has argued actually works against him. I have shown that extroverts have more of an opportunity to thrive in western society and that they fit the ideal self set by society. Introversion has a place in society, but it is surely overrun by extrovert ideology. Introverts are the minority and where one thing is dominant, that thing thrives. In this case, that thing is extroversion. It is therefore more preferable to be an extrovert in modern western society than to be an introvert.
Thank you for this debate Phantom. It has been my pleasure.
As pro has accepted the burden of proof without objection, I only need to show how it has not been proven that it is preferable to be an extrovert in Western society rather than an introvert. This round I will demonstrate how pro has failed his burden of proof.
It's impossible not to misunderstand arguments at times, but as far as I can tell, pro has misunderstood me more than I him. I knew pro was arguing it was generally more preferable to be an extrovert in Western society; his mistake was in generalizing Western society at the level of bias which he presented. My objection was that Western society was not nearly as extroverted as pro assumed, partially because plenty of Western countries are more introverted than extroverted.
It's my opponent's error for not realizing that the clearly Western countries I mentioned were Western and not Eastern. It was not good format on my part, but the countries were obviously Western.
It might be easy to take to pro's analysis of extroversion in the Western world because the main English speaking Western societies are extroverted, i.e. North America and Great Britain and most of us hail from those areas. My contention is that it is only important if Western society is quite significantly biased towards extroverts and in ways that discriminate against introverts; but that is only true in some nations and then, of course, there are other factors to weigh in. In other nations there is either an introvert bias, or no significant bias either way, or no bias that hinders introverts. It is not enough only to claim a society has more extroverts but leave out whether this causes introverts to be at a disadvantage. In other words, the ideals, practices and social construction of a predominantly extroverted society might still cause no disadvantage to introverts. So far I have named 10 introverted Western countries. My opponent does not specifically name any but talks about the whole of Western society as extroverted. But this proves nothing. Extroverted societies are not by necessity more advantageous to extroverts, as pro seems to assume.
Socialization among extroverts and introverts
Pro is correct that school and most work places are social, and that extroverts enjoy socializing. He's incorrect to assume introverts don't enjoy this setting as well. That's a basic misconception. Introversion does not mean anti-social. It merely means that social interaction gives energy to extroverts whereas it depletes the introvert's store after a while; thus introverts recharge when they’re out of that environment. Introverts cannot handle as much social interaction as extroverts but that does not mean they don't enjoy it. This is why introverts can thrive with only a few friends and a more limited social life. School and work don't force introverts to be extremely socially active. Usually introverts can handle a social life more to their suiting.
Introverts like social interaction, social approval and stimulating environments as well. They just don't need as much of it as extroverts and find it in different ways. This can be an advantage on its own because it demands much less in order to thrive. Introverts don't need society to be introverted as much as extroverts need it to be extroverted. Pro paints the picture of a society where the needs of the extroverts are handed to them on a silver platter and the introverts have to fend for themselves as best they can. The problem here is that what's on the platter is agreeable to introverts; they just take a smaller helping. They can go out and socialize, but they need not do it as much as extroverts. It is not hard to restrain from too much social interaction. Another problem with the picture is that in any society it is impossible not to spend much of the time alone. In times of isolation, the introvert is more at ease. Living in an extroverted society does not alleviate the discomfort of having nothing to do. Introverts, however, are well suited to finding things to do because they enjoy activities like reading, taking walks and watching movies; and also only a small circle of friends.
Society does not decide how much social stimulation one receives. For the most part, introverts can limit their social interaction just as extroverts can increase theirs. That’s why pro’s picture is wrong. He assumes society hands extroverts the lifestyle they prefer, whereas in reality, both introverts and extroverts suite their lifestyle to fit their preferences.
Pro has dropped a few points. I take it that pro now regards it as relevant that introverts can still make some of the best persons in the roles pro describes as extroverted, whereas before he regarded it as missing the point.
He also fails to address that extroverts do not dominate the field of high paying jobs, so I take that as conceded.
Furthermore, he does not defend himself against the accusation that he has wildly exaggerated the extroverted oppression of introverts.
Pro's argument makes sense that extroverts can climb higher in society; however this ignores a few factors. First, his conception of what it means to be at the top rungs of society. Introverts and extroverts probably have a different idea of this. Since extroverts need social recognition more than introverts, it makes sense that they would idolize political roles. On the other hand, introverts look more for self-fulfillment and thus do not incline so much to this position. Furthermore, pro never really defines “power roles” and talks only about politics. What about executives? I already showed 40% are introverts, which is a larger percentage than the total percentage of introverts in society.
Pro has not shown how leadership is the least bit significant. Introverts make excellent leaders in a number of ways as I already stated. Extroverts do as well, but leadership is not at all dominated by extroverts making this argument fail in support of the resolution.
Pro sticks to his idea the society puts out one single ideal. There is a majority ideal in any society but ideals are subjective so it doesn't matter if the majority tries to conform to the same ideal. The minority ideals are still acceptable to the majority because it would be close-minded to press one's ideal on everybody else. What happens to an introvert who does not conform to extroverted ideals is not in any way "social rejection". While many people set a goal to become one specific kind of person, they have broad social boarders on what constitutes a good and acceptable person. Introverts can just as easily fit within these boarders.
It is not necessary to conform to the majority ideal in order to be accepted. People set ideals for themselves. The majority ideal is the ideal that most people try to conform to but not what they push on to others. Introverts and others try to succeed in other ideals which the majority has no issue with because there is not one single ideal. That doesn’t mean you can try to be whatever kind of person you want and be accepted, but most introverted ways of thinking would be accepted by any normal person.
Pro has largely overstated the extroverted bias in Western society and amplified it by generalizing a few countries as the majority. Only a minority of countries are near as extroverted as pro claims all of Western society is overall. Pro furthermore exaggerates the pressure that society puts on introverts and the introvert's inability to thrive. In reality, extroverts and introverts both have their handicaps and benefits that help them adapt and thrive. Introverts need less stimulation. Society, according to pro, caters to the extroverted preference. This harms introverts little since it is easy to avoid situations of stimulation that exceed their threshold. Introverts fit their lifestyle to their introverted preferences. It takes less to make an introvert happy and introverts have the advantage over extroverts in times of isolation.
Thanks to pro for the debate and the voters for their hopefully honest evaluations.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|