Introverts Run the World—Quietly 內(nèi)向者：悄然掌管世界

The theory of evolution. The theory of relativity. The Cat in the Hat1）. All were brought to you by introverts.

Our culture is biased against quiet and reserved people， but introverts are responsible for some of humanitys greatest achievements—from Steve Wozniaks invention of the Apple computer to J. K. Rowlings Harry Potter. And these introverts did what they did not in spite of their temperaments—but because of them.

As the science journalist Winifred Gallagher writes： “The glory of the disposition that stops to consider stimuli rather than rushing to engage with them is its long association with intellectual and artistic achievement. Neither E = mc2 nor Paradise Lost2） was dashed off3） by a party animal.”

Introverts make up a third to a half the population. Thats one out of every two or three people you know.

Yet our most important institutions—our schools and our workplaces—are designed for extroverts. And were living with a value system that I call the New Groupthink， where we believe that all creativity and productivity comes from an oddly gregarious place.

Picture the typical classroom. When I was a kid， we sat in rows of desks， and we did most of our work autonomously. But nowadays many students sit in “pods” of desks with four or five students facing each other， and they work on countless group projects—even in subjects like math and creative writing. Kids who prefer to work by themselves dont fit， and research by educational psychology professor Charles Meisgeier found that the majority of teachers believe the ideal student is an extrovert—even though introverts tend to get higher grades， according to psychologist Adrian Furnham.

The same thing happens at work. Many of us now work in offices without walls， with no respite4） from the noise and gaze of co-workers. And introverts are routinely passed over5） for leadership positions， even though the latest research by the management professor Adam Grant at Wharton shows that introverted leaders often deliver better results. Theyre better at letting proactive employees run with their creative ideas， while extroverts can unwittingly put their own stamp on things and not realize that other peoples ideas arent being heard.

Of course， we all fall at different points along the introvert-extrovert spectrum. Even Carl Jung， who popularized these terms in the first place， said there was no such thing as a pure introvert or a pure extrovert—that “such a man would be in a lunatic6） asylum.” Theres also a term， ambivert7）， for people who fall smack8） in the middle of the spectrum.

But many of us recognize ourselves as one or the other. And culturally we need a better balance of yin and yang between the two types. In fact， we often seek out this balance instinctively. Thats why we see so many introvert-extrovert couples （Im an introvert happily married to an extrovert） and the most effective work teams have been found to be a mix of the two types.

The need for balance is especially important when it comes to creativity and productivity. When psychologists look at the lives of the most creative people， they almost always find a serious streak9） of introversion because solitude is a crucial ingredient for creativity.

Charles Darwin took long walks alone in the woods and emphatically10） turned down dinner party invitations. Theodore Geisel， better known as Dr. Seuss， dreamed up his creations in a private bell tower in the back of his house in La Jolla. Steve Wozniak invented the first Apple computer alone in his cubicle at Hewlett Packard.

Of course， this doesnt mean that we should stop collaborating with each other—witness Wozniak teaming up with Steve Jobs to form Apple. But it does mean that solitude matters. And for some people its the air they breathe.

In fact， weve known about the transcendent power of solitude for centuries； its only recently that weve forgotten it. Our major religions all tell the story of seekers—Moses， Jesus， Mohammed， Buddha—who go off alone， to the wilderness， and bring profound revelations back to the community. No wilderness， no revelations.

This is no surprise， if you listen to the insights of contemporary psychology. It turns out that you cant be in a group without instinctively mimicking others opinions—even about personal， visceral11） things like who youre physically attracted to. We ape12） other peoples beliefs without even realizing were doing it.

Groups also tend to follow the most dominant person in the room even though theres zero correlation between good ideas and being a good talker. The best talker might have the best ideas， but she might not. So its much better to send people off to generate ideas by themselves， freed from the distortion of group dynamics， and only then come together as a team.

Im not saying that social skills are unimportant， or that we should abolish teamwork. The same religions that send their sages off to lonely mountaintops also teach us love and trust. And the problems we face today in fields like economics and science are more complex than ever， and need armies of people to solve them.

But I am saying that we all need alone time. And that the more freedom we give introverts to be themselves， the more theyll dream up their own unique solutions to the problems that bedevil us.

進(jìn)化論。相對(duì)論?！洞髅弊拥呢垺贰Ｋ羞@些都是由性格內(nèi)向的人帶給我們的。

我們的文化對(duì)性格沉靜、內(nèi)斂的人存在偏見(jiàn)，但內(nèi)向型性格的人創(chuàng)造了人類(lèi)最為杰出的一些成就——史蒂夫·沃茲尼亞克發(fā)明了蘋(píng)果電腦，J. K. 羅琳寫(xiě)出了《哈利·波特》，不一而足。這些內(nèi)向型的人能取得如此成就并不是因?yàn)樗麄兛朔俗约旱膬?nèi)向性格，而是因?yàn)樗麄冇羞@樣的性格。

正如科學(xué)記者威妮弗雷德·加拉格爾所言：“這種性格使人在面對(duì)新鮮刺激的事物時(shí)會(huì)停下來(lái)思考，而不是風(fēng)風(fēng)火火地投入其中。其倍受贊譽(yù)之處就在于它與智力成果和藝術(shù)成就的長(zhǎng)久淵源。無(wú)論是方程式E = mc2還是《失樂(lè)園》都不是派對(duì)狂匆匆創(chuàng)造出來(lái)的成果?！?/p>

內(nèi)向型的人占所有人口的1/3到1/2。也就是說(shuō)在你認(rèn)識(shí)的人中，每?jī)扇齻€(gè)人就有一個(gè)是內(nèi)向型的。

然而，我們最為重要的機(jī)構(gòu)——我們的學(xué)校和工作單位——都是為外向型的人設(shè)計(jì)的。我們所處的價(jià)值體系認(rèn)為所有的創(chuàng)造力和生產(chǎn)力都來(lái)自某個(gè)古怪的群體場(chǎng)合，我稱(chēng)這種價(jià)值體系為“新式群體思維”。

想象一下典型的教室。在我小時(shí)候，我們坐在成排的課桌后，大部分作業(yè)都是獨(dú)立完成的。但如今，許多學(xué)生都是四五個(gè)一組，面對(duì)面坐在圍成“豆莢式”的課桌旁，做著數(shù)不清的小組任務(wù)——即使像數(shù)學(xué)課和創(chuàng)意寫(xiě)作之類(lèi)的課程也不例外。那些喜歡獨(dú)自完成功課的孩子無(wú)法適應(yīng)。教育心理學(xué)教授查爾斯·梅斯蓋爾的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，大多數(shù)老師都認(rèn)為理想的學(xué)生是外向型的，即便心理學(xué)家阿德里安·弗恩海姆發(fā)現(xiàn)內(nèi)向型學(xué)生的分?jǐn)?shù)往往更高。

工作場(chǎng)所也不例外?，F(xiàn)在我們?cè)S多人的辦公室都沒(méi)有圍墻，這使我們無(wú)法從同事的嘈雜聲和注視中得到喘息的機(jī)會(huì)。此外，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)崗位通常都不會(huì)考慮選內(nèi)向型的人來(lái)?yè)?dān)任，盡管沃頓商學(xué)院管理學(xué)教授亞當(dāng)·格蘭特的最新研究表明，內(nèi)向型領(lǐng)導(dǎo)往往能帶來(lái)更好的成果。他們更善于讓積極主動(dòng)的職員按照他們的創(chuàng)意來(lái)做，而外向型領(lǐng)導(dǎo)會(huì)在不知不覺(jué)中把一切打上自己的烙印，卻意識(shí)不到自己沒(méi)有聆聽(tīng)別人的意見(jiàn)。

當(dāng)然，我們都在“內(nèi)向—外向”這兩極之間占據(jù)著不同的位置。卡爾·榮格是最早把這些術(shù)語(yǔ)變得家喻戶(hù)曉的心理學(xué)家，但即使是他也認(rèn)為并不存在純粹的內(nèi)向或外向型的人——“那樣的人可能會(huì)在精神病院里找到”。還有一個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ)，叫“中間性格者”，指那些正好處在內(nèi)向和外向兩極中間的人。

但我們?cè)S多人都認(rèn)為自己非此即彼。從文化上來(lái)說(shuō)，我們需要在兩者之間找到一個(gè)更好的陰陽(yáng)平衡。事實(shí)上，我們往往本能地尋求這種平衡。正因?yàn)槿绱?，我們?huì)看到很多內(nèi)向型和外向型結(jié)合的夫妻（我是內(nèi)向型，嫁給了一個(gè)外向型，婚姻幸福），人們也發(fā)現(xiàn)效率最高的工作團(tuán)隊(duì)都是混合了兩種性格的人的團(tuán)隊(duì)。

在創(chuàng)造力和生產(chǎn)力的問(wèn)題上，內(nèi)向和外向的平衡尤其重要。當(dāng)心理學(xué)家在審視最富創(chuàng)造力的一些人的生活時(shí)，他們幾乎總能發(fā)現(xiàn)內(nèi)向性格的重要特征，因?yàn)楠?dú)處是創(chuàng)造力的一個(gè)關(guān)鍵要素。

查爾斯·達(dá)爾文曾斷然拒絕一次又一次的晚宴邀請(qǐng)，長(zhǎng)時(shí)間獨(dú)自一人在樹(shù)林里漫步。常被人稱(chēng)作瑟斯博士的西奧多·蓋澤爾在其位于拉荷亞的房舍后面的一座僻靜鐘樓里構(gòu)思出了他的作品。史蒂夫·沃茲尼亞克獨(dú)自在惠普公司的小隔間里創(chuàng)造出了第一臺(tái)蘋(píng)果電腦。

當(dāng)然，這并不意味著我們應(yīng)該停止相互合作——沃茲尼亞克就是和史蒂夫·喬布斯合作才成立了蘋(píng)果公司。但這的確說(shuō)明了獨(dú)處的重要性。對(duì)某些人來(lái)說(shuō)，獨(dú)處就是他們呼吸的空氣。

事實(shí)上，數(shù)百年來(lái)，我們都深知獨(dú)處具有超凡之力，只是在最近我們才忘記了這一點(diǎn)。人類(lèi)主要的宗教都流傳著探尋者的故事——摩西、耶穌、穆罕默德、佛陀——他們孑然一身，深入荒野之境，將深?yuàn)W的啟示帶回給人類(lèi)。不入荒野，焉得啟示。

這沒(méi)什么奇怪的，你只要聽(tīng)一聽(tīng)當(dāng)代心理學(xué)的觀點(diǎn)就會(huì)明白。事實(shí)證明，如果你置身于一群人之中，你就會(huì)本能地仿效他人的觀點(diǎn)——哪怕是在一些個(gè)人的、發(fā)自?xún)?nèi)心的事情上，比如誰(shuí)在生理上對(duì)你具有吸引力。在模仿別人思想時(shí)，我們甚至意識(shí)不到這一點(diǎn)。

群體也通常會(huì)服從房間里最健談的那個(gè)人，盡管好的思想與健談?wù)咧g毫無(wú)關(guān)系。最健談的人也許會(huì)有最好的思想，但也可能沒(méi)有。因此，最好還是將人們分開(kāi)，以免受到群體力量的干擾，讓他們獨(dú)自形成自己的觀點(diǎn)，然后再作為一個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)聚在一起。

我并不是說(shuō)社交技能不重要，或者應(yīng)該廢止團(tuán)隊(duì)協(xié)作。那些將圣賢們送到偏僻山頂?shù)淖诮掏瑫r(shí)也教誨我們要互愛(ài)互信。如今，我們?cè)诮?jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)和科學(xué)等領(lǐng)域所面臨的問(wèn)題比以往任何時(shí)候都要復(fù)雜，需要大量的人力來(lái)解決。

但我要說(shuō)的是，我們都需要獨(dú)處的時(shí)光。我們給內(nèi)向者自由發(fā)揮的余地越多，他們就能設(shè)想出更多自己獨(dú)到的方案，以解決那些深深困擾我們的問(wèn)題。

1. The Cat in the Hat：《戴帽子的貓》，美國(guó)作家、漫畫(huà)家西奧多·瑟斯·蓋澤爾（Theodor Seuss Geise， 1904～1991）創(chuàng)作的兒童讀物

2. Paradise Lost：《失樂(lè)園》，英國(guó)詩(shī)人約翰·彌爾頓（John Milton， 1608～1674）以《舊約圣經(jīng)》的《創(chuàng)世紀(jì)》為基礎(chǔ)創(chuàng)作的史詩(shī)

3. dash off：迅速寫(xiě)（或畫(huà)）；迅速完成

4. respite [?resp?t] n. 暫緩；喘息時(shí)間

5. pass over：（在提升、任命時(shí)）對(duì)（某人）不加考慮

6. lunatic [?lu?n?t?k] adj. 為收容精神病人而設(shè)立的

7. ambivert [??mbi?v??（r）t] n. [心]既外向又內(nèi)向的人，中間性格者

8. smack [sm?k] adv. 恰巧，正好

9. streak [stri?k] n. （行為、氣質(zhì)等的）個(gè)性特征（或傾向）

10. emphatically [?m?f?t?kli] adv. 斷然地

11. visceral [?v?s?r?l] adj. 發(fā)自肺腑的，出自?xún)?nèi)心的

12. ape [e?p] vt. 模仿