The idea that human personalities and behaviors can be sorted into two simplistic piles or even a scale between two piles is just silly.
There's no predictive value to it- you can't objectively classify\quantify people's 'vertion' and then predict behaviors or outcomes based on those classifications, not even statistically from a large sample set because it's meaninglessly subjective.
People are complex. Someone might appear 'introverted' in a social situation they're unfamiliar with, but in a different setting my appear 'extroverted' because they're very comfortable.
And some will say "social interactions give energy to extro and take it from intro" but what the hell does 'energy' mean in that context anyway? If I go to a small party with close friends all talking about sci-fi I'll enjoy myself all night and feel refreshed, but I'd be exhausted after 30 minutes at a rave and need a week to recover.
And do people migrate between intro-extro throughout their life? In my 20's I felt compelled to meet and experience new people all the time but now in my mid-40's I don't really care and tend to stick to the people I know. Does that mean I turned more introverted at some point? That's why even as a personality scale it's nonsense.
It's all just Myers-Briggs for dummies, which is already for dummies.
The only way it makes sense is as a description of immediate behavior, not of a personality. Someone may be 'behaving in an introverted way' but saying that makes them an 'introvert' is nonsense because they may go somewhere else and behave in an extroverted way an hour later.
Energy ,in this context, would be defined of a mix of ideas:
Granted, its a small sample, but you describe two different social interactions and from that, I can tell you're an extrovert.
...and...
In both examples you are comparing two different types of interact with different groups of people. What you're not comparing is an interaction with people on one hand vs being alone by yourself on the other.
Let me ask you about how you like to spend your time alone. How would you feel if you went two weeks without every interacting with another human being besides perhaps anonymous non-personal point-of-sale transactions where you buy groceries? No phone calls with family, no meals or drinks with friends. When you think about this does it fill you with a fear of isolation, or a comfort of ease? My guess for you is the former.
This doesn't mean that all introverts want to be alone, but rather they ration how much interaction with other humans they have to the capacity they can do so without negatively affecting their sense of self or mood.
Which is hilarious because in person most people describe me as an introvert. At this point I'm closer to shut-in than anything resembling an extrovert.
But that's the issue- you're demonstrating pretty clearly that the intro-extro thing makes people feel they can make categorical judgements of a person from even a casual self-description of their behavior.
I spend almost all of my time outside of work alone. And I work with 3 other dudes in an office where only 1-2 is there on any given day and have about 3 conversations a week that aren't work related. I do a little woodworking, lot of gardening, watch too much streaming, and I love cooking for myself and eating everything before it even makes it on a plate. Besides some health issues I'd say my life is pretty blissful like this.
In my 20's I was an active musician in the local scene and that was the core of my social life. Maybe that's the breakdown because I had no problem being 'social' in musical contexts because that was my world, I'd kind of helped build it so it was a 'social cocoon' that only people that I had a connection to through music with could even enter. I did like being on stage but that's a different animal- looks like you're in a crowd but you're really very separate from it- at a good venue at least. And I used the small party with sci-fi friends as a casual example because I'd had positive experiences of that nature, but haven't gone to any kind of 'party' in over a decade.
But I think your response explains why this is such an unpopular opinion. For whatever reason a lot of people have adopted introvert\extrovert as a part of their identity and here I am telling them that it's invalid because it's nonsense. That's a bit like telling someone their religion is invalid so no surprise people will push back against challenges.
First, nearly all of your statements are posing the question of: "is someone an introvert or extrovert" as a binary condition. You are X or you are Y. You made one statement I saw where you allow for a spectrum, but all responses to responses appear to only recognize a binary condition.
I do believe its a spectrum, but when someone says "I'm an introvert" its shorthand for "On the spectrum of intro- or extro- version, I fall so far on the introversion side, that I would consider, and my behavior for myself, matches introversion". That whole statement would be a mouthful.
You gave two small examples of your behavior/patterns, both falling in one way. I even called this out that it was a small sample. I think you put too much weight in my categorizing you from those two. I wasn't making a clinical diagnosis. If you want to use this as a whole point that introversion and extroversion aren't a thing, you're welcome to, but I think you'd be offbase.
Introversion is not part my identity. Its a rational system that helps me cope with and navigate my personal limits, strengths and failings. If you have another system that fits better to help me understand myself I can apply introspectively, I'm open to it.
Okay, I'll bite. If its nonsense, as an example tell me why I'm totally mentally exhausted after spending 60 minutes presenting to a large group of people. Why is it some people instead thrive on that same 60 minute large group presentation and come out energized and wanting more?
Not quite. A religion is a system of explanations about the world, life, and lifestyle. I assume you wouldn't just say "its wrong" you'd point out scientific answers to those same questions.
So far on our intro/extroversion topic, you're just saying its non-existent, offering no other explanation for the observed behaviors and outcomes. Here's your chance to fill in that second half. Please explain your version of the alternative.
What do you mean by 'system' here? Sounds like you think of introversion as a personal philosophy more than a trait. That is pretty interesting but that's definitely not how most people apply the term.
Because without any other context that sounds pretty exhausting. Though if I'd been working on a project for several months that I really felt good about I might enjoy the opportunity to share it with a group of people that could fully understand my work- it might be as fulfilling as it is exhausting. So am I an introvert or extrovert- or rather which side of the introvert-extrovert scale do I lean towards... Sorry but the phrasing for scale is more cumbersome than just using the terms. Of course it's not binary- that would be ridiculous even within the context of how ridiculous the whole concept is.
And you described introversion as "system that helps me cope with and navigate my personal limits, strengths and failings". Definitely sounds religion adjacent. But maybe I'm not understanding how you use introversion as a 'system' so I'm curious about that.
Introversion\Extroversions don't 'explain' anything, it's a classification. My point is that at best it's classifying behavior and that can and does change. Considering it as a 'trait' is all but useless because it's essentially just how people feel about themselves.
Do you think people can change between intro-extro (again scale implied, work with me here...) in a lifetime? If an extroverted person experiences trauma that makes them behave in a more introverted way have they 'become introverts' or are they just traumatized extroverts?