[wool_gather]

Not to turn this into a culture war, but as introverts in a world of extraversion, the more people who understand the distinction and recognize that introverts don't need to "just get out there", or reform themselves to be "less shy", or any of that nonsense, the happier everyone will be. So it's worth raising this. The misunderstanding may be broad, but it's not necessarily a fixed state.

And, to be frank, people who insist on labeling an acquaintance as introvert(2) are not exactly engaging in non-jerk behavior either. In fact, it's that very thing that leads young introverted people to self-describe as "shy" and then do their unconscious best to fulfill that description, to their detriment.

[BurningFrog]

This is a prescriptive vs descriptive language debate. I'm personally a staunch descriptivist.

Fact is that in common usage the word "introvert" primarily means "shy".

To me, fighting to change the definition of words, is among the least productive of all things.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/introvert https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/intro...

> And, to be frank, people who insist on labeling an acquaintance as introvert(2) are not exactly engaging in non-jerk behavior either. In fact, it's that very thing that leads young introverted people to self-describe as "shy" and then do their unconscious best to fulfill that description, to their detriment.

This seems a very unlikely chain of events!

[derefr]

Descriptivism breaks down when encountering jargon.

Consider the phrase "begging the question", for example. The phrase means something specific when discussing logical syllogisms, and was coined by academics as a piece of jargon to refer to that particular concept.

Even if everyone who doesn't know what a logical syllogism is, now thinks that "begging the question" means something entirely different from what those academics mean, that doesn't mean that the phrase has lost its jargon meaning. You can't redefine away jargon. Jargon gets written down into scientific papers and people continue to read and cite those indefinitely, so the jargon use of the term gets promulgated in academia indefinitely in order to understand those papers.

Yes, there is a lay-term "introvert" that now means something pretty much non-differentiable from "shy." But that's irrelevant when the useful term isn't the lay-term, but the jargon term.

To think otherwise would be like expecting a biblical scholar to stop using the word "apocalypse" to refer to the set of apocryphal texts of the Bible, just because the lay-term refers to an eschaton event.

Yes, lay-people will think you mean the wrong thing. But the solution to that is not to abandon the jargon word, but rather to specify that you're speaking academically and that you intend words to have their jargon meaning; and to terminate the conversation (or, grudgingly, teach an entire intro course to the academic subject to your interlocutor) if they don't know the appropriate jargon.

[bootsz]

I don't entirely disagree, but my main gripe is that the former definition is extremely useful so it is unfortunate to have it subsumed by the concept of "shy" (for which we already have a widely-understood word), since it then becomes difficult to communicate and reason about the former. Maybe the solution is that we need yet another word to use for the former meaning, although I wonder how long will it take until such a word would yet again become co-opted to mean "shy"...

[wool_gather]

> This seems a very unlikely chain of events!

No, not even remotely. It is a real problem.

[fourthark]

How so? Of course we are affected by what we are called, and an introvert will go along with it to avoid arguing.

(I agree with you that it's pointless to try to change how people use words.)