Thanks for the article, @JBStillFlying . It sounds to me like people are distributed on a spectrum, with some in the middle and the ones on the ends crossing over or even migrating from time to time and over time. It also sounds like some of the stereotypes about the two types are not quite true - as well as some of the assumed outcomes (which was the point being made by the Penn Prof). I buy all that. But, in the end, the categories do really exist as human typologies, and that makes me want to ask again the question of which type correlates most strongly with the temperament and habit of studiousness and which with the temperament and habit of social interaction. I still hope to come up with some research specifically on that question. Anecdotal evidence is interesting, but statistics are convincing.
Years ago, when I was a draftee into the U.S. Army, I was administered a test meant to determine whether I had officer potential in me. I remember some of the questions in that test: Would you prefer to read a book or attend an athletic event? Would you prefer to go for a walk in the woods by yourself or take a scout troop on a camping expedition? Do you like conversation with a close friend or group discussion? Do you like fiction or non-fiction? --You get the idea. The great minds who designed that test certainly thought they knew what personal habits and predilections showed leadership potential. Of course the laughable part of it all was that if you really wanted to go to OCS it would be easy to lie your way in by answering those questions in the clearly signalled preferred way. The Harvard admissions people are perhaps a little more subtle than that, and they are looking for kids to demonstrate that they actually do the things they claim to like to do, but at bottom aren’t their comments showing that they’re operating on the same old knee-jerk assumption that the talkative, the gregarious, the sporty, the social - all the movers and shakers in the little world of high school - are the ones meant to inherit whatever of the earthly paradise Harvard can bestow? Life may be more complicated than that, but, if so, these guys show no sign of appreciating it. The sinister side of all this could be - as Deresewiecz believes - kids are contorting their natural inclinations in order to go out and acquire all these brownie points merely for the purpose of getting into the elite schools. Are kids that would otherwise be searchingly brilliant and studious diverting their energies to social clubs and the like activities in order to pad their resumes? And if they do that, do they form habits - as Aristotle predicts and Steven Pinker observes - that warp what a college education is really all about?