Interesting article.
I actually heard similar arguments about 'HSP' (='highly sensitive person')
That it's evolutionary necessary and important that different kinds of people/specimens of a species exist (for HSP it was like 'canaries in mines' to show any signs of trouble... Many HSP people can be 'shy' or 'introvert' too..)
I'd agree it's important that at least some members of the species are 'cautious', so after the brave ones are gobbled up, the species continues
I disagree about introvert/extrovert being the only dynamics - some people - including me! can be both introverted and extroverted, and quite some others on this forum too! (it seems) People can be shy/sa and extroverted too, as far as I know.. Aha, it's addressed in the original article...
Psychology says everyone is a sum of genetics+environment+self activity, so I don't know why sa/shyness wouldn't be partially genetic too, and if it is, there's probably a reason for it?
Yup, shyness is supposed to be 'easier' than full-blown sa... (by definition, the articles say so too..)
I think the articles are supposed to be 'self empowerment' for shy people... By many 'shyness' is seen as negative trait, and it's good to look at the positives too, no?
In my country, meds are overprescribed and there's not enough therapy offered, or prevention programs... I don't know how it is elsewhere.. It seems that in USA meds are often overprescribed too, at least some people on other forums said so.. but I think more people get therapy like CBT over there too..
Did you guys even read the original NYTimes article?