I would argue if you asked 100 random people to draw a red Vs not-red line in that experiment you described, short of colour blindness, you would not see very much variance in the position of the line. That is why I believe the terms have converged on a meaning.
In fact, I think it would be very hard to construct an experiment where people did not use the term red in a consistent fashion.
I agree with you that formal definitions of words come after the fact. But meaning of words are always present; everyone who uses a word uses it with some understanding if its meaning, that they want to convey. And as words converge on a shared meaning, they become effective for communicating meanings. I'm arguing introvert/extrovert have been around for a long time, and have not converged on a consistent meaning. The terms have too much variance in meaning to be useful at communicating. One person uses the word and means something very different from when someone else uses the word. In 20 years time this variance will likely still be a problem. If the definition of a word shifts over time, that's ok as long as the variance remains low; it just means it has a new definition. But if the variance is high, it means the word isn't very useful/effective for communication.
My impression was that the variance is high enough that i have to learn / swap new vocabulary with every new person in my social circles. I don't see the convergence you are talking of.
Fascinating, that has not been my experience. Can you give some examples?
Although I will note there is always some variance, the issue happens when it's too great, and some people's definition of a word is barely even overlapping with another person's definition of a word.
Right here, right now: Your use of "definition" is foreign to me. I do not have definitions of words in my head, but understandings or interpretations.
A definition is something that would be in a dictionary book.
Haha fair enough! I use definition to mean essentially "what one sees as the meaning of a word". That "one" could be Webster or another dictionary. Or an individual.
Your definition, is "the meaning of a word as specified in a dictionary".
There's definitely variance between these two definitions, but I think it's a small variance, and we can largely still understand each other despite the variance. I would say that word has converged on a meaning. We could, if we decided it was necessary, create separate words, one to mean an exact definition as defined by an authoritative source, and one to mean how every individual defines a word. But English society has decided that distinction isn't worth creating a new word at this time.
My argument is that introvert/extrovert have much more variance. When some people use the term, they use it to describe a behaviour, a temporary state, a constant personality trait, a spectrum, two perpendicular dimensions, a label on a loose set of behaviours, social skills, energy levels -- it's got so many facets! And dictionaries follow human usage -- so how is a dictionary supposed to pin this down to one or two concise definitions? That's my argument for why the terms are too variant to be exceptionally useful/meaningful.
In fact, I think it would be very hard to construct an experiment where people did not use the term red in a consistent fashion.
I agree with you that formal definitions of words come after the fact. But meaning of words are always present; everyone who uses a word uses it with some understanding if its meaning, that they want to convey. And as words converge on a shared meaning, they become effective for communicating meanings. I'm arguing introvert/extrovert have been around for a long time, and have not converged on a consistent meaning. The terms have too much variance in meaning to be useful at communicating. One person uses the word and means something very different from when someone else uses the word. In 20 years time this variance will likely still be a problem. If the definition of a word shifts over time, that's ok as long as the variance remains low; it just means it has a new definition. But if the variance is high, it means the word isn't very useful/effective for communication.