I resist and experiment with introductions because when we introduce ourselves, we don't only say who we are but also who we're not. In Critical Business School, we meet for 4 hours of discourse with no introductions, and when I teach, I make a point of not going around the room with ice-breakers and commonality exercises. That kind of social convergence limits our ability to show up, and our connected lives compound that effect.
Anecdotally, if I were to post on Twitter, or in my Linkedin headline that I was a NEW INC inaugural member, or a TEDx speaker, I might subliminally invite other alums/members or other TEDx speakers to follow me, and I might follow them back. That would then affect my feed, connections, and content in a way that can establish my view on my affordance for change, say, if I want to leave the field of AI research for coaching.
This kind of meta convergence feels like a low-context confusion. It is almost clear, but it masks and obstructs my personal goals for change with a collective fog. When we resist introductions, we create high context confusion. It is an open field that might be unusual or scary, but it is clear of mediation and invites us to learn more about ourselves to become better collaborators. I invite you to experiment with introductions as a way to create high-context confusion.