Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to be alone: the difference between loneliness and solitude

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: How to be alone: the difference between loneliness and solitude

#51

Post by closeparen »

newscracker wrote: post #28

There’s one more state — a new kind of “alone connectedness” that most people seem to prefer, which has been fostered and magnified by the Internet and social platforms (I include HN as one of those). Without even communicating with others, even if there are known people in physical proximity, many people feel connected just by being “lurkers” in their favorite corners of the Internet. This is not like passive watchi…

Same for cities. If anything, I have a weaker social network after moving to a big city, but the ambient energy makes me feel less alone.

Re: How to be alone: the difference between loneliness and solitude

#52

Post by Razengan »

majos wrote: post #4

Boy, HN loves articles about solitude and loneliness. And it's a distinction that often crops up in discussion here. I think there's a balance here, and cultivating some amount of loneliness -- not solitude -- is also good. For example, two people in my life are "Alice" and "Bob", who have been married for decades. Alice once told me that one of Bob's great weaknesses was that he'd been alone for too long in his teen…

> Bob's social needs are low to non-existent, and while he has loving family and friends, he enjoys sustained solitude. For example, weeks of overseas travel where nobody knows him and he doesn't talk much are great fun for him. ... It's easy to decide all that mess isn't worth it.

This sounds like me. I prefer — have learned to prefer — solitude, and prefer to enter human interaction only when I can withdraw from it at will without any awkwardness.

"The mutual exchange of vulnerabilities" often ends in bitterness, especially in cultures where putting yourself in a vulnerable position is seen as naiveté and the "streetwise" are ready to take advantage of those who do the former.

Re: How to be alone: the difference between loneliness and solitude

#54

Post by ospd »

newscracker wrote: post #28

There’s one more state — a new kind of “alone connectedness” that most people seem to prefer, which has been fostered and magnified by the Internet and social platforms (I include HN as one of those). Without even communicating with others, even if there are known people in physical proximity, many people feel connected just by being “lurkers” in their favorite corners of the Internet. This is not like passive watchi…

Your comment has inspired me to create an account, which I will likely not log in to again, simply to agree with you anecdotally in regards to the feeling of inter-connectedness experienced by lurkers.

I feel like I know many of you common posters, though you may never have known I existed up until reading this comment.

I had never really noticed or explored this phenomenon until you had mentioned it above.

Re: How to be alone: the difference between loneliness and solitude

#55

Post by Baeocystin »

majos wrote: post #4

Boy, HN loves articles about solitude and loneliness. And it's a distinction that often crops up in discussion here. I think there's a balance here, and cultivating some amount of loneliness -- not solitude -- is also good. For example, two people in my life are "Alice" and "Bob", who have been married for decades. Alice once told me that one of Bob's great weaknesses was that he'd been alone for too long in his teen…

> Relationships with other people can become strained if you are at least approximately self-sufficient.

If I (or anyone) is happier in solitude than in interacting with person X, it strikes me as quite patronizing to come to the conclusion that 'gosh, they may feel weak, better throw them a bone.' It simply means that the two people in question should probably seek out others to meet their respective companionship needs.

Self-sufficient people are not 'defective' any more than more social types are. People who are self-actualized do not owe more social people anything, any more than someone who craves social activity should force themselves into loneliness to meet the more independent person's wishes. They're just different personalities, and both have their own value.

>The mutual exchange of vulnerabilities is an important component of close friendships.

I do not think this is a universal. This has never been the case in any of my friendships, and I am not a misanthrope. I feel lucky to be able to say that I have lifelong, close friends, whose company I greatly enjoy. What we all have in common, even though we are all very different people, is enough comfort and trust in one another to be able to speak our minds freely, without any reservations, even when we know the other will disagree. The discussions that come of it are treasures.

Re: How to be alone: the difference between loneliness and solitude

#58

Post by thisiszilff »

Regardsyjc wrote: post #43

I crave solitude yet I still feel lonely, like I'm missing a tribe. I haven't had a chance to be alone by myself for more than an hour for the last few months since I moved in with my boyfriend. I went from lonely entrepreneur to my social bar overflowing into the red zone, where any additional social obligation is a sacrifice of me time. I love my partner, he is the best person ever, but he can't be everything, like…

I've always thought that our contemporary world pushes these two sometimes contradictory ideas on us: that we are unique individuals and that we are supposed to have a "tribe" of people like ourselves. The more "unique" you become (or the more intimately you know yourself) the more you're able to draw differences between you and others which impedes finding your "tribe." It's a trope in media to have a "friend group" of people that share certain core, common, traits but these are entirely artificial constructs that don't accuractely reflect the messy business of human relationships. The sleight of hand comes about when we begin to feel as if WE are missing out, as if WE have failed, and not that this artificial notion that's been distilled in us is in actuality unreasonable and unrealistic.

Re: How to be alone: the difference between loneliness and solitude

#59

Post by jamesissac »

Senderman wrote: post #48
majos wrote: post #4

Boy, HN loves articles about solitude and loneliness. And it's a distinction that often crops up in discussion here. I think there's a balance here, and cultivating some amount of loneliness -- not solitude -- is also good. For example, two people in my life are "Alice" and "Bob", who have been married for decades. Alice once told me that one of Bob's great weaknesses was that he'd been alone for too long in his teen…

This comment might sound like I'm being difficult, but I'm genuinely asking. You imply a downside for Bob in his avoidance of shared-vulnerability-relationship, you didn't explicitly state it - you said it hurts others who have expectations over him. Maybe the details of their marriage, which are none of my business, are where the answer is - but my question is: what is the downside for him?

Maybe the downside is that Bob will observe that others express displeasure at his behavior, having let down their expectations(maybe unreasonable) of him. Now Bob isn't callous by nature so this will weigh upon his conscience.
Post reply on HN