

The power of lonely - tmsh
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2011/03/06/the_power_of_lonely/?page=full

======
dkarl
Is it a stretch to see a political aspect to the academic focus on solitude as
a pathology? At a fundamental level, liberals (whose ideals have paradoxically
been claimed by conservatives in modern America) glorified the individual and
defined the highest ideal to be freedom, a state in which reciprocal
obligations are minimized. Leftists have defined themselves in opposition to
liberal/conservative ideals by celebrating collectivism, promoting mutual
obligation as a good _in itself_ , and denigrating individuality as an
unhealthy delusion and a denial of humanness, which is inherently social and
collective.

The split can be seen very easily in how (to revert to the modern American
terms) liberals and conservatives talk about difference. Conservatives
celebrate individual difference; liberals celebrate group difference. It is
very interesting that to be different _as an individual_ is a conservative
ideal, treated suspiciously by liberals, but to be different _as part of a
group_ is a liberal ideal, treated with suspicion by conservatives.

(Note that I'm talking about the two groups' rhetoric here; I'm not talking
about who is actually more hospitable to difference in practice.)

Is it any wonder then, that psychologists in academia would see aloneness as a
pathological state, a departure from the psychologically normal and healthy
state of functioning as a group member?

~~~
sliverstorm
IMHO People's minds, in the conceptual realm, work on a black-and-white basis.
I find it can often be very difficult to discuss the grey region with folks.

Which is somewhat amusing, considering the underlying hardware works on a
billion shades of grey.

~~~
electromagnetic
I think ignorance relies on black-and-white whilst intelligence thrives on
grey. I've seen little problem to discussions of grey areas here on HN where
we prize intelligence over conformity.

Ignorance needs ignorance to survive, it's like a pathogen. The more ignorant
people there are, the easier it is to survive as an ignoramus.

I've found it easy to discuss grey regions with people, so long as they're
moderately intelligent - at least from my point-of-view.

------
stretchwithme
Sometimes explaining the path you're on is more work than its worth and a
distraction from continuing on it. People can't really accept what you believe
about it without some proof that its valid, which you can't supply because
you're discovering it.

You're probably not going to gain any confidence from such an interaction. You
may even come off like a wing nut. So keeping things to yourself until you
have something solid and a way to explain it can be best.

------
ga
Yet being around people you can relate with is priceless. We hackers need new
thoughts and cross fertilization of ideas. The web helps but personally, my
most interesting moments of this year so far where in a Linux meeting in
Quebec and a San Diego HN social event last week, before returning home to my
tropical island. Don't underestimate the power of socialization until you
start to really live outside north america/europe/australia-nz/japan.

------
VMG
I never got preparing for exams in groups. It's fine to exchange material but
actually _learning_ in groups doesn't seem so work for me at all because it is
so distracting.

~~~
sliverstorm
I used to have the same problem.

I discovered if I unofficially turned it into a loosely directed review
session taught by me, they suddenly became very helpful. 'teaching' my peers
the material forces me to think about everything much more critically, and
justify and explain everything. The process of doing these things _myself_
crystallizes my understanding, assembling together everything I've learned.

(I believe this phenomenon is very similar to the way you can be stuck trying
to find a bug for hours, and then instantly realize the solution as soon as
you try to explain the problem to a peer)

------
jawns
"The leaders of the world’s great religions -- Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, Moses
-- all had crucial revelations during periods of solitude."

Regarding Jesus, the two times of solitude that immediately come to my mind,
based on the Gospel accounts, are his time spent in the desert and in the
garden of Gethsemane.

In neither case did he have what I would call a "crucial revelation." (And I'm
sure some theologians would argue that it's not technically possible for Jesus
to have had a revelation.)

I wonder what the author had in mind.

------
adrianwaj
Usually the ones that criticize solitude are those that can't handle their
own, and get lonely, and thus can't realize its great benefits. Solitude can
offer the power to better relationships because it anchors a person.

