
A man who became a hermit at 20 - headalgorithm
https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-48968502
======
krtkush
> He tried to cause as little damage as possible, but the sheer number of
> break-ins - more than 1,000 over the years, caused a lot of anxiety for some
> of the cabin owners.

> Why had he turned his back on the world and gone off to live completely
> alone?

I would hardly define his way of living as turning his back from the world. He
was still very much dependant on it and could obviously not live without it.

~~~
fredsir
Finding materials in nature (e.g. an untouched-by-humans forrest) vs in
society (e.g. someones cabin) is not much of a difference if you are not a
part of society. All living things need food and other stuff to sustain its
life.

You go out, shoot a deer to survive, chop down a tree, and head home and you
got some food and supplies. You go out, find a cabin, take some food and other
stuff and head home and you've got some food and other supplies.

The difference is only significant if you follow the rules of society where we
don't take each others stuff. But just like we don't bat an eye when we go out
and take the life or supplies from an animal that is not part of society, why
should a person or another creature that is not part of society think any
different when they go into someones cabin and take food and supplies instead
of finding the things in untouched nature? Why craft an axe from raw materials
when you can just take the one that something else made that is laying right
there in that log of wood?

~~~
navigatesol
> _why should a person or another creature that is not part of society think
> any different when they go into someones cabin and take food and supplies
> instead of finding the things in untouched nature?_

Because the creature or its family isn't going to be planning retribution,
like I'd be doing if you broke into my property and stole my stuff.

~~~
jdironman
Ah, the gatherer becomes the hunted.

~~~
taneq
It's not "gathering" if you're taking things that someone's deliberately
prepared for their own future use.

~~~
fredsir
So it's not gathering when we pick berries because the plant prepared them for
spreading its seeds, not for us to eat and end up in our trash. Or we take the
tree where the bird nested in, or the beetle, or the abe? Or when we take
whatever else we take that something else prepared for another use?

It doesn't fit nicely in our societal view of "yours" and "mine", but whenever
you take something, whatever it is, you are almost always taking it away from
something else. Surely "thieving" is gathering. It's just a kind of gathering
that society has decided is not okay, except in all the cases where society
says it's okay, like taking the animals home, or the native humans, and so on.

~~~
mcbutterbunz
> So it's not gathering when we pick berries because the plant prepared them
> for spreading its seeds, not for us to eat

Didn't many berries evolve so that animals would eat the berries and their
seeds would end up in their feces? I'm not sure how to say that without it
sounding like a cause and effect. Plants didn't _intend_ to evolve so that
animals would eat the berries and carry their seeds away, it was more a
symbiotic relationship.

~~~
fredsir
Sure. Point being it’s all gathering. No difference when you gather berries or
other peoples stuff against their will.

~~~
Noos
Stealing isn't gathering because we have a philosophical framework behind the
concept of property. This is on top of the physical act.

If this guy got shot stealing from people, we wouldn't just call it killing;
because we have a philosophical framework about justice and retribution. If
you were consistent, you'd have to be okay that this guy would be treated like
a fox who raids a henhouse; up to the personal whims of the aggrieved.

~~~
fredsir
If I was gathering your stuff without permission, it’s stealing. If a bear or
a person not part of society does it, it’s not stealing, it’s gathering. The
myths of society are only that: collective beliefs inside society.

------
jfk13
> He wanted to live out his life in that small place in the woods, to die
> there among the trees, leaving nothing behind.

Well, the people whose cabins he raided might not agree with the "leaving
nothing behind" aspect. That would sound more convincing if he'd lived on wild
berries and roots, fish from the streams, etc., taking no more than the
environment could comfortably sustain.

He didn't become a hermit; he became an outlaw in the forest, and we shouldn't
be surprised that the sheriff eventually came after him.

~~~
bofadeez
He probably smokes meth too, let's face it

~~~
dang
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments to Hacker News?

~~~
bofadeez
Yes, I was just joking around. Sorry about that. (Love your community here!)

------
patientplatypus
I feel like the people who are complaining that he stole aren't really getting
it.

Sure, he stole - and that's a bad thing because he took something that someone
else worked hard to get. That's unfair.

On the other hand, there's no real way to "really" drop out of society. If you
deal with money at all you have to pay taxes, live in a house. Even as a wood
cutter in the Alaskan wilderness or some such you still have to own and pay
for a truck. Being homeless is a hugely social thing as you have to live in a
city and beg - and everyone hates you. Even as a pure hunter there's not
enough natural wilderness to support that, and you can't exactly hunt on land
you don't own.

So yeah, the people he stole from didn't agree to have their things taken. He
(and I for that matter) didn't really agree to this whole society thing
either.

~~~
badpun
The are plenty of options for dropping out of society. Siberia for example is
millions of square kilometers of wilderness where you won't be bothered. It's
not populated because the conditions for farming are bad: the soil is not
suitable and the climate is not ideal - but it should be ok for a hunter-
gatherer.

------
GuardianCaveman
“Despite the bitter Maine winters, when temperatures can plummet to -20C,
Knight says he never lit a fire, in case the smoke attracted attention.”

He dropped off the grid a few miles from thousands of cabins and survived
exclusively on the contents of those cabins and the work of other people who
filled those cabins with supplies. Had he truly survived alone in Wilderness
instead of the equivalent of camping in the backyard and going inside the
house for snacks he could have afforded to light a fire instead of pacing at
3AM to keep warm. He’s a parasite in the way he lived - not some noble
outdoorsman. He’s a criminal.

~~~
ashildr
I don’t think that being a hermit (avoiding any social interaction in
‘nature’) and being a criminal (acting against law) are mutually exclusive.
And I think it’s very interesting to read about people who chose to become
hermits, because I don’t understand the motivation and may learn something. I
find it less interesting to discuss stolen batteries, because I understand
that motivation and logic. You may choose to not understand things that you
don’t agree with, being that kind of intellectual hermit is your proper, if
sad, choice as a free human.

~~~
CGamesPlay
> I don’t think that being a hermit (avoiding any social interaction in
> ‘nature’) and being a criminal (acting against law) are mutually exclusive.

I don’t think anyone here disagrees with this. But this man was certainly more
in the latter category than the former. He was just as dependent on
civilization putting groceries in the supermarket as any of your suburban
neighbors, except instead of paying for those groceries, he stole them. Sure,
he also lived in nature and didn’t talk to people.

~~~
komali2
Ok sure but he's in jail now so you don't need to worry about people
normalizing the behavior - so why not talk instead about the hermitude itself?

~~~
6thaccount2
Is he still in jail? I thought he was caught ages ago and had a sentence less
than a year?

I remember reading about his talk on living in prison...30 years in nature and
then absolute filth.

------
arkitaip
Had this man been born in, say, the 18th century, he could have become a
garden hermit [0]. British aristocracy used to employ hermits to live on their
estates, sometimes in hermitages or grottoes, as living garden ornaments but
also counsel.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_hermit](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden_hermit)

------
tkjl
Humans have a tendency to normalize the common. I think most people would
adapt to solitude given long enough time. What made him end up in the woods at
20 is much more interesting than how he survived all the years. This was
clearly his normalized state at 20.

Our senses are constantly bombarded, or maybe the right phrasing is “hijacked”
with information. This will affect us in one way or another. This guy clearly
choose information that has no intention to monetary profit on his decisions.
But again, it’s not a calculated decision. It’s a product of his history.

I’m sure you can find happiness in solitude if you’re willing to take the cost
of transitioning. Hell, you might even be able to self induce happiness in the
void of information. Perhaps by talking to an imaginary friend.

------
sealthedeal
So basically one break in every 10 days? I also find it crazy that he only
came across one hiker in 27 years.

Also, in Alaska, you are supposed to leave your cabins unlocked in case people
need to use them if they were stranded, etc. I doubt that this area was that
remote, just food for thought.

------
krn
If I had to guess, High-functioning autism[1] is the most likely mental
disorder to lead to such a complete self-isolation. It's similar to Asperger's
in a way that a person is usually of normal or higher than average
intelligence, but it makes it even harder to empathize with others, which
leads to extreme anxiety and complete inability to concentrate attention in
adult life. In other words, such a person might not be able to socialize,
study, or work despite being intelligent enough. This can unsurprisingly
encourage some unusual choices in life.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-
functioning_autism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-functioning_autism)

~~~
codingdave
Interesting that the Wikipedia article you linked, within the first paragraph,
completely refutes your premise that HFA is a diagnosis applied to some
individuals with above average intelligence, as well as social struggles.

~~~
krn
I am not sure if we read the same article.

There are plenty of sources on the subject[1]:

> High functioning autism can be tough to diagnose in a very young child.
> There are a number of answers to that question. For example: Higher
> intelligence and language skills may have masked certain symptoms.

> The ability to do well in school, communicate effectively, and pass an IQ
> test with flying colors are all impressive — and may send parents and
> teachers down the wrong path when looking for reasons for a child's unusual
> issues or behavior.

[1] [https://www.verywellhealth.com/high-functioning-
autism-26030...](https://www.verywellhealth.com/high-functioning-
autism-260305)

~~~
codingdave
Don't shoot the messenger - you are the one who linked to an article that
said:

"IQ of 70 or greater", and "HFA is not a recognized diagnosis"

~~~
krn
> "IQ of 70 or greater"

It means that 70 is the _lowest_ IQ of people with High-functioning autism,
which makes the average much higher than that.

> and "HFA is not a recognized diagnosis"

So is Asperger's since 2013. Yet, there is a huge difference between people
with high-functioning and low-functioning autism.

A person with low-functioning autism is not able to live independently at all.

~~~
krageon
> which makes the average much higher than that.

All it means is that this is the lowest IQ. The average might be 71, we cannot
deduce that one way or the other from "IQ of 70 or greater".

~~~
krn
> The average might be 71, we cannot deduce that one way or the other from "IQ
> of 70 or greater".

We cannot deduce that from this single quote alone, but there are far more
detailed figures available[1]:

> 31% of children with ASD have an intellectual disability (intelligence
> quotient [IQ] <70), 25% are in the borderline range (IQ 71–85), and 44% have
> IQ scores in the average to above average range (i.e., IQ >85).

If only the autistic people with IQ of 70 or greater are considered "high-
functioning", then 64% of them have IQ greater than 85.

In other words, 2/3 of people with High-functioning autism are of average or
above average intelligence.

[1] [https://www.autismspeaks.org/autism-facts-and-
figures](https://www.autismspeaks.org/autism-facts-and-figures)

~~~
krageon
I appreciate that you elaborated on this!

Are you implying here that 44% is 2/3 or that an IQ of 71-85 is already
average or above average intelligence? I'm afraid I don't follow your
reasoning. It looks to me like you might at most be able to claim from these
numbers that 44% is of average or above average intelligence.

A little bit off-topic: Doesn't this website belong to the group of people
that demonize and vilify (and even anthropomorphize) autism?

------
0xd171
You can really strip down and simplify your life, spend time in silence and
adjust your social interactions to suit your personality in many ways that are
much better than this.

------
dmitryminkovsky
Sounds a lot like
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Thomas_Knight](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Thomas_Knight).
That’s the Wikipedia but the other accounts are maybe better reads. Still, not
sure how you can be considered a hermit if you’re always out burglarizing.
You’re more of a homeless burglar then in my opinion. Interesting stories
though.

~~~
chippy
That is the same Christopher Knight that the article talks about.

~~~
dmitryminkovsky
Oh wow you’re right. Early morning confusion.

------
dang
Thread from 2014:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8205993](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8205993)

2017:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13878801](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13878801)

------
tw1010
He's aged remarkably well for 53.

------
ashildr
I wonder if they would be diagnosed ADHD or on the autism spectrum if they had
to function in society.

~~~
h0l0cube
As for Christopher Knight, that might be the case:
[https://www.gq.com/story/the-last-true-
hermit?currentPage=1](https://www.gq.com/story/the-last-true-
hermit?currentPage=1)

> I followed his cue and looked over his shoulder while he stared over mine.
> We maintained this arrangement for most of the visit. Chris had recently
> been given a mental-health evaluation by Maine’s forensic service. The
> report mentioned a possible diagnosis of Asperger’s disorder, a form of
> autism often marked by exceptional intelligence but extreme sensitivity to
> motions, sounds, and light.

> Chris had just learned of Asperger’s while in jail, and he seemed unfazed by
> the diagnosis. "I don’t think I’ll be a spokesman for the Asperger’s
> telethon. Do they still do telethons? I hate Jerry Lewis." He said he was
> taking no medications. "But I don’t like people touching me," he added.
> "You’re not a hugger, are you?"

------
zmix
Please, a bit more diversity!

"Property is theft!"

\-- Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_is_theft)!

------
rramadass
From the comments here, it seems people have not studied any philosophy and
are treating these folks as selfish and thieving. Not so; as a living organism
you need the minimum to feed, clothe and house yourself. This can be done in
any manner (in ancient history Sages/Monks used to "beg" for food which was an
accepted norm) and it simply is that some ways are looked down upon in today's
society. Nothing more. For some more accounts on solitary living and solitude
see;

1) Read up on Dick Proenneke -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Proenneke](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Proenneke)
He lived alone for 30 years (from age 50 to 80) in the Alaskan Wilderness;
built his cabin by hand and filmed his activities. Those documentaries and
journals are a must watch/read.

2) Into Great Silence -
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_Great_Silence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Into_Great_Silence)
A beautiful documentary on Carthusian monks in the French Alps.

~~~
appleflaxen
Breaking into people's property to take what they paid for is not ethical
because it violates the golden rule of that underpins most mainstream
religions: do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

If you want to beg, fine, but this man would burglarize cabins on the lake in
order to get food.

~~~
thendrill
Potato Potato.... Depends how you look at the potato... Who gave you the right
to take it from the ground and eat it ? Who gave you the ground ? Is it wrong
if someone planted it ? Is it wrong if it grows there naturally. Is it wrong
if you take one because your hungry, or is it wrong to take a ton in case you
get hungry ? See it is a slippery slope of ownership... Are you owned ? But
you still pay taxes to people that own you ?

~~~
JohnJamesRambo
Oh boy.

------
lota-putty
I see a complete loss of hope here, small joyous moments of human life are too
good to leave the world behind.

I suppose these people are stuck between two truths, life & death.

~~~
rramadass
You are looking at this from the wrong pov. The objective of solitary living
is to cut yourself off from "society" and its demands/interactions. The
ensuing mental calm and peace (there is "joy" in this) is what "hermits" are
striving for.

------
snambi
Looks like a homeless beggar living in the woods. There are so many in silicon
valley doing exactly same.

------
Avshalom
The framing this asshole gets from the press continues to astonish me.

"He didn't come out again for 27 years"... well except the 1000+ times he came
out to steal shit. And yeah I'm damn sure 27 years of weekly break ins and
theft "caused a lot of anxiety" christ that phrase is doing some heavy
lifting. "he tried to cause as little damage as possible" which is a hell of a
thing to say about 27 years of making the conscious decision to break into
people's houses and steal their shit.

~~~
fredsir
Aren't we also breaking in and stealing other, not people, but livings things
"stuff" when we mow down their home, destroy their supplies, and then kill
them off completely? Is it really a "break in" and "theft" if you are not part
of the society that has defined those collective myths? If you are not part of
a society that deems that individuals can own stuff, why should you follow
those rules? What about when we put upon others our will when we start a war?
Is it always wrong to take other peoples possessions or put upon them our
will? Is it wrong to take from others that have plenty if you have none? Isn't
our modern societies built upon taking stuff that isn't inherently ours,
claiming it, and then forcing our will upon those around us, humans and
animals alike?

If you are not part of our society, maybe going in and taking our stuff is not
as much "break in" and "theft", but just pure and simple survival.

~~~
taneq
> Is it always wrong to take other peoples possessions or put upon them our
> will?

Uh, yes. As far as "wrong" has a meaningful definition, that's wrong.

~~~
bradyo
I presume you are a vegan then

~~~
taneq
Animals aren't people.

To be clear, they're not people because they're outgroup, not because they're
not as smart as us.

------
fortran77
Well, he became a professional thief at age 20.

