
What Solitary Confinement Does to the Brain - JabavuAdams
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/03/30/090330fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all
======
plinkplonk
I found this part interesting.

"Many prisoners find survival in physical exercise, prayer, or plans for
escape. Many carry out elaborate mental exercises, building entire houses in
their heads, board by board, nail by nail, from the ground up, or memorizing
team rosters for a baseball season. McCain recreated in his mind movies he’d
seen. Anderson reconstructed complete novels from memory. Yuri Nosenko, a
K.G.B. defector whom the C.I.A. wrongly accused of being a double agent and
held for three years in total isolation (no reading material, no news, no
human contact except with interrogators) in a closet-size concrete cell near
Williamsburg, Virginia, made chess sets from threads and a calendar from lint
(only to have them discovered and swept away)."

It seems that isolation works like a virus attack, slowly rendering the mind
incapable of working properly. Somewhat like a mental Gom Jabbar. Some people
at least seem to fight back by consciously creating stimulation. Hack and
Counter Hack.

~~~
rjurney
During 10 days of silence and meditation, I had entire movies play in my head,
in great detail, line by line, scene by scene. Movies I could normally barely
remember. I didn't have to try, it just happened. In fact I was trying not to
think. My mind wanted any kind of content to play. I think it happens
naturally.

~~~
rgrieselhuber
Fascinating. Makes me wonder what evolutionary necessity drove this need to
constantly have content playing?

~~~
DannoHung
Who knows, maybe it's part of the the low-level threat scanning aspect of our
nature. Maybe it has something to do with our capacity for self-consciousness,
maybe it's a side effect of being sentient.

I somehow doubt that it's a purely socially ingrained tendency though.

------
HalcyonMuse
"Everyone’s identity is socially created: it’s through your relationships that
you understand yourself as a mother or a father, a teacher or an accountant, a
hero or a villain."

This drew my attention in particular. Is this true for all people, truly,
including devout introverts, or is it merely a generalization? Does it perhaps
have varying degrees of applicability based on how intro- or extroverted
someone is?

~~~
swombat
I don't think it's a matter of introversion vs extroversion. Also, I don't
think it's generally true.

Certainly, a large part of our identity is socially created. Yet, at the same
time, there is a pretty large kernel that's there whether or not we're in our
usual social circles, whether or not we change our career, location, etc. And,
for some, that kernel is more important than the socially-dependent aspects.

I'd add that some parts of that kernel override whatever environment we're in.
A gentleman is still a gentleman in the gutter, as they say. Just because
you're in the company of thugs doesn't mean you're going to define yourself as
a thug.

So, while we certainly do adapt our behaviour to the role that we're
presenting, it is ultimately just a role - not our identity.

~~~
mkelly
I'm unsure how this "kernel" isn't socially created too.

Whether we decide to act like those around us, or different than them, is
irrelevant. The article is saying that just having _someone_ around us to
interact with in _some_ way is vital for our brain to even function.

Introverts still have plenty of social interaction -- maybe not in the small
area of recreational socialization that gets so much attention from
extroverts, but our society is still made up of a bunch of people. You have to
interact with them to do much of anything.

------
mcantelon
For an overview of the context of the state's research on, and use of,
solitary confinement I'd recommend the book "Brainwash: The Secret History of
Mind Control": [http://www.amazon.com/Brainwash-Secret-History-Mind-
Control/...](http://www.amazon.com/Brainwash-Secret-History-Mind-
Control/dp/031232572X). Despite the sensationalist title, it's a sober, wryly
humorous look at the evolution of psychological coercion techniques in modern
states.

------
michael_dorfman
Interestingly (with reference to another thread), "solitary confinement" is a
necessary requirement of some forms of meditation. Of course, that confinement
is by choice, and of a duration chosen by the participant. There's no doubt
that the lack of communication has an effect on the brain; whether this effect
is always deleterious seems disputable.

~~~
coffeemug
That's the beauty of the whole thing. I've seen grown men who appear to be
perfectly happy break down and cry like children after only three days of
meditation. Isolation puts you in very close contact with yourself. You can't
distract yourself any longer, so you're left with your own thoughts, repeating
delirious patterns, second guessing yourself, second guessing your life, and
your environment. If you do meditation wrong (succumb to these patterns
instead of returning to your breath), it can drive you insane, literally
inducing psychotic lapses.

Yet if you do it right, your mind become incredibly calm and alert.
Concentration becomes easy, your mind snaps into gear with a tiny push. And
you end up playing a game that's trivial to learn and unbelievably difficult
to master. Slowly, you peal away layers of your psyche, becoming intimately
familiar with it in the process, until you get to the pristine awareness your
mind inherently has.

There is wisdom and strength in isolation. You just have to learn how to get
through the demons in the darkest corners of your mind.

~~~
silentbicycle
It also makes a tremendous difference when isolation is voluntary, versus
being held prisoner in solitary confinement.

~~~
mkelly
Agreed. A lot of the "defiant" behaviors of the prisoners seemed to be efforts
to exert some control over their environment. Also, the newer British system
allowed more control in addition to less confinement.

I wonder if there's much overlap at all between the psychological effect of
voluntary solitude and forced solitude.

------
miguelpais
This story made me thought not about the prisioners who obviously have reasons
to get crazy, but rather on ourselves, so called hackers, who sometimes adopt
by own choice a life style based on short human interaction. What can be the
effects of that?

Even given the fact that we're usually very social beings in the virtual
world, talking to a lot and developpping strong relationships over the web,
what can be the affects of the lack of talking for example? Will we lose
progressively our hability to express ideas by talking and getting stronger in
the writing?

I think there aren't many studies on this kind of isolatio

------
rokhayakebe
The keyword here is Freewill. I think you could isolate for months if it is
your own choice. But if you are forced to be isolated for 3 hours it makes a
huge difference.

~~~
dcurtis
This reminds me of a guy named Tehching Hsieh, who voluntarily isolated
himself in a cage in his New York City apartment for a year. The cage and
pictures of him are on display at MoMA.

<http://www.moma.org/visit/calendar/exhibitions/322>

~~~
joe_adk
Anyone remember the name of the Japanese game show where the comedian was
locked in a room for (n) and had to win his way free via magazine giveaways? I
always thought it was fake/marketing, but an interesting.

~~~
dcx
Nasubi - <http://www.quirkyjapan.or.tv/nasubi.html>

It's like a study of this in action - insane but you can't look away.

------
mhb
Duplicate: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=565661>

------
biohacker42
What about Richard Proenneke: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Proenneke>

_remained there for most of the next 30 years, coming to the lower 48 only
occasionally_

Sane hermits are rare but not unknown, I wonder what makes them different?

