I have the usual reasons for preferring solitude over socializing, but there's also a sort of meta-reason that causes me to want to socialize even less:<p>When I am asked about what I've been up to, and I'm honest in that I spend a lot of my time in a balance between intellectual pursuits and mundane chores, I am treated as if I am crazy or deficient. People who don't require my level of solitude see it as a sign that I'm broken, and they never grasp that I prefer it because it helps me stay healthy and creative.<p>I recently took a two week vacation from work; I had been working non-stop for over a year and needed some time to not code or work on anything. I drove out to Arches National Park, spent some time in nature, came back, and simply relaxed at home. Read some books, played video games, etc.<p>According to everyone, I should have gone out to see the latest movies, taken a cruise, traveled to cities, experienced night life, seen family and friends, and filled all my days with "activities". My life is supposed to be exciting, by their standard of what exciting is.<p>It's pretty insulting, especially because they don't even attempt to see it my way. I perfectly understand why others don't want the kind of solitude that I desire, and I don't deride them of it. To be a genuine person only to be met with implications that I'm not living my life correctly makes me think "Why am I bothering with this shit?" So I socialize even less.<p>To me, socializing for the sake of it is rarely worth the time. It's good practice for when you want to socialize with people who are worth your time, but the returns are pretty diminishing. I don't need to continually explain to people why I'm not filling every moment of my life with "activities" and why I care about my craft(coding). People who value socializing often talk about being a good listener, but they rarely do this themselves.<p>If people were more open in their attitudes, I'd be more likely to want to socialize with them.
The best part about being comfortable as a "loner" is that your daily state of existence moves from one of need to one of curation and choice. Being alone is where I thrive, so any break from that requires a better return. My social moments have meaning to them now, because I choose to allow them to happen. It's very difficult for toxic people to get in my space because I don't live with the need for company, regardless of whether that company provides actual value to my day.
Being a loner and socializing seem to occur in proportion to your personality, which let's say has an inherent value across the spectrum. That value can shift depending upon your emotional, psychological, and physiological state. There are times when shifting along the spectrum either by conscious choice or social coercion (benevolent I hope) is very useful. I think your personality is constructed through the interaction of waves of perception and understanding of oneself generated by you and others who know you: this seems to make your personality whole because others can help you understand yourself either directly or indirectly through shared experiences. In addition to the usual self-analysis/introspection, others can act as a mirror or microscope to examine oneself.<p>Here is the conclusion of the article:<p>"Thus, if your personality tends toward unsociability, you shouldn’t feel the need to change. Of course, that comes with caveats. But as long as you have regular social contact, you are choosing solitude rather than being forced into it, you have at least a few good friends and your solitude is good for your well-being or productivity, there’s no point agonising over how to fit a square personality into a round hole."<p>There were articles and discussion yesterday and in the past about the dangers of loneliness which may be salient as social networking creates a paradox of socialization: I'm with all my friends (maybe even humanity), but physically I am alone.<p>> <a href="https://hn.algolia.com/?query=loneliness&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=story" rel="nofollow">https://hn.algolia.com/?query=loneliness&sort=byPopularity&p...</a>
This has not been new knowledge for several thousand years, at least. Marcus Aurelius, from the <i>Meditations</i>:<p>"Men seek retreats for themselves, houses in the country, sea-shores, and mountains; and thou too art wont to desire such things very much. But this is altogether a mark of the most common sort of men, for it is in thy power whenever thou shalt choose to retire into thyself. For nowhere either with more quiet or more freedom from trouble does a man retire than into his own soul, particularly when he has within him such thoughts that by looking into them he is immediately in perfect tranquility; and I affirm that tranquility is nothing else than the good ordering of the mind. Constantly then give to thyself this retreat, and renew thyself; and let thy principles be brief and fundamental, which, as soon as thou shalt recur to them, will be sufficient to cleanse the soul completely, and to send thee back free from all discontent with the things to which thou returnest."<p>But Marcus was no loner, and neither are the people who are able to use isolation healthily, for the most part. We should neither over- nor under-emphasize "the things to which thou returnest."
In my experience, society pressures many bad decisions on people out of social conformity or expectations. For instance, it’s pretty hard to live a genuinely healthy lifestyle in the US. Most jobs are sedentary. Diet options tend to be heavily animal based and fatty or otherwise nutrient poor and calorie rich. Everybody loves tailgating the car going the speed limit, etc. simply opting out of those things will probably result in better health outcomes.
This resonates with me, being a bit of an introvert. There is something rather lovely about encasing yourself in your own thoughts without the pressure or prejudice of other opinions. I do enjoy company as well, but I really feel alive and free when I can think clearly, which happens most often when I'm alone - it actually gives me a profound sense wellbeing.
There's an entire genre of science clickbait where the title is extremely noncommittal, and it gets upvoted because it jives with users worldview and self-rationalization.<p>"See, it's ok to be alone. That one study from 2011 of pizza chain efficiency suggests there could be potential benefits to being alone."<p>"See, it's actually a good thing to drink alcohol everyday as long as I do it 'in moderation'."
Historically, the ability to spend time alone with one's thoughts has always been a luxury, available only to those with the means to own or rent their own living space. Everyone else in the world dealt with highly-communal living spaces where you didn't have any choice but to socialize with virtually 100% of your non-sleeping time.<p>You simply didn't have an option to develop introversion unless you were extremely lucky.
I think the term "loner" sends mixed signals. It has a negative connotation and to me at least, it means that you want to socialise but find it difficult or awkward.<p>Instead, I think what this article is getting at is simply setting time aside in your agenda for yourself. That's it. Whether it be to hone some skills, relax, meditate, plan your future, whatever. It's super helpful. I live in a small village and commute every day by train or car. Sometimes I take one hour walks with my dog and talk with myself. I look forward to it sometimes. It's like catching up with a friend after a busy week.<p>Tiny definitions like these can really make a difference. I wish we were more careful, specially in an era where people only read headlines and feel they gained knowledge.
In either Age of empires, or Rise of Nations, soldiers take steady attrition damage operating on enemy grounds. And, gain health just by being on home or ally territory.<p>I think this analogy works for introverts vs extroverts.<p>Introverts take attrition damage dealing with others - especially extroverts.<p>Extroverts take attrition damage when alone or on slow paced periods.
Reminds me of Crocodile Dundee having come to the city from long walkabouts alone in the outback - "Must be real friendly people to all want to live together like this!"
I'm curious if there is any research in Computer Science Education / Software Engineering that looks at some of the more holistic aspects of group work. One of the supporting arguments for things like paired programming is the idea that software developers, previously stereotyped as being isolated basement dwellers, need to be able to socialize in the business world. It seems then counter-intuitive to do these types of activities if they work stump creativity in problem-solving.<p>Furthermore, what about isolation while learning/homework? NCSU requires introductory CS students to work in groups for lab assignments. Research my lab currently is doing shows collaborative students can have good learning gains, as well as a person who "does all the work". How does this article's points align with these types of findings?
I'm not sure I'd classify myself as a loner(married, fairly large social circle) but I definitely value my self reflection time. I do think I tend to be more 'dense' in my social interactions as the article suggests. Ie if I"m gonna spend a lot of hours doing something social(parties, meet-ups etc), I'd prefer there to be some observable benefit. There are plenty of ways to I know of it improve/expand my knowledge on my own: skunkworks projects, reading etc. Think it's pretty much like anything else in life: find the balance of alone time and socialization that works for you and you'll be healthier and happier for it.
I am fine with choosing a 'loner' path, but the hitch comes when they want civilization / society to come to rescue whenever they feel like it or are in danger or stuck etc.<p>I did and do pride myself for being able to be on my own but over time, I have come to see what my family adds to my existence. What I don't realize and appreciate when they are around, I completely feel it when they aren't. The social part of me is like a cat I guess: when others are watching, it just wants to hide under a counter, goes for snuggles once in a while.<p>As in all things, it is good to keep a moderate involvement. You can't expect them snuggles without giving something in return to family/society/country/whatever.<p>Time for another one of my dumb theories: The system has enabled us to be alone more and more without actually putting ourselves in the path of physical labor/danger - but I believe it is also fraying at the seams exactly because of the same. It is hard to care for your fellow man / schools / community etc. when you hardly participate and if you only react when personally impacted. Social contracts need social involvement.
I replaced going out with staying in after realizing that much of the activities weren't all that great. 'Hanging out', drinks, chasing girls, spending cash, and then back on the treadmill making cash in order to rinse and repeat.<p>To be fair, these things <i>are</i> fun but as you get older the opportunity cost is way too high for them to be worthwhile at the expense of self improvement.<p>Instead I work for 3 months at a time everyday in almost total solitude on an online business then spend two weeks travelling Asia or on a roadtrip. Those two weeks make up for whatever mediocre activities I missed the last 12 weekends. (The goal is not solitude, it's freedom. Solitude is simply what's required to get there).<p>In today's always connected world, being alone is a gift. Your time is your most valuable asset and most commitments are not value-adding so filter accordingly.<p>One important point: Don't use solitude as an excuse to neglect oneself. Time spent alone should be a space to grow not atrophy.
You know, the only time that I almost regretted not making a lot of friends was when my wife and I got married recently. She had a few friends there and a ton of family. I only had family. While I'm cool with all of her friends and family, it would have been nice to have had people on my side to talk to, too.<p>It isn't a thorn in my side; it just would've been nice.
I think many people revel in their ability to be alone, almost as if it is some special ability they have. For me, truly being alone means: no television, no video games, no internet. It is not really some special ability to watch 4 hours of Netflix while browsing the internet on your phone occasionally.
The only way to solve a problem is to first create a problem.<p>1. How do do social skills influence happiness?<p>Answer: The potential to influence could be mathematically described as 1 + 1 = 2. Happiness, on the other hand, adds up to a single solitary state of mind: 1 + 0 = 1. Potential relies on variables.
Sometimes I get the feeling that there's too much over analysis of things and too often they lead to bad unintended consequences.<p>Not everything needs to be "researched". Can we redirect some "research" money of this nature to things like cold fusion and curing cancer?
What I like about being a loner, is that no one can influence me.<p>My decisions are all my own.<p>I used to live with roommates, and it was too mentally exhausting. Once I was able to afford my own 1-bedroom apartment, I moved out. And I found serenity.<p>No more mess to deal with that wasn't my own. No more roommates bailing on me, causing unnecessary drama. You now have better control of your life and destiny.<p>When I traveled for work, I had to travel alone. I found the best place to sit was at the bar. The sports game on TV provides distraction. And sometimes, you get to strike a conversation with another fellow traveler.