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 <i>in itself</i>, and denigrating individuality as an unhealthy delusion and a denial of humanness, which is inherently social and collective.<p>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 <i>as an individual</i> is a conservative ideal, treated suspiciously by liberals, but to be different <i>as part of a group</i> is a liberal ideal, treated with suspicion by conservatives.<p>(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.)<p>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?