Loneliness article in The Atlantic

Move along, nothing to see here!
zarathustra
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 11:15 pm
Location: VEGAS, BABY

Post by zarathustra »

hoplite - i wanna meet that guy! :) though it's a little show-off-y, it's kinda hot.
i also get annoyed with the FB or online interaction bashing. it's fallacious because the value of interactions is based solely on subjectivity and the context, which can be the SAME no matter what forum you are interacting in.
this is quite a relevant post for me in general, but especially lately since i'm still pretty new to the bay area and my very small group of friends that i have meaningful dialogue with are still in pdx. it's hard.
i've always tested intj or entj . . . a friend recently called me the most extroverted introvert he's ever met. i can play and even genuinely be outgoing, but i do have a limit of about 2 hours max and then i need my recharge of solitude. i withdraw and start to get anxious; looking like an addict dying for a fix. UNLESS there is meaningful interaction; then i can go on for hours. (that's what she said)
i think that what was said earlier about exercising that social muscle is important. there are many weekends i'd much prefer to read alone in the bath, but i force myself one night a week to walk to the pub and have a drink and try to seem approachable (i bring a homemade one with me in my bag). at least 75% of the time i come away disappointed with the interaction, but there are times i can get at least one meaningful conversation in with someone. that helps restore a little faith.
now, i think it's easier for those with kids, spouses, or significant others to lean on those relationships, which i'm not saying is bad or good. what i'm saying is that i'm not in any of those boats, so i am in a position where i HAVE to venture out of my "comfort zone" to give life a chance to show me people i can have meaningful interactions with and possibly a love interest.
i tend to try to focus on getting people to "reveal a bit of real" if you know what i mean. i value "the real" in people but i think most are not used to it being required or desired from others, so they stick to what is "socially acceptable", which is boring and meaningless drivel and/or lame come-ons. the tactic hoplite's friend uses i don't think would work with most people because it's a little attacky, but to each his own.
when you get through with someone, though, the payoff is amazing and relationships can be formed. just because someone starts off with the shallow convos we all despise does not mean they can't do the deeper ones. we, as a society, are just conditioned to keep that in and/or ignore it. i think a lot of people are HUNGRY to be genuine but can't take the first step. i can't tell you how many times people have told me how refreshing it was to let go and be real for once. that makes my "attempts" at being social worth it.
so i guess i'm saying: exercise the muscle and focus less on how lowly everyone else's conversations are and think about the fact that maybe there are a lot more people than you think who have something deep and meaningful to offer but don't know how or don't think it's desired from others. give people a chance and try not to be judgy in your approach!


rachelFLF
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 1:05 am

Post by rachelFLF »

i don't think we should group fb bashing and internet bashing together. to me, the conversations on a forum like this feel real and thoughtful, whereas the majority of those on fb do not. so feeling like fb is lame does not mean one dislikes all internet interaction. i think fb is just its own animal.
full disclosure: i don't have fb. maybe i'm wrong and the truth is that it is what you make of it. i notice my husband having deep conversations with friends on fb - someone will post an article and they'll debate it. but it think the way it's set up easily lends itself to a lot of superficiality.


User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6395
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Post by Ego »

The New York Times had an interesting OpEd piece yesterday about this titled, The Flight From Conversation.
A few of the more interesting quotes:
Human relationships are rich; they’re messy and demanding. We have learned the habit of cleaning them up with technology. And the move from conversation to connection is part of this. But it’s a process in which we shortchange ourselves. Worse, it seems that over time we stop caring, we forget that there is a difference.
and
FACE-TO-FACE conversation unfolds slowly. It teaches patience. When we communicate on our digital devices, we learn different habits. As we ramp up the volume and velocity of online connections, we start to expect faster answers. To get these, we ask one another simpler questions; we dumb down our communications, even on the most important matters.
and
And we use conversation with others to learn to converse with ourselves. So our flight from conversation can mean diminished chances to learn skills of self-reflection. These days, social media continually asks us what’s “on our mind,” but we have little motivation to say something truly self-reflective. Self-reflection in conversation requires trust. It’s hard to do anything with 3,000 Facebook friends except connect.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/opini ... ef=general#


Post Reply