This is not simply about being lonely. I’ve been reflecting on certain life-situations, where I’ve felt ‘alone’. You can be ‘alone’ in a whole crowd of people. And you can certainly feel ‘lonely’ in a crowd. However the two concepts do not equate in my mind (regardless of any dictionary definitions).
What it means
The following are the characteristics that I’ve sifted out that constitute feeling ‘alone’:
- Where I alone knew the intricate details, the multitude of interconnecting issues, and the various ramifications.
- No one else would give the time of day or a candle by night to take the slightest interest in the details. It’s simply not their business.
- Because of the course and intricacy of the situations, few would understand them in their entirety or sufficiently, to really grasp their significance.
- A feeling that if another was to share in some of the detail, they would certainly lose interest or feel they ‘shouldn’t go there’, on grounds of some political or moral correctness – conjured purely for avoidance.
- Interest if shown would be short-lived and superficial, leading to under- or mis-appreciation of the salience of the issues.
- Knowing a thing in detail and being so close to it, runs the risk of being accused of being pedantic – and seeing more into situations than exist.
- Attempts to share the unique set of experiences leads to others taking a safe and middle road – after all they, not being able to grasp the depths of the issues are overly cautious, lest they be accused by some ‘watchful eye’ of misleading or misdirecting.
Pressure and risk
There is at times a pressure to share thoughts, with a hope that at least a single other person will appreciate and provide rescue from a sense of potential insanity. But at the same there is an inhibitory risk that any sharing could lead to accusations of insanity. The tension between the two – hope of rescue from; and risk of accusation of insanity – is an uncomfortable place.
How does it happen?
But ‘alone’ and ‘lonely’ have roots in a large super-pattern etched into us over millions of years. We are normally parts of ‘herds’ (as a concept).
There you go insulting everybody – people are not cattle!
CW:
What are you on about?!
You said peopleare part of herds – well that’s about cattle and other similar animals.
CW:
Chrysst – I was referring the the herd instinct when I used the word.
You can’t do that with humans!
CW:
Why?
Because humans are not animals, they do not move in herds, and no herd instinct can apply to them! What’s wrong with you?!
CW:
Actually – humans a animals – and whilst they are not cattle etc – they are ruled by herd instincts.
Show me the evidence!
CW:
No! I’m not showing you any evidence. The herd instinct is not something I can put under a microscope and show you. It is a concept that arises from sociology and psychology.
I’m not a sociologist or psychologist and neither are you!
CW:
Right – I’ve had it. You’re back in the box!
OMG! After that volley of insults and confusion, I had to take a short lie down. I’m okay now. Lemme continue.
“We found that human groups tend to spontaneously herd, particularly in terms of directional synchrony, supporting the notion of a human herding instinct.” [See here – but this is not the only reference]. It is reasonable to infer that when we are not as well connected psychologically, cognitively or physically from groups in our social spheres, that we will feel something. I suggest that such feelings will be interpreted as loneliness and related concepts.
Summary
‘Alone’ and ‘lonely’ may be flipsides of the same coin – I can’t be very certain. I hope that those who read this find some meaning that resonates with their person. Being alone or lonely has several components: biological, psychological and social. It is a huge exploration that I will take up at another time.