3 ms·
> Reducing otherwise involuntary interactions can be a good thing. You feel the need to breathe not because your body senses it lacks oxygen, but because it se
by Chaebixi 9y ago
> Reducing otherwise involuntary interactions can be a good thing.
You feel the need to breathe not because your body senses it lacks oxygen, but because it senses an excess of CO2, so it'll happily let you suffocate with no warning in an atmosphere with too much nitrogen gas. I think humanity has many more systems like that, which break down in unhealthy ways when removed from some natural constraint or conflict. I think, for many people, one of those is the conflict between the need for social interaction and the desire fulfill basic wants as easily as possible. An easy way to get the latter is by "cutting out the human," (e.g. working and shopping online) but that can leave the former need neglected if someone lacks the urge to seek out social connection on their own.
I admit there are people who can be happy with a completely solitary life, but I believe they're very rare. Also, modern industrial society has succeeded in depersonalizing many human business interactions so they're already pretty barren of value (e.g. you can't form a friendship with a store clerk* if it's it's too often a different one), but I think my point still stands.
* I have done this several times.
- paulryanrogers 9y agoGiving people more choice in how they satisfy their social needs is good. If they're unaware of how to fulfill them then I wouldn't argue for forcing them to do so through chores.