3 ms·

<< That is not coming back anytime soon. I am posting this as a person born and raised in a rather small community. I personally do not yearn for the good old

<< That is not coming back anytime soon. I am posting this as a person born and raised in a rather small community. I personally do not yearn for the good old days when 'everyone knew everyone' and there were things to do together. We did things together, because of geographical convenience and random chance. We had no other options so we did kids things. Granted, I was lucky to be included in that particular group, because they all were much, much smarter than me, but despite relatively pleasant memories, I enjoy my current situation much more. << When I was young random strangers had regularly great conversations on trains. I accept that being extrovert and/or social is(was?) the default mode in polite society, but I think we can agree that not everyone is built the same way. I certainly do not talk to strangers bar some unusual turn of events that requires cooperation. << Every single technological innovation has made it easier for the individual to function better alone. Is that a bad thing? We can now individually decide the life we actually want to lead with minimal interplay between various mediators that would have been mandatory only decades ago. Should we not be celebrating this as a tremendous achievement of humanity as a whole?

FooHentai 4y ago
Perhaps. But what are the long-term ramifications of continuing down this track? Does a society of individuals with low cohesion survive in the long run? What motivations to pull together and overcome any adversity that might come along exists? Is it worth it for a few generations of improved individual freedom, if that society doesn't hold together longer than that due to a lack of cohesion? “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” — Abraham Lincoln.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
janeerie 4y ago
I have come to believe that social interaction is like exercising or eating your vegetables. Some people naturally enjoy it; some people don’t. Either way, you will be a healthier person if you do it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
seydor 4y ago
everyone can learn to love their current situation. we are very adaptible species, but lack of interaction is also lack of opportunity and experience - sensory experience. being guarded against strangers is a somewhat ingraned fear. but there is value to overcoming the fear , or at least it s worth knowing whether there is value. somtimes the journey is worth more than the destination. surely it's great that we can travel faster in life and break barriers, but it often leads to lonely destinations which feel very meaningless.
ryandrake 4y ago
It's not just leave-me-alone individualism. It's this new, belligerent "Toxic Individualism" that's taken hold, supported by recent technological change (such as social media) and recent political/cultural change (many examples). A regular individualist simply prefers to operate on their own, outside of society and ignore collective activities. This new breed of individualism is more focused on attacking society and making it harder for people to take cooperative, collective action. Regular individualists are about working for themselves, where Toxic Individualists are more about deliberately working against society. "I don't want to be part of society" has become "Society is bad and you shouldn't have it either". I don't think this should be celebrated.
- woeirua 4y ago
  The anti-natalist movement is a good example of this.
  - fancybouncy 4y ago
    not at all. They are completely different things. We anti-natalists see child-making as torture and murder against an innocent -- if you see someone murdering an innocent, surely it's normal to speak out against it and try to stop it. Child making is not about parents; you are free to do whatever you do with your own life, not to involve someone else by force.
    - tsol 4y ago
      >you are free to do whatever you do with your own life, not to involve someone else by force. are you a vegan?
- Dracophoenix 4y ago
  What you call the the "toxic individualists" are simply another collective. Just one motivated by envy or nihilism.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago

FooHentai 4y ago

Perhaps. But what are the long-term ramifications of continuing down this track? Does a society of individuals with low cohesion survive in the long run? What motivations to pull together and overcome any adversity that might come along exists? Is it worth it for a few generations of improved individual freedom, if that society doesn't hold together longer than that due to a lack of cohesion? “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” — Abraham Lincoln.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

janeerie 4y ago

I have come to believe that social interaction is like exercising or eating your vegetables. Some people naturally enjoy it; some people don’t. Either way, you will be a healthier person if you do it.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

seydor 4y ago

everyone can learn to love their current situation. we are very adaptible species, but lack of interaction is also lack of opportunity and experience - sensory experience. being guarded against strangers is a somewhat ingraned fear. but there is value to overcoming the fear , or at least it s worth knowing whether there is value. somtimes the journey is worth more than the destination. surely it's great that we can travel faster in life and break barriers, but it often leads to lonely destinations which feel very meaningless.

ryandrake 4y ago

It's not just leave-me-alone individualism. It's this new, belligerent "Toxic Individualism" that's taken hold, supported by recent technological change (such as social media) and recent political/cultural change (many examples). A regular individualist simply prefers to operate on their own, outside of society and ignore collective activities. This new breed of individualism is more focused on attacking society and making it harder for people to take cooperative, collective action. Regular individualists are about working for themselves, where Toxic Individualists are more about deliberately working against society. "I don't want to be part of society" has become "Society is bad and you shouldn't have it either". I don't think this should be celebrated.

woeirua 4y ago
The anti-natalist movement is a good example of this.
- fancybouncy 4y ago
  not at all. They are completely different things. We anti-natalists see child-making as torture and murder against an innocent -- if you see someone murdering an innocent, surely it's normal to speak out against it and try to stop it. Child making is not about parents; you are free to do whatever you do with your own life, not to involve someone else by force.
  - tsol 4y ago
    >you are free to do whatever you do with your own life, not to involve someone else by force. are you a vegan?
Dracophoenix 4y ago
What you call the the "toxic individualists" are simply another collective. Just one motivated by envy or nihilism.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 4y ago