3 ms·

If you are a participant in society, then you aren't a shut in. Nothing of significance happen. No promotion, no falling in love, no completion of a project, no

by kiba 3y ago

If you are a participant in society, then you aren't a shut in. Nothing of significance happen. No promotion, no falling in love, no completion of a project, no failure but also no success either. That is a shut-in. To be a shut-in is the inability to access the full spectrum of what life has to offer. Beside, as anyone familiar with using the internet, there may be so much entertainment, and yet there's nothing on the internet either.

ffsm8 3y ago
That's your definition of the term. Most people have a broader spectrum they'd classify as shut-in, which you can discover by clicking on the provided wiki article. Personally I think your definition doesn't actually work, tbh. Where do you draw the line for "no participation in society"? Wouldn't that mean any interaction? Now they can't even order through a web portal, can't comment on social media like reddit etc. You'd need to create an incredibly controlled environment to make that viable, which would remove the self-imposed aspect of it. Even the article you're commenting on has a hikikomori releasing a game project after several years. He wouldn't be one according to your definition either, even though everyone that knows about him IRL would absolutely call him one.
- kiba 3y ago
  Nah. I define the hikikomori by necessarily the state of despair. That obviously came through the participation in society. For the record, a hikikomori makes a video game? Wow. I wish I can do that. It's a matter of effort, of putting a foot in one another. The thing is, developing a video game and releasing it to the public is inherently a social activity, unless you write the code only for yourself. Things are happening. Playing video games which is what creates despair for me. Nothing happens outside of that video game. Don't get me wrong, playing video is a lot of fun, but it isn't beneficial when there's too much of it.
  - ffsm8 3y ago
    From reading your other comments in this thread I think you're just equating your experience as a hikikomori to be what it means to be a shut-in. The currently accepted definition is however merely: * spending most of the day and nearly every day confined to home, * marked and persistent avoidance of social situations, and social relationships, * social withdrawal symptoms causing significant functional impairment, * duration of exceeding six months, * no apparent physical or mental etiology to account for the social withdrawal symptoms. Under these criteria (quoted straight from the linked Wiki article), a person working from home office with no contact can also become a social recluse, even if it's certainly a different experience then what you've experienced
noneparticular 3y ago
Can't say I overly agree with that, I work full time from home but pretty common for me to not leave my residence for 10 to 15 days at a time, and usually only to purchase groceries or small things to repair or maintain where I live. This is my life for the last 6 or 7 years now. I have no family to speak of, and I don't have any acquaintances outside of work. And I've never met any of my colleagues face to face. Many of whom have never seen a photograph of me. Most of our interactions are in Mattermost chats, emails, or work items. Most people only know me as ASCII codes rendered on a screen to form words. If that doesn't qualify me as a shut in, what does? >To be a shut-in is the inability to access the full spectrum of what life has to offer. My response to that would be to ask why such things would be appealing in the first place. Why should one that finds no reward in dealing with other people at all, aspire to being promoted or falling in love? Both of which inherently require dealing with other people.
- barbs 3y ago
  I feel it's what we've evolved to be tbh, regardless of what we've logically concluded.
  - dleary 3y ago
    This is not a valid argument. The same argument has been used to oppress people since time immemorial, whether they were brown skinned, homosexuals, neurodivergent, Jews, or various other arguments for being “not as we were evolved to be”. (You have targeted one form of neurodivergent people here). If you ignore the eyeblink of the last 100 years, then we have hundreds of thousands of years of brutal rape, war, misogyny, racism, xenophobia, enslavement, and I’m sure we could think of a few others… It would be very hard to argue that this is not “what we’re evolved to be”, since we so lustfully pursued these endeavors for literally 100 times as long as we have recorded history. This argument is basically the same exact sentiment as “because that is Gods will” or “because that is the way it’s always been done” dressed up in a patina of science by including the word “evolved” in it.
- kiba 3y ago
  My response to that would be to ask why such things would be appealing in the first place. Why should one that finds no reward in dealing with other people at all, aspire to being promoted or falling in love? Both of which inherently require dealing with other people. A good question. I define that with: nothing happens. Life becomes static. Events don't happen. That's what I meant by being a shut-in. To be fair, a shut-in to having a life is a range rather than a binary thing. My response to that would be to ask why such things would be appealing in the first place. Why should one that finds no reward in dealing with other people at all, aspire to being promoted or falling in love? Both of which inherently require dealing with other people. I don't know. I was OK with not meeting people in real life. Then I started meeting people, and started to find a new dimension in life. I found that I have certain social talent that I didn't know I have. One thing to take into consideration is that people changes and their preferences changes. They are not static. Anyway, it's not so much about having photos or being able to see someone's face. It's about something happening. It's kinda hard to define. Again, no failure, but no success either. No exhilaration, and no happiness. Life is static. Nothing happens. Sadness may happens, but hopefully good things should outweigh that.
johnnyanmac 3y ago
>there may be so much entertainment, and yet there's nothing on the internet either. There's plenty on the internet. There may have been more outside, but cultural shifts are decreasing that. So the Internet is becoming surprisingly (and depressively) more competitive.
- kiba 3y ago
  By any objective measure, there's more books and more video games than you can ever play within your limited lifespan. That is what I meant by there's always something to do but yet nothing. I partially solved that by actually just learning the science as opposed to watching more educational science video. There's only so much edutainment that you can tolerate.

by kiba 3y ago

ffsm8 3y ago

That's your definition of the term. Most people have a broader spectrum they'd classify as shut-in, which you can discover by clicking on the provided wiki article. Personally I think your definition doesn't actually work, tbh. Where do you draw the line for "no participation in society"? Wouldn't that mean any interaction? Now they can't even order through a web portal, can't comment on social media like reddit etc. You'd need to create an incredibly controlled environment to make that viable, which would remove the self-imposed aspect of it. Even the article you're commenting on has a hikikomori releasing a game project after several years. He wouldn't be one according to your definition either, even though everyone that knows about him IRL would absolutely call him one.

kiba 3y ago
Nah. I define the hikikomori by necessarily the state of despair. That obviously came through the participation in society. For the record, a hikikomori makes a video game? Wow. I wish I can do that. It's a matter of effort, of putting a foot in one another. The thing is, developing a video game and releasing it to the public is inherently a social activity, unless you write the code only for yourself. Things are happening. Playing video games which is what creates despair for me. Nothing happens outside of that video game. Don't get me wrong, playing video is a lot of fun, but it isn't beneficial when there's too much of it.
- ffsm8 3y ago
  From reading your other comments in this thread I think you're just equating your experience as a hikikomori to be what it means to be a shut-in. The currently accepted definition is however merely: * spending most of the day and nearly every day confined to home, * marked and persistent avoidance of social situations, and social relationships, * social withdrawal symptoms causing significant functional impairment, * duration of exceeding six months, * no apparent physical or mental etiology to account for the social withdrawal symptoms. Under these criteria (quoted straight from the linked Wiki article), a person working from home office with no contact can also become a social recluse, even if it's certainly a different experience then what you've experienced

noneparticular 3y ago

Can't say I overly agree with that, I work full time from home but pretty common for me to not leave my residence for 10 to 15 days at a time, and usually only to purchase groceries or small things to repair or maintain where I live. This is my life for the last 6 or 7 years now. I have no family to speak of, and I don't have any acquaintances outside of work. And I've never met any of my colleagues face to face. Many of whom have never seen a photograph of me. Most of our interactions are in Mattermost chats, emails, or work items. Most people only know me as ASCII codes rendered on a screen to form words. If that doesn't qualify me as a shut in, what does? >To be a shut-in is the inability to access the full spectrum of what life has to offer. My response to that would be to ask why such things would be appealing in the first place. Why should one that finds no reward in dealing with other people at all, aspire to being promoted or falling in love? Both of which inherently require dealing with other people.

barbs 3y ago
I feel it's what we've evolved to be tbh, regardless of what we've logically concluded.
- dleary 3y ago
  This is not a valid argument. The same argument has been used to oppress people since time immemorial, whether they were brown skinned, homosexuals, neurodivergent, Jews, or various other arguments for being “not as we were evolved to be”. (You have targeted one form of neurodivergent people here). If you ignore the eyeblink of the last 100 years, then we have hundreds of thousands of years of brutal rape, war, misogyny, racism, xenophobia, enslavement, and I’m sure we could think of a few others… It would be very hard to argue that this is not “what we’re evolved to be”, since we so lustfully pursued these endeavors for literally 100 times as long as we have recorded history. This argument is basically the same exact sentiment as “because that is Gods will” or “because that is the way it’s always been done” dressed up in a patina of science by including the word “evolved” in it.
kiba 3y ago
My response to that would be to ask why such things would be appealing in the first place. Why should one that finds no reward in dealing with other people at all, aspire to being promoted or falling in love? Both of which inherently require dealing with other people. A good question. I define that with: nothing happens. Life becomes static. Events don't happen. That's what I meant by being a shut-in. To be fair, a shut-in to having a life is a range rather than a binary thing. My response to that would be to ask why such things would be appealing in the first place. Why should one that finds no reward in dealing with other people at all, aspire to being promoted or falling in love? Both of which inherently require dealing with other people. I don't know. I was OK with not meeting people in real life. Then I started meeting people, and started to find a new dimension in life. I found that I have certain social talent that I didn't know I have. One thing to take into consideration is that people changes and their preferences changes. They are not static. Anyway, it's not so much about having photos or being able to see someone's face. It's about something happening. It's kinda hard to define. Again, no failure, but no success either. No exhilaration, and no happiness. Life is static. Nothing happens. Sadness may happens, but hopefully good things should outweigh that.

johnnyanmac 3y ago

>there may be so much entertainment, and yet there's nothing on the internet either. There's plenty on the internet. There may have been more outside, but cultural shifts are decreasing that. So the Internet is becoming surprisingly (and depressively) more competitive.

kiba 3y ago
By any objective measure, there's more books and more video games than you can ever play within your limited lifespan. That is what I meant by there's always something to do but yet nothing. I partially solved that by actually just learning the science as opposed to watching more educational science video. There's only so much edutainment that you can tolerate.