19 ms·

The Anti-Social Century

152 points by coloneltcb 2y ago

nicd 2y ago
This is the issue that is top of mind for me at the moment. If you're frustrated by political polarization, this is one of the root causes! I'm very eager to hear any ideas on steps we can take to systematically reverse this damage to society.
- reducesuffering 2y ago
  Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. We optimize for a big GDP number but never for a population happiness level.
  - Dracophoenix 2y ago
    > How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Are they on anti-depressants because life has gotten worse or because of decreasing stigma resulting from greater accessibility to better-informed patients? Until the turn of the century, just mentioning you saw a shrink in any sincere capacity would get you funny looks in most parts of the country. > Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. There's an old joke where a reporter asks a bank robber why he robs banks. The latter's response: "Because, that's where the money is". The bank and bar of today is the Internet. It's what funds and facilitates most social ventures, even the ones that take place IRL. Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair.
    - flenkzooz 2y ago
      I'm not sure I completely agree with your last assertion (except according to a very rigorous definition of "optimize"). While people do very much differ, there are certain things that predictably make the majority of people happier. Social connectedness, for example. We may not be able to truly optimize for these things, but I think we can reliably improve human wellbeing at scale. A successful example from the past would be the efforts to add more green spaces to cities. People like parks, and they're happier on average when they have access to them.
    - brookst 2y ago
      Yeah increasing treatment of medical conditions seems like a very poor proxy for proving an increase in incidence.
    - riehwvfbk 2y ago
      > Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair. This right here is exactly what's wrong. People are put into impossible conditions and then blamed when they can't magically make themselves happy with the arrangement. Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy?
      - Dracophoenix 2y ago
        Happiness isn't self-induced solipsism. I don't claim that external conditions have no effect on individual happiness, but rather that external conditions do not uniformly or systematically determine an individual's happiness nor can one reliably use such conditions to extrapolate the happiness of others. A policy that addresses a so-called collective need often comes at the cost of individual agency and thus individual happiness. It is therefore, necessary to recognize that the domain of happiness and its relevant parameters does not belong to an abstract blob, but solely to the individual. > Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy? Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owner's house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content as they are well-fed.
        throaway54 2y ago
        >Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owners house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content, as they are well-fed. Not if they are given a space which is too small and not stimulating enough for them, then they just pace around for their whole lives.
    - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
      Maybe an increased stigma was better? Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness, if you discount the former I think there are some examples.
      - Dracophoenix 2y ago
        > Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness The conditions that make someone miserable are just as variable. Some of the most content people possess little education and are mired in the throes of poverty. If you started a national misery program where the government impoverishes its population left and right, there would still be a minority who find enjoyment, even thrive, in such circumstances.
        dinkumthinkum 2y ago
        I mean you are talking about anomalies which is not what people mean here. Obviously masochists exist but that’s not very interesting
  - cess11 2y ago
    Capitalism can't reproduce itself through happy people. It needs enormous amounts of suffering to continue, and as a kid growing up you'll at some point notice this. At least you did, before the screens became dominant over reality.
    - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
      What does any of this mean? What is capitalist reproduction? How is any of that true? Does a system in which someone has a right to your labor somehow solve this?
      - cess11 2y ago
        It's an expression from economics. Do you disagree that societies reproduce themselves? We're living in a world system where almost all societies are based on the idea that one class of people has a right to the labour of almost all the rest. I'm not sure why you suggest furthering it is a solution to our current predicaments.
    - eli_gottlieb 2y ago
      Modes of production are not modes of consumption. The system doesn't change if the "plastic trivia" companies go bankrupt from everyone suddenly growing a sense of thrift.
  - matrix87 2y ago
    > 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Is it because they're emotionally worse off, or is it because pharma is advertising them more aggressively, kickbacks, etc
    - reducesuffering 2y ago
      There are many studies showing US youth report feeling worse than previously. The CDC: "Youth in the U.S. are experiencing a mental health crisis." https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-health-numbers.html https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-healt... Increased pharma pushing is an easy scapegoat, but it would have to be making these youth more depressed before they were ever taking antidepressants. Social media and phones have been disconnecting real interactions and pushing people onto fake digital "connections." Then when people are more lonely than ever, we're now pushing them "AI bot connections" to help loneliness, purely because VC's see $ in it, basically giving desperate people soda to help their hunger.
    - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
      I think social media even promotes this hyper therapy and medication seeking behavior. My guess it probably even creates a kind of Overton window sort of thing for physicians, big pharma notwithstanding. It’s very easy for people to get prescriptions for these drugs and a lot of doctors seem to think “patients reports depression so I prescribed SSRI” or whatever is popular.
      - harvodex 2y ago
        When I was 20, no one my age had got incredibly wealthy or famous who wasn't an actor or musician. It is like a hyper version of de Tocqueville now. No matter how poor someone is, they still don't feel that far from being rich and famous in America. This creates enormous status anxiety coupled with the reality of student loans and inflation it is a really bad deal for young people's mental health.
      - matrix87 2y ago
        yeah I see the same trend, at some point I just kinda decided to mentally slot all of those people into the stupid category, tune them out, and go on living
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    I totally agree with you but there is a lot of tech that is not social media related. But, that fact probably doesn’t change your quantitative observation.
  - watwut 2y ago
    > 25% of US university students on antidepressants. You need to factor in alcohol and drug use rates for previous generations, crime rates of youth and so it. It is not that current situation is optimal, but when I was young, you would not get antidepressants even if you actually desperately needed it. The taboo against admitting even to yourself that you might have mental health issue was too high. Conservative minded people like to complain about lack of risk taking among youth ... but quite a lot of risk taking was pure self destruction or destruction of whoever you got pregnant (if you was a guy).
- MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
  The article recommends seeking out interactions with others even when (especially when) we would avoid it. I don't know how to make that a movement, but I'll be more mindful of it.
- hansonkin 2y ago
  I've been working on a project to solve the social connection problem using a new approach. In a post third space society, I want to make it easier for people to connect with others nearby in small groups around shared hobbies and activities. Having a small group size makes it easier to host at someone's place and it's also cheaper than going out. I did a soft launch earlier this week by posting on NYC subreddits to get early feedback and test out my hypothesis . The reaction has been very positive with many comments saying they like the concept. Obviously there's a long way to go to really nail down the product market fit and build a sustainable business around it but the early feedback makes me feel like there is really something there.
  - vaginicola 2y ago
    Could help me find your reddit posts? I'm interested in learning more, but am having trouble locating them through search... I share your enthusiasm for making it easier for people to connect in person, focused around shared interests (incl. established online social networks). I'm sincerely concerned about the potential outcomes of our current and growing social isolation. That said, I believe that "third spaces" are still essential. Effective third spaces can provide safe, neutral ground for those who are unacquainted to get to know one another on their own terms. I think that the thought of inviting a strangers into your personal space is pretty uncomfortable to many people. I also think people want to get out of their cave every now and then--especially with the rise of work-from-home. I think the failure of traditional third spaces (cafes, bars, social clubs, libraries, etc.) has more to do with them being unable to adapt to the needs of modern society & socialization. My thought is that there needs to be a new type of third space which meets those needs. Perhaps something like WeWork, but geared towards the third space? Something that can adapt to and support the diverse interest/hobbies/networks that have come about due to the internet. Something that tics all of the "Great Good Place" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place) boxes and more. I have some ideas, but need to develop them further.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      A social crutch I really like is games. I’m terrible at talking to people, but I love playing competitive but social games. Stuff like chess boards, card games could go a long way.
- jasdi 2y ago
  Read the UN report on the Attention Economy. Everything is connected to Attention being over fished by platforms. The human pool of Attention is slow growing and finite (the limit being number of minutes in a day*people). Yet Content keeps exploding to infinity. Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In traditional economics, more money chasing the same goods = inflation. In the Attention Economy, more content chasing the same attention = engagement inflation (harder to get noticed, costs more to be seen). The real winners - Platforms, since they act like central banks controlling both supply (content) and demand (attention via algorithm). The Attention Economy behaves like a manipulated market where demand is fixed but distorted, and supply keeps increasing, benefiting the gatekeepers (platforms) while exhausting the participants (creators, advertisers, businesses, users). History teaches us where the story goes.
  - yesco 2y ago
    > History teaches us where the story goes. Does it? When else has this happened before? Or do you just mean manipulated markets specifically?
  - robwwilliams 2y ago
    > Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In some sense perhaps, but I now value my attention more since there is so much more competing for attention. Out with Twitter/X, in with Hacker News; out with daily papers, in with long news: Aeon and Atlantic and Foreign Affairs. And zero broadcast TV.
    - 63 2y ago
      This requires conscious choice and some discipline though. For the average person, content competes for attention on their behalf before their conscious brain kicks in. Social media uses cheap tricks like rage bait that your local book club just can't compete with. Yes, an emotionally healthy person with some free time who enjoyed books as a child (already a minority of people it seems due to many factors) may choose the book club, but the higher barrier of entry just keeps most people from ever considering it. It's just so damn hard for any in-person activities to compete with instant gratification and addictive rage. In college in 2022, I was a member of several clubs with varying subjects and members. Every one of them struggled to get anyone to attend. The CS club hosted drone races and 3d printed model painting. The improv club had weekly themed meetings. The theater department hosted at least 1 large and 1 small show per semester and we couldn't even get people to sit in the audience. And this is college, where demands on participants' time are relatively lacking (compared to kids and a 9-5). I imagine a lot of social activities have failed to get members and then just ceased to exist as a result. Several of the clubs I was in no longer exist due to a lack of participants to take up leadership after my class graduated. Don't even get me started on how people talk and talk about causes they admire on the internet but then never actually volunteer their time to make anything better. I really think society has just fucked itself over by letting social media companies run rampant with our attention, feeding us lies and gossip that doesn't matter 24 hours later. I genuinely just don't know if most people can be conscious and disciplined enough to get themselves out of the trap. At the very least, it will take a few generations to develop new mores and standards and who knows what new tech will be around to ruin their lives by then. I find it hard to believe that anyone was ever hopeful about working in this industry.
- intended 2y ago
  Aren’t there many countries which are happily anti social? In any case - approaching this as if it is damage, will end up putting you in opposition to choices people are making. You can be incredibly alone in a crowd of people. You can be empty when people are singing your praises. Meaning - is different simple social interaction. People can find their comfort zone of personal interaction is much smaller than others. TLDR: Treating it like a problem, results in bad suggestions. Treating it like a choice, suggests that one look at the options available to people. It may turn out that people aren’t hanging out at bars, but at home. Frankly, why wouldn’t people stay at home, if home is where they have put their time and effort into setting up. If you want a good place to find solutions, look to boredom and monotony. Do note - polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record.
  - bruce343434 2y ago
    > polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record. What do you mean?
    - HPsquared 2y ago
      The Reformation is one famous example.
      - jfengel 2y ago
        Reformation was itself really about long-standing conflicts between countries/nationalities. Few people really care whether they are saved through faith alone or not, just as East and West weren't really having wars over whether "filioque" belongs in the Nicene Creed. The Internet does give ordinary people the opportunity to be mean to each other on a daily basis rather than having wars. I'm genuinely not sure that's an improvement, since at least people would think twice before going into combat. The level of desiring to harass each other seems roughly constant.
        philwelch 2y ago
- tmnvix 2y ago
  I'm sure people will disagree on the significance, but I think it seems obvious that a society that encourages (and in some cases requires) its members to isolate themselves in mobile metal boxes is going to be more antisocial than one that doesn't.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    I think cars are a symptom of a philosophy, not the root cause.
    - pesus 2y ago
      I'd say they're both, and it feeds into itself.
      - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
        Fair
  - pesus 2y ago
    I'm with you on this one, and I think my time living in a fairly walkable city vs. previously living in a non-walkable suburb really underscored this point for me personally. I'm failing at finding it via google, but I also recall a study that showed drivers tended to view other drivers/cars on the road not as a person in control of a vehicle, but rather an inanimate object, which I think further supports your point. If anyone has a link to the study, I'd be grateful.
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    I feel like there is a political side that loves and thinks it clever to shame car ownership or blame everything on cars because because of sone socialist nonsense or something. People have been very social up until 2000 perhaps even later and so-called “metal boxes” have been a big part of American life for a long time. There have even been times when cars were an integral part of socializing in many circles. I get it “America sucks and ancient cities on the Continent are superior” or whatever , but isn’t this kind an f a cliche take at this point?
- bdangubic 2y ago
  until people realize that “social” media is the root of most evil plauging society currently nothing will change. and people will not disconnect from “social” media because of pure addiction. my life is drastically different today since I’ve ditched ALL social media. unlike other addictions, this came without withdrawals (10-20 minutes on HN helps :) )
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    I think you’re more on point than anyone else. Social media not working but affects connections but it hinders connections in both platonic and romantic relationship for so many reasons.
mitchbob 2y ago
https://archive.ph/xrfDj https://archive.ph/xrfDj
- ChrisArchitect 2y ago
  Gift link shared by author on social: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/02/american-loneliness-personality-politics/681091/?gift=o6MjJQpusU9ebnFuymVdsHLEgrw7xaVlFdZ_ahquf0Y https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/02/america...
CapstanRoller 2y ago
[flagged]
- nonrandomstring 2y ago
  > The USA is the land of trauma, multifaceted and pervasive, and telling people to touch grass or go to their local bar won't stop it nor heal the damage. You might find something resonates in this essay [0] I don't think it's unique to US America. It's well documented via writers like de Toqueville and Putnam, but the same phenomena are there in the UK, in Australia, and elsewhere. Technology lets us see ourselves, and we are quite sickened by how we treat one another. [0] https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/radical-disbelief-and-its-causes/ https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/radical-disbelief-and-its-ca...
- everdrive 2y ago
  There’s another side to this coin: the exultation of and obsession with trauma. There is an unstated and unnamed assumption in modern American culture: that you have experienced trauma, and more importantly that trauma is what has constructed your personality. This view has _some_ merit, but has been taken in uncritically as a fundamental assumption of life. Forcing yourself to imagine traumas, or constantly revisit legitimate traumas is deeply unhealthy. There was a time when no one could talk about their psychological issues, but now the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction: we has been discussing our trauma to a greater and greater degree for the past 30 years, but mental health outcomes are only getting worse. I’m undecided if this is casual, but there is no evidence it’s _helping_.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - logicchains 2y ago
    >There is an unstated and unnamed assumption in modern American culture: that you have experienced trauma, and more importantly that trauma is what has constructed your personality This is not "American culture", it's American leftism. Almost no conservative American thinks like that. And it's dying out by itself because American liberals aren't having enough children and views/values are partially heritable.
eddyfromtheblok 2y ago
since this article is US focused, 66% of households own pets. People would rather hang out with their pets. People bring their dogs to shop and people used to bring them to bars in the late 2010s.
- paulryanrogers 2y ago
  I really hope this trend doesn't grow or return, especially to places like super markets.
juresotosek 2y ago
Very concerning
hnthrow90348765 2y ago
If you ever want this back, the solution is simple: less work hours for the same pay. I suspect that societal health isn't a priority of capitalism though.
- HPsquared 2y ago
  If everyone just (on average) worked less, rent would be lower.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    And houses would be proportionally fewer, smaller, and and in need for repair. That is unless we assume builders and maintenance people are exempt from working less
    - HPsquared 2y ago
      And that would be okay!
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        I agree, as long as folks realize there is no free lunch.
        BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
        There may be some. I can’t recall where I saw it, but there can be large productivity increases when the work week is shorter. If the main tasks aren’t constant time but dependent on worker performance, there may be a free lunch to be had.
    - riehwvfbk 2y ago
      I take it you haven't been to Silicon Valley, the tech capital of the world. It's a place where everyone is hyper competitive and works as much as they physically can, and then some. And those are the slackers, the ones who truly want to get ahead optimize their sleep schedule to need only a few hours. It's also a place where poorly built and maintained budget housing from the 1960s sells for several million USD. Or you know, Japan. They are such slackers that they have a special word for death by overwork (karoshi). I hear they live in giant mansions.
rcpt 2y ago
> In 2023, 74 percent of all restaurant traffic came from “off premises” customers—that is, from takeout and delivery—up from 61 percent before COVID Sounds like people are just eating out more? https://www.statista.com/statistics/239410/us-food-service-and-drinking-place-sales/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/239410/us-food-service-a...
geremiiah 2y ago
It's not that I want to stay at home. It's just that I find it impossible to have a fulfilling social life. I don't know why these articles always seem to assume that these home bound people have good social opportunities.
- nicd 2y ago
  Very fair, and worth addressing. May I ask- what are the main barriers preventing you from socializing? Could intentionally designed apps or social structures reduce those barriers? What do you think would be most helpful?
  - germinalphrase 2y ago
    For many people, it's probably no deeper than the question, "where would I go?".
  - geremiiah 2y ago
    1. I would go out alone to some events, but most of the time I would end up not speaking to anyone because people were not approachable. Everyone else is typically in groups and closed off to outside interactions. There were some exceptions but that was the norm. 2. I'd search for some hobby/interest groups that would fit my interests, but nothing really fits. Either there are no meetups for such interests or there are meetups but the demographic at those meetup is not the demographic that I am interested in meeting. 3. Out of desperation I tried to be open minded and joined some hobby groups and did some sports that were really out of character for me. Here I did meet some interesting people, but I did not make a good impression because I was so obviously out of place. 4. Eventually my Friday nights consisted of going for a swim at 21:00-22:00 or going to the library of the nearest university so that I could feel some kind of social warmth sitting in a hall with all the other people.
    - KittenInABox 2y ago
      1. I think you would be surprised how much people are friendly in a socializing event if you just showed up and said hey I'm new, can I join in this conversation. Then just listen 80% of the time and maybe ask a question or two. Then do it again with a follow up of what you listened to. Just keep at it. 2. What are your interests, precisely? And what do you mean the demographic you are interested in meeting-- what is that demographic, precisely?
mibes 2y ago
I think old distinction between the words "unsociable" meaning not wanting to socialise, and "anti-social" meaning causing trouble to society, is useful. I guess I'm swimming against the tide with this one though
- panarky 2y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asociality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asociality
  - ysavir 2y ago
    GP is referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour "Asocial" means being non-social. "Anti-social" means being a problem to society. It's terrible terminology to be sure, but those are the current definitions, and it's surprising that no one in the chain of publication for this article flagged that.
    - lantry 2y ago
      The article does describe how these changes are hurting our society, e.g. increased opioid overdoses, increased political polarization; so it could be an intentional word choice to call it "anti-social".
    - troad 2y ago
      > It's terrible terminology to be sure It's a fairly common pattern in English: e.g. "moral - amoral - immoral", or "political - apolitical - anti-political". > it's surprising that no one in the chain of publication for this article flagged that. I think the choice here is deliberate: the century stands accused of being hostile to social life, ergo it is anti-social, not asocial.
zkmon 2y ago
[flagged]
- jddj 2y ago
  Do autocrats not want efficient workers for some reason?
  - zkmon 2y ago
    Autocrats are not crazy about votes and economy progress. Infact they are more community-minded than the votes-bank leaders who always worry about next elections, coalitions and political survival. Look at the churn of leaders in Europe.
- guntars 2y ago
  > Scary laws favorable to women ensure men wouldn't dare to look at women for more than 2 seconds, leave alone starting up conversation. I’m sure it’s the scary laws that stop you from talking to women.
  - zkmon 2y ago
    It's the risk. Marriage is a risk, having children is risk, all commitments are risk. Any deviations, randomness and failures are prohibitively dangerous. Where does this risk come from? mostly from laws.
Barrin92 2y ago
A lot of the observations are true but it's really funny to me to frame this through the "21st century" post-pandemic, lens in particular the part about self-optimization, "secular monks" as the article calls it. Immediately reminded me of Baudrillard, (America 1989): "The skateboarder with his Walkman, the intellectual working on his word- processor, the Bronx breakdancer whirling frantically in the Roxy, the jogger and the body-builder: everywhere, whether in regard to the body or the mental faculties, you find the same blank solitude, the same narcissistic refraction. This omnipresent cult of the body is extraordinary. It is the only object on which everyone is made to concentrate, not as a source of pleasure, but as an object of frantic concern[...] This ‘into’ is the key to everything. The point is not to be nor even to have a body, but to be into your own body. Into your sexuality, into your own desire. Into your own functions, as if they were energy differentials or video screens. The hedonism of the ‘into’: the body is a scenario and the curious hygienist threnody devoted to it runs through the innumerable fitness centres, body- building gyms, stimulation and simulation studios that stretch from Venice to Tupanga Canyon, bearing witness to a collective asexual obsession. " He was one of the first people to point to the irony of a health and beauty obsessed culture that doesn't actually use their health or beauty for anything, because they've removed any real social contact from their life, just existing in isolation in front of a screen. This is the gym goer / instagram influencer who Baudrillard would have compared more to a corpse in a morgue than an actual person.
- paulryanrogers 2y ago
  Except it wasn't fully isolated then or now. Then people would use their solitary efforts to find a mate. Now they do it to find a mate, sometimes more indirectly by broadcasting their efforts and accomplishments online instead of at the bar, school, church, club, etc. Perhaps one could argue the men going their own way movement has coalesced or even grown. But that's harder to quantify.
trashface 2y ago
People getting tired of the status games.
lapcat 2y ago
I recently started reading "The Art and Science of Connection" by Kasley Killam, who argues that social health should be considered the equal to physical health and mental health as three essential, interdependent pillars of personal health, and lack of social connections can be as deadly as, say, smoking cigarettes, to the extent that shortens your life.
- kaiwen1 2y ago
  Is the "deadly" due to an increase in confounding factors related to social isolation – drinking, lack of exercise, etc? Or does merely being alone, while still maintaining an otherwise healthy lifestyle, shorten life?
  - lapcat 2y ago
    The latter, according to the author. For example: > In 1979, two epidemiologists published a paper that would trigger a seismic shift in the scientific community's understanding of and interest in the link between relationships and life span. Lisa Berkman, then at Yale University, and Leonard Syne at the University of California, Berkeley, followed nearly seven thousand adults for nine years. In that time period, men with fewer social and community ties were twice as likely to die—regardless of how physically healthy they were at the start of the study, their socioeconomic status, and whether they smoked, drank alcohol, were obese, exercised, or used preventative healthcare services. For isolated women, the risk of dying was closer to three times that of their connected counterparts.
matrix87 2y ago
> This neededness can come in several forms: social, economic, or communitarian. Our children and partners can depend on us for care or income. Our colleagues can rely on us to finish a project, or to commiserate about an annoying boss. Our religious congregations and weekend poker parties can count on us to fill a pew or bring the dip. I think that this point is the underlying rationale for writing the article. "Not enough" people are making sacrifices. It isn't that they're less happy, it's that the author doesn't want them to be happy. They'd rather rewrite the definition of happiness If all you're doing is giving, why bother? You could have a wife and kids, or you could do FIRE. If you go the wife and kids route, suddenly all of your money and time are no longer "yours" I think, if some people look at society and institutions and say "I'm giving more than what I'm receiving here", there's nothing wrong with that. Framing it as the individual's problem is dumb and counterproductive. Religion is on the way out, people are getting sick of lying to themselves
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  Well yeah, of course it’s not an individual problem. Reading your comment, though. it’s very clear that you’re responding the way that you are partially because of how difficult you perceive these interactions to be. That’s not your fault, it’s a consequence of how we have constructed our society. That’s the problem. To put it a different way, while it’s fine to choose not to walk sometimes, it wouldn’t be healthy if you were against the idea of walking because your leg muscles had atrophied from constant sitting.
  - matrix87 2y ago
    I don't think the choice between wife->kids->retirement->death and something else is analogous to choosing to walk or not walk. Walking is a natural thing that's intrinsic to our biology, the other thing is a product of culture, policy, time, etc. Other cultures have alternate ways of doing if you're equating that lifestyle pipeline to walking or participating in society, it's not really a valid point
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
kelseyfrog 2y ago
I made a point to improve my social skills before covid and I'm now I'm having an absolute field day. The number of people who are lonely and wish they had something to do means that when I ask someone to coffee, drinks, or just to hangout, chances are they'll say yes. I'm an active member of one of my city's discord servers, so there's a substantial pool to draw from. I've organized in person book clubs, movie nights, and group coffee outings, all from the same pool. More recently, I've engaged with my city's kink community which has no shortage of public socials. I'm at the point where I have to be choosy about how I want to spend my time because it's easy to get over booked. Maybe I have higher initiative than most, but I found the experience to be dependent on how much effort I put into it and incredibly rewarding.
- KittenInABox 2y ago
  IME this is the right of it- it is harder to develop the muscle to take the initiative to be social. It's hard to consider but socializing is an active investment, not a passive one to be consumed easily like social media feeds. It's very easy to say "I signed up for a thing, but I'll flake instead because I just don't feel like it".
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  Well, at the risk of stating the obvious, if you are “engaging [your] city’s kink community,” you are probably a strong outlier!
  - Workaccount2 2y ago
    I was already checked out when I saw "discord". This isn't an insult, it's just that the variance in discord users is narrow enough that that common trait alone is enough to make a viable social group of broadly like-minded people.
    - kelseyfrog 2y ago
      Those are good points. I usually score quite high on openness [1], though I lean more introverted overall. While focusing on courage has been helpful for me, I may have overgeneralized my own experiences. Maybe my approach isn’t something everyone can take on — it certainly didn’t come naturally to me. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits
scotty79 2y ago
I'm waiting for schizoid personality label to become en vogue so I can claim I was ahead of the curve.
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  If you can start a movement about it being a “spectrum” then you will probably get a lot of success out of that.
chaostheory 2y ago
One factor for lack of dine in customers is the exorbitant tips and extra fees that restaurants like tacking on. It’s harder for them to do it with take out customers.
- paulryanrogers 2y ago
  It is funny to see a tip prompt when ordering, before you've any idea how good or bad the service and food will be
djoldman 2y ago
> A 2023 Gallup survey found that the share of Americans who said they experienced loneliness “a lot of the day yesterday” declined by roughly one-third from 2021 to 2023, even as alone time, by Atalay’s calculation, rose slightly. This seems particularly interesting.
jiscariot 2y ago
There is a lot in this piece, but one of the things mentioned was public spaces. While it likely doesn't play a huge role, it can't be ignored that the last ten or so years in the US, public spaces have generally deteriorated due to the lack of enforcement of quality-of-life laws, and general absence of social norms. If your government decides to allow tent cities (everything that comes with that) in your local park, people of means will take their kids to SkyZone. When public transportation becomes unsafe, people of means will opt to rideshare. It points to a failure in leadership of many large US cities. Hopefully that changes.
njstraub608 2y ago
Is there any research on consumer preferences and why, for example, people might PREFER to be alone vs. eating in a diner? It feels like socialization used to be a forced mechanism, regardless of whether that created positive feelings in both parties. People have such limited time now between caring for children and demanding careers that any time spent meeting new people generally feels wasted unless you have significant energy to invest in that relationship (which generally means less “me” time). I personally don’t feel like this is the fault of technology as much as it is the fault of rising costs and long, intense work hours to pay said costs.

152 points by coloneltcb 2y ago

nicd 2y ago

This is the issue that is top of mind for me at the moment. If you're frustrated by political polarization, this is one of the root causes! I'm very eager to hear any ideas on steps we can take to systematically reverse this damage to society.

reducesuffering 2y ago
Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. We optimize for a big GDP number but never for a population happiness level.
- Dracophoenix 2y ago
  > How many people think today's children are having better lives than the last generation? 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Are they on anti-depressants because life has gotten worse or because of decreasing stigma resulting from greater accessibility to better-informed patients? Until the turn of the century, just mentioning you saw a shrink in any sincere capacity would get you funny looks in most parts of the country. > Unfortunately it involves stopping staring at screens 10 hours a day, which is the funds supporting half of this forum's careers. There's an old joke where a reporter asks a bank robber why he robs banks. The latter's response: "Because, that's where the money is". The bank and bar of today is the Internet. It's what funds and facilitates most social ventures, even the ones that take place IRL. Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair.
  - flenkzooz 2y ago
    I'm not sure I completely agree with your last assertion (except according to a very rigorous definition of "optimize"). While people do very much differ, there are certain things that predictably make the majority of people happier. Social connectedness, for example. We may not be able to truly optimize for these things, but I think we can reliably improve human wellbeing at scale. A successful example from the past would be the efforts to add more green spaces to cities. People like parks, and they're happier on average when they have access to them.
  - brookst 2y ago
    Yeah increasing treatment of medical conditions seems like a very poor proxy for proving an increase in incidence.
  - riehwvfbk 2y ago
    > Happiness isn't a quality you can optimize for on a national or global scale as it's a purely individual affair. This right here is exactly what's wrong. People are put into impossible conditions and then blamed when they can't magically make themselves happy with the arrangement. Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy?
    - Dracophoenix 2y ago
      Happiness isn't self-induced solipsism. I don't claim that external conditions have no effect on individual happiness, but rather that external conditions do not uniformly or systematically determine an individual's happiness nor can one reliably use such conditions to extrapolate the happiness of others. A policy that addresses a so-called collective need often comes at the cost of individual agency and thus individual happiness. It is therefore, necessary to recognize that the domain of happiness and its relevant parameters does not belong to an abstract blob, but solely to the individual. > Tell me, are animals happy to be in a zoo? Why not? Why can't they just make themselves happy? Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owner's house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content as they are well-fed.
      - throaway54 2y ago
        >Not every animal views a zoo (or for that matter, a farm or a pet-owners house) as a prison. For a significant population of zoo animals, life in captivity is the only life they know. For the most part, they are as happy and content, as they are well-fed. Not if they are given a space which is too small and not stimulating enough for them, then they just pace around for their whole lives.
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    Maybe an increased stigma was better? Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness, if you discount the former I think there are some examples.
    - Dracophoenix 2y ago
      > Why is that you can “optimize” unhappiness nationally but not happiness The conditions that make someone miserable are just as variable. Some of the most content people possess little education and are mired in the throes of poverty. If you started a national misery program where the government impoverishes its population left and right, there would still be a minority who find enjoyment, even thrive, in such circumstances.
      - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
        I mean you are talking about anomalies which is not what people mean here. Obviously masochists exist but that’s not very interesting
- cess11 2y ago
  Capitalism can't reproduce itself through happy people. It needs enormous amounts of suffering to continue, and as a kid growing up you'll at some point notice this. At least you did, before the screens became dominant over reality.
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    What does any of this mean? What is capitalist reproduction? How is any of that true? Does a system in which someone has a right to your labor somehow solve this?
    - cess11 2y ago
      It's an expression from economics. Do you disagree that societies reproduce themselves? We're living in a world system where almost all societies are based on the idea that one class of people has a right to the labour of almost all the rest. I'm not sure why you suggest furthering it is a solution to our current predicaments.
  - eli_gottlieb 2y ago
    Modes of production are not modes of consumption. The system doesn't change if the "plastic trivia" companies go bankrupt from everyone suddenly growing a sense of thrift.
- matrix87 2y ago
  > 25% of US university students on antidepressants. Is it because they're emotionally worse off, or is it because pharma is advertising them more aggressively, kickbacks, etc
  - reducesuffering 2y ago
    There are many studies showing US youth report feeling worse than previously. The CDC: "Youth in the U.S. are experiencing a mental health crisis." https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-health-numbers.html https://www.cdc.gov/healthy-youth/mental-health/mental-healt... Increased pharma pushing is an easy scapegoat, but it would have to be making these youth more depressed before they were ever taking antidepressants. Social media and phones have been disconnecting real interactions and pushing people onto fake digital "connections." Then when people are more lonely than ever, we're now pushing them "AI bot connections" to help loneliness, purely because VC's see $ in it, basically giving desperate people soda to help their hunger.
  - dinkumthinkum 2y ago
    I think social media even promotes this hyper therapy and medication seeking behavior. My guess it probably even creates a kind of Overton window sort of thing for physicians, big pharma notwithstanding. It’s very easy for people to get prescriptions for these drugs and a lot of doctors seem to think “patients reports depression so I prescribed SSRI” or whatever is popular.
    - harvodex 2y ago
      When I was 20, no one my age had got incredibly wealthy or famous who wasn't an actor or musician. It is like a hyper version of de Tocqueville now. No matter how poor someone is, they still don't feel that far from being rich and famous in America. This creates enormous status anxiety coupled with the reality of student loans and inflation it is a really bad deal for young people's mental health.
    - matrix87 2y ago
      yeah I see the same trend, at some point I just kinda decided to mentally slot all of those people into the stupid category, tune them out, and go on living
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  I totally agree with you but there is a lot of tech that is not social media related. But, that fact probably doesn’t change your quantitative observation.
- watwut 2y ago
  > 25% of US university students on antidepressants. You need to factor in alcohol and drug use rates for previous generations, crime rates of youth and so it. It is not that current situation is optimal, but when I was young, you would not get antidepressants even if you actually desperately needed it. The taboo against admitting even to yourself that you might have mental health issue was too high. Conservative minded people like to complain about lack of risk taking among youth ... but quite a lot of risk taking was pure self destruction or destruction of whoever you got pregnant (if you was a guy).
MathMonkeyMan 2y ago
The article recommends seeking out interactions with others even when (especially when) we would avoid it. I don't know how to make that a movement, but I'll be more mindful of it.
hansonkin 2y ago
I've been working on a project to solve the social connection problem using a new approach. In a post third space society, I want to make it easier for people to connect with others nearby in small groups around shared hobbies and activities. Having a small group size makes it easier to host at someone's place and it's also cheaper than going out. I did a soft launch earlier this week by posting on NYC subreddits to get early feedback and test out my hypothesis . The reaction has been very positive with many comments saying they like the concept. Obviously there's a long way to go to really nail down the product market fit and build a sustainable business around it but the early feedback makes me feel like there is really something there.
- vaginicola 2y ago
  Could help me find your reddit posts? I'm interested in learning more, but am having trouble locating them through search... I share your enthusiasm for making it easier for people to connect in person, focused around shared interests (incl. established online social networks). I'm sincerely concerned about the potential outcomes of our current and growing social isolation. That said, I believe that "third spaces" are still essential. Effective third spaces can provide safe, neutral ground for those who are unacquainted to get to know one another on their own terms. I think that the thought of inviting a strangers into your personal space is pretty uncomfortable to many people. I also think people want to get out of their cave every now and then--especially with the rise of work-from-home. I think the failure of traditional third spaces (cafes, bars, social clubs, libraries, etc.) has more to do with them being unable to adapt to the needs of modern society & socialization. My thought is that there needs to be a new type of third space which meets those needs. Perhaps something like WeWork, but geared towards the third space? Something that can adapt to and support the diverse interest/hobbies/networks that have come about due to the internet. Something that tics all of the "Great Good Place" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_place) boxes and more. I have some ideas, but need to develop them further.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    A social crutch I really like is games. I’m terrible at talking to people, but I love playing competitive but social games. Stuff like chess boards, card games could go a long way.
jasdi 2y ago
Read the UN report on the Attention Economy. Everything is connected to Attention being over fished by platforms. The human pool of Attention is slow growing and finite (the limit being number of minutes in a day*people). Yet Content keeps exploding to infinity. Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In traditional economics, more money chasing the same goods = inflation. In the Attention Economy, more content chasing the same attention = engagement inflation (harder to get noticed, costs more to be seen). The real winners - Platforms, since they act like central banks controlling both supply (content) and demand (attention via algorithm). The Attention Economy behaves like a manipulated market where demand is fixed but distorted, and supply keeps increasing, benefiting the gatekeepers (platforms) while exhausting the participants (creators, advertisers, businesses, users). History teaches us where the story goes.
- yesco 2y ago
  > History teaches us where the story goes. Does it? When else has this happened before? Or do you just mean manipulated markets specifically?
- robwwilliams 2y ago
  > Just like inflation devalues money, content inflation devalues individual Attention. In some sense perhaps, but I now value my attention more since there is so much more competing for attention. Out with Twitter/X, in with Hacker News; out with daily papers, in with long news: Aeon and Atlantic and Foreign Affairs. And zero broadcast TV.
  - 63 2y ago
    This requires conscious choice and some discipline though. For the average person, content competes for attention on their behalf before their conscious brain kicks in. Social media uses cheap tricks like rage bait that your local book club just can't compete with. Yes, an emotionally healthy person with some free time who enjoyed books as a child (already a minority of people it seems due to many factors) may choose the book club, but the higher barrier of entry just keeps most people from ever considering it. It's just so damn hard for any in-person activities to compete with instant gratification and addictive rage. In college in 2022, I was a member of several clubs with varying subjects and members. Every one of them struggled to get anyone to attend. The CS club hosted drone races and 3d printed model painting. The improv club had weekly themed meetings. The theater department hosted at least 1 large and 1 small show per semester and we couldn't even get people to sit in the audience. And this is college, where demands on participants' time are relatively lacking (compared to kids and a 9-5). I imagine a lot of social activities have failed to get members and then just ceased to exist as a result. Several of the clubs I was in no longer exist due to a lack of participants to take up leadership after my class graduated. Don't even get me started on how people talk and talk about causes they admire on the internet but then never actually volunteer their time to make anything better. I really think society has just fucked itself over by letting social media companies run rampant with our attention, feeding us lies and gossip that doesn't matter 24 hours later. I genuinely just don't know if most people can be conscious and disciplined enough to get themselves out of the trap. At the very least, it will take a few generations to develop new mores and standards and who knows what new tech will be around to ruin their lives by then. I find it hard to believe that anyone was ever hopeful about working in this industry.
intended 2y ago
Aren’t there many countries which are happily anti social? In any case - approaching this as if it is damage, will end up putting you in opposition to choices people are making. You can be incredibly alone in a crowd of people. You can be empty when people are singing your praises. Meaning - is different simple social interaction. People can find their comfort zone of personal interaction is much smaller than others. TLDR: Treating it like a problem, results in bad suggestions. Treating it like a choice, suggests that one look at the options available to people. It may turn out that people aren’t hanging out at bars, but at home. Frankly, why wouldn’t people stay at home, if home is where they have put their time and effort into setting up. If you want a good place to find solutions, look to boredom and monotony. Do note - polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record.
- bruce343434 2y ago
  > polarization started well before the personal computer showed up in the geological record. What do you mean?
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    The Reformation is one famous example.
    - jfengel 2y ago
      Reformation was itself really about long-standing conflicts between countries/nationalities. Few people really care whether they are saved through faith alone or not, just as East and West weren't really having wars over whether "filioque" belongs in the Nicene Creed. The Internet does give ordinary people the opportunity to be mean to each other on a daily basis rather than having wars. I'm genuinely not sure that's an improvement, since at least people would think twice before going into combat. The level of desiring to harass each other seems roughly constant.
      - philwelch 2y ago
tmnvix 2y ago
I'm sure people will disagree on the significance, but I think it seems obvious that a society that encourages (and in some cases requires) its members to isolate themselves in mobile metal boxes is going to be more antisocial than one that doesn't.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  I think cars are a symptom of a philosophy, not the root cause.
  - pesus 2y ago
    I'd say they're both, and it feeds into itself.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      Fair
- pesus 2y ago
  I'm with you on this one, and I think my time living in a fairly walkable city vs. previously living in a non-walkable suburb really underscored this point for me personally. I'm failing at finding it via google, but I also recall a study that showed drivers tended to view other drivers/cars on the road not as a person in control of a vehicle, but rather an inanimate object, which I think further supports your point. If anyone has a link to the study, I'd be grateful.
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  I feel like there is a political side that loves and thinks it clever to shame car ownership or blame everything on cars because because of sone socialist nonsense or something. People have been very social up until 2000 perhaps even later and so-called “metal boxes” have been a big part of American life for a long time. There have even been times when cars were an integral part of socializing in many circles. I get it “America sucks and ancient cities on the Continent are superior” or whatever , but isn’t this kind an f a cliche take at this point?
bdangubic 2y ago
until people realize that “social” media is the root of most evil plauging society currently nothing will change. and people will not disconnect from “social” media because of pure addiction. my life is drastically different today since I’ve ditched ALL social media. unlike other addictions, this came without withdrawals (10-20 minutes on HN helps :) )
- dinkumthinkum 2y ago
  I think you’re more on point than anyone else. Social media not working but affects connections but it hinders connections in both platonic and romantic relationship for so many reasons.

mitchbob 2y ago

https://archive.ph/xrfDj https://archive.ph/xrfDj

ChrisArchitect 2y ago
Gift link shared by author on social: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/02/american-loneliness-personality-politics/681091/?gift=o6MjJQpusU9ebnFuymVdsHLEgrw7xaVlFdZ_ahquf0Y https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2025/02/america...

CapstanRoller 2y ago

[flagged]

nonrandomstring 2y ago
> The USA is the land of trauma, multifaceted and pervasive, and telling people to touch grass or go to their local bar won't stop it nor heal the damage. You might find something resonates in this essay [0] I don't think it's unique to US America. It's well documented via writers like de Toqueville and Putnam, but the same phenomena are there in the UK, in Australia, and elsewhere. Technology lets us see ourselves, and we are quite sickened by how we treat one another. [0] https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/radical-disbelief-and-its-causes/ https://cybershow.uk/blog/posts/radical-disbelief-and-its-ca...
everdrive 2y ago
There’s another side to this coin: the exultation of and obsession with trauma. There is an unstated and unnamed assumption in modern American culture: that you have experienced trauma, and more importantly that trauma is what has constructed your personality. This view has _some_ merit, but has been taken in uncritically as a fundamental assumption of life. Forcing yourself to imagine traumas, or constantly revisit legitimate traumas is deeply unhealthy. There was a time when no one could talk about their psychological issues, but now the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction: we has been discussing our trauma to a greater and greater degree for the past 30 years, but mental health outcomes are only getting worse. I’m undecided if this is casual, but there is no evidence it’s _helping_.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- logicchains 2y ago
  >There is an unstated and unnamed assumption in modern American culture: that you have experienced trauma, and more importantly that trauma is what has constructed your personality This is not "American culture", it's American leftism. Almost no conservative American thinks like that. And it's dying out by itself because American liberals aren't having enough children and views/values are partially heritable.

eddyfromtheblok 2y ago

since this article is US focused, 66% of households own pets. People would rather hang out with their pets. People bring their dogs to shop and people used to bring them to bars in the late 2010s.

paulryanrogers 2y ago
I really hope this trend doesn't grow or return, especially to places like super markets.

juresotosek 2y ago

Very concerning

hnthrow90348765 2y ago

If you ever want this back, the solution is simple: less work hours for the same pay. I suspect that societal health isn't a priority of capitalism though.

HPsquared 2y ago
If everyone just (on average) worked less, rent would be lower.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  And houses would be proportionally fewer, smaller, and and in need for repair. That is unless we assume builders and maintenance people are exempt from working less
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    And that would be okay!
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      I agree, as long as folks realize there is no free lunch.
      - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
        There may be some. I can’t recall where I saw it, but there can be large productivity increases when the work week is shorter. If the main tasks aren’t constant time but dependent on worker performance, there may be a free lunch to be had.
  - riehwvfbk 2y ago
    I take it you haven't been to Silicon Valley, the tech capital of the world. It's a place where everyone is hyper competitive and works as much as they physically can, and then some. And those are the slackers, the ones who truly want to get ahead optimize their sleep schedule to need only a few hours. It's also a place where poorly built and maintained budget housing from the 1960s sells for several million USD. Or you know, Japan. They are such slackers that they have a special word for death by overwork (karoshi). I hear they live in giant mansions.

rcpt 2y ago

> In 2023, 74 percent of all restaurant traffic came from “off premises” customers—that is, from takeout and delivery—up from 61 percent before COVID Sounds like people are just eating out more? https://www.statista.com/statistics/239410/us-food-service-and-drinking-place-sales/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/239410/us-food-service-a...

geremiiah 2y ago

It's not that I want to stay at home. It's just that I find it impossible to have a fulfilling social life. I don't know why these articles always seem to assume that these home bound people have good social opportunities.

nicd 2y ago
Very fair, and worth addressing. May I ask- what are the main barriers preventing you from socializing? Could intentionally designed apps or social structures reduce those barriers? What do you think would be most helpful?
- germinalphrase 2y ago
  For many people, it's probably no deeper than the question, "where would I go?".
- geremiiah 2y ago
  1. I would go out alone to some events, but most of the time I would end up not speaking to anyone because people were not approachable. Everyone else is typically in groups and closed off to outside interactions. There were some exceptions but that was the norm. 2. I'd search for some hobby/interest groups that would fit my interests, but nothing really fits. Either there are no meetups for such interests or there are meetups but the demographic at those meetup is not the demographic that I am interested in meeting. 3. Out of desperation I tried to be open minded and joined some hobby groups and did some sports that were really out of character for me. Here I did meet some interesting people, but I did not make a good impression because I was so obviously out of place. 4. Eventually my Friday nights consisted of going for a swim at 21:00-22:00 or going to the library of the nearest university so that I could feel some kind of social warmth sitting in a hall with all the other people.
  - KittenInABox 2y ago
    1. I think you would be surprised how much people are friendly in a socializing event if you just showed up and said hey I'm new, can I join in this conversation. Then just listen 80% of the time and maybe ask a question or two. Then do it again with a follow up of what you listened to. Just keep at it. 2. What are your interests, precisely? And what do you mean the demographic you are interested in meeting-- what is that demographic, precisely?

mibes 2y ago

I think old distinction between the words "unsociable" meaning not wanting to socialise, and "anti-social" meaning causing trouble to society, is useful. I guess I'm swimming against the tide with this one though

panarky 2y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asociality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asociality
- ysavir 2y ago
  GP is referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour "Asocial" means being non-social. "Anti-social" means being a problem to society. It's terrible terminology to be sure, but those are the current definitions, and it's surprising that no one in the chain of publication for this article flagged that.
  - lantry 2y ago
    The article does describe how these changes are hurting our society, e.g. increased opioid overdoses, increased political polarization; so it could be an intentional word choice to call it "anti-social".
  - troad 2y ago
    > It's terrible terminology to be sure It's a fairly common pattern in English: e.g. "moral - amoral - immoral", or "political - apolitical - anti-political". > it's surprising that no one in the chain of publication for this article flagged that. I think the choice here is deliberate: the century stands accused of being hostile to social life, ergo it is anti-social, not asocial.

zkmon 2y ago

[flagged]

jddj 2y ago
Do autocrats not want efficient workers for some reason?
- zkmon 2y ago
  Autocrats are not crazy about votes and economy progress. Infact they are more community-minded than the votes-bank leaders who always worry about next elections, coalitions and political survival. Look at the churn of leaders in Europe.
guntars 2y ago
> Scary laws favorable to women ensure men wouldn't dare to look at women for more than 2 seconds, leave alone starting up conversation. I’m sure it’s the scary laws that stop you from talking to women.
- zkmon 2y ago
  It's the risk. Marriage is a risk, having children is risk, all commitments are risk. Any deviations, randomness and failures are prohibitively dangerous. Where does this risk come from? mostly from laws.

Barrin92 2y ago

A lot of the observations are true but it's really funny to me to frame this through the "21st century" post-pandemic, lens in particular the part about self-optimization, "secular monks" as the article calls it. Immediately reminded me of Baudrillard, (America 1989): "The skateboarder with his Walkman, the intellectual working on his word- processor, the Bronx breakdancer whirling frantically in the Roxy, the jogger and the body-builder: everywhere, whether in regard to the body or the mental faculties, you find the same blank solitude, the same narcissistic refraction. This omnipresent cult of the body is extraordinary. It is the only object on which everyone is made to concentrate, not as a source of pleasure, but as an object of frantic concern[...] This ‘into’ is the key to everything. The point is not to be nor even to have a body, but to be into your own body. Into your sexuality, into your own desire. Into your own functions, as if they were energy differentials or video screens. The hedonism of the ‘into’: the body is a scenario and the curious hygienist threnody devoted to it runs through the innumerable fitness centres, body- building gyms, stimulation and simulation studios that stretch from Venice to Tupanga Canyon, bearing witness to a collective asexual obsession. " He was one of the first people to point to the irony of a health and beauty obsessed culture that doesn't actually use their health or beauty for anything, because they've removed any real social contact from their life, just existing in isolation in front of a screen. This is the gym goer / instagram influencer who Baudrillard would have compared more to a corpse in a morgue than an actual person.

paulryanrogers 2y ago
Except it wasn't fully isolated then or now. Then people would use their solitary efforts to find a mate. Now they do it to find a mate, sometimes more indirectly by broadcasting their efforts and accomplishments online instead of at the bar, school, church, club, etc. Perhaps one could argue the men going their own way movement has coalesced or even grown. But that's harder to quantify.

trashface 2y ago

People getting tired of the status games.

lapcat 2y ago

I recently started reading "The Art and Science of Connection" by Kasley Killam, who argues that social health should be considered the equal to physical health and mental health as three essential, interdependent pillars of personal health, and lack of social connections can be as deadly as, say, smoking cigarettes, to the extent that shortens your life.

kaiwen1 2y ago
Is the "deadly" due to an increase in confounding factors related to social isolation – drinking, lack of exercise, etc? Or does merely being alone, while still maintaining an otherwise healthy lifestyle, shorten life?
- lapcat 2y ago
  The latter, according to the author. For example: > In 1979, two epidemiologists published a paper that would trigger a seismic shift in the scientific community's understanding of and interest in the link between relationships and life span. Lisa Berkman, then at Yale University, and Leonard Syne at the University of California, Berkeley, followed nearly seven thousand adults for nine years. In that time period, men with fewer social and community ties were twice as likely to die—regardless of how physically healthy they were at the start of the study, their socioeconomic status, and whether they smoked, drank alcohol, were obese, exercised, or used preventative healthcare services. For isolated women, the risk of dying was closer to three times that of their connected counterparts.

matrix87 2y ago

> This neededness can come in several forms: social, economic, or communitarian. Our children and partners can depend on us for care or income. Our colleagues can rely on us to finish a project, or to commiserate about an annoying boss. Our religious congregations and weekend poker parties can count on us to fill a pew or bring the dip. I think that this point is the underlying rationale for writing the article. "Not enough" people are making sacrifices. It isn't that they're less happy, it's that the author doesn't want them to be happy. They'd rather rewrite the definition of happiness If all you're doing is giving, why bother? You could have a wife and kids, or you could do FIRE. If you go the wife and kids route, suddenly all of your money and time are no longer "yours" I think, if some people look at society and institutions and say "I'm giving more than what I'm receiving here", there's nothing wrong with that. Framing it as the individual's problem is dumb and counterproductive. Religion is on the way out, people are getting sick of lying to themselves

BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
Well yeah, of course it’s not an individual problem. Reading your comment, though. it’s very clear that you’re responding the way that you are partially because of how difficult you perceive these interactions to be. That’s not your fault, it’s a consequence of how we have constructed our society. That’s the problem. To put it a different way, while it’s fine to choose not to walk sometimes, it wouldn’t be healthy if you were against the idea of walking because your leg muscles had atrophied from constant sitting.
- matrix87 2y ago
  I don't think the choice between wife->kids->retirement->death and something else is analogous to choosing to walk or not walk. Walking is a natural thing that's intrinsic to our biology, the other thing is a product of culture, policy, time, etc. Other cultures have alternate ways of doing if you're equating that lifestyle pipeline to walking or participating in society, it's not really a valid point
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago

kelseyfrog 2y ago

I made a point to improve my social skills before covid and I'm now I'm having an absolute field day. The number of people who are lonely and wish they had something to do means that when I ask someone to coffee, drinks, or just to hangout, chances are they'll say yes. I'm an active member of one of my city's discord servers, so there's a substantial pool to draw from. I've organized in person book clubs, movie nights, and group coffee outings, all from the same pool. More recently, I've engaged with my city's kink community which has no shortage of public socials. I'm at the point where I have to be choosy about how I want to spend my time because it's easy to get over booked. Maybe I have higher initiative than most, but I found the experience to be dependent on how much effort I put into it and incredibly rewarding.

KittenInABox 2y ago
IME this is the right of it- it is harder to develop the muscle to take the initiative to be social. It's hard to consider but socializing is an active investment, not a passive one to be consumed easily like social media feeds. It's very easy to say "I signed up for a thing, but I'll flake instead because I just don't feel like it".
dinkumthinkum 2y ago
Well, at the risk of stating the obvious, if you are “engaging [your] city’s kink community,” you are probably a strong outlier!
- Workaccount2 2y ago
  I was already checked out when I saw "discord". This isn't an insult, it's just that the variance in discord users is narrow enough that that common trait alone is enough to make a viable social group of broadly like-minded people.
  - kelseyfrog 2y ago
    Those are good points. I usually score quite high on openness [1], though I lean more introverted overall. While focusing on courage has been helpful for me, I may have overgeneralized my own experiences. Maybe my approach isn’t something everyone can take on — it certainly didn’t come naturally to me. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

scotty79 2y ago

I'm waiting for schizoid personality label to become en vogue so I can claim I was ahead of the curve.

dinkumthinkum 2y ago
If you can start a movement about it being a “spectrum” then you will probably get a lot of success out of that.

chaostheory 2y ago

One factor for lack of dine in customers is the exorbitant tips and extra fees that restaurants like tacking on. It’s harder for them to do it with take out customers.

paulryanrogers 2y ago
It is funny to see a tip prompt when ordering, before you've any idea how good or bad the service and food will be

djoldman 2y ago

> A 2023 Gallup survey found that the share of Americans who said they experienced loneliness “a lot of the day yesterday” declined by roughly one-third from 2021 to 2023, even as alone time, by Atalay’s calculation, rose slightly. This seems particularly interesting.

jiscariot 2y ago

There is a lot in this piece, but one of the things mentioned was public spaces. While it likely doesn't play a huge role, it can't be ignored that the last ten or so years in the US, public spaces have generally deteriorated due to the lack of enforcement of quality-of-life laws, and general absence of social norms. If your government decides to allow tent cities (everything that comes with that) in your local park, people of means will take their kids to SkyZone. When public transportation becomes unsafe, people of means will opt to rideshare. It points to a failure in leadership of many large US cities. Hopefully that changes.

njstraub608 2y ago

Is there any research on consumer preferences and why, for example, people might PREFER to be alone vs. eating in a diner? It feels like socialization used to be a forced mechanism, regardless of whether that created positive feelings in both parties. People have such limited time now between caring for children and demanding careers that any time spent meeting new people generally feels wasted unless you have significant energy to invest in that relationship (which generally means less “me” time). I personally don’t feel like this is the fault of technology as much as it is the fault of rising costs and long, intense work hours to pay said costs.