Hmm. I like the evolutionary framing, but don´t know if `the desire for solitude´ is what is being searched for.
It was perfectly possible to be alone before phones. In fact, you could truly be alone, in a way that's difficult now.
The phone gives me a constant stream of optimized semi-sociability. I feel like I'm interacting with people, but without any of the annoying constraints that accompany physical social life. I can respond when I choose. I can listen to the most interesting people talk, etc.
I think it rather has to with anxiety. We like social interaction. We don't like social confrontation, the feeling of talking to strangers, etc. Markets and technology cater to that and give us low-effort digital wall-e land. We are not forced to overcome anxiety, which is so important for romantic life.
Also, digital life makes that our digital social graph and our physical ones barely overlap, so we have less in common with the people physically surrounding us, qua values, conversation topics, etc.
Also, being able to be constantly in touch with one's high school friends, family, etc, through WhatsApp / FaceTime also takes up social energy without giving opportunities for new (local) friend groups and romantic prospects
Also, chat groups create a harder "in vs. out"-dynamic for social groups, decreasing serendipity and "friend of a friend"-dynamics that were so typical for romantic adventures.
And there's probably countless other ones.
Thus I don't think it's "our evolutionary desire for loneliness" but rather "there is a difference between our social preferences and the social environments that are best for finding romantic partners, and wealth and especially the internet have allowed us to optimize for the former"
My partner, a Honduran immigrant, was always an overachiever. After coming to the US and succeeding here financially, he still couldn't get away from his family and friends asking him for money, especially with free communication now on WhatsApp. The older he gets, the more I see him lessening his social and family interactions there, but he struggles because he needs this contact, albeit from afar.
Do you think that worrying about fertility or socialization still makes any sense with impeding AGI? It seems highly unlikely at this point that anything we value today would still remain meaningful by 2100.
This is why I've never bought the "loneliness epidemic" narrative out of fashion not so much time ago. While there are people who could suffer solitude, there are also many others who voluntarly choose to have more time with themselves than with others. However, with regard of the debate about Smartphones killing socialization, a counterpoint would be people staying all day chatting online with their Social Media apps are not factually "alone", since they are still on some level interacting with other human beings.
Evolution is the prism through which all behavior should be viewed in order to be properly understood.
Hmm. I like the evolutionary framing, but don´t know if `the desire for solitude´ is what is being searched for.
It was perfectly possible to be alone before phones. In fact, you could truly be alone, in a way that's difficult now.
The phone gives me a constant stream of optimized semi-sociability. I feel like I'm interacting with people, but without any of the annoying constraints that accompany physical social life. I can respond when I choose. I can listen to the most interesting people talk, etc.
I think it rather has to with anxiety. We like social interaction. We don't like social confrontation, the feeling of talking to strangers, etc. Markets and technology cater to that and give us low-effort digital wall-e land. We are not forced to overcome anxiety, which is so important for romantic life.
Also, digital life makes that our digital social graph and our physical ones barely overlap, so we have less in common with the people physically surrounding us, qua values, conversation topics, etc.
Also, being able to be constantly in touch with one's high school friends, family, etc, through WhatsApp / FaceTime also takes up social energy without giving opportunities for new (local) friend groups and romantic prospects
Also, chat groups create a harder "in vs. out"-dynamic for social groups, decreasing serendipity and "friend of a friend"-dynamics that were so typical for romantic adventures.
And there's probably countless other ones.
Thus I don't think it's "our evolutionary desire for loneliness" but rather "there is a difference between our social preferences and the social environments that are best for finding romantic partners, and wealth and especially the internet have allowed us to optimize for the former"
Interesting hypothesis. It sounds plausible, although the "solution" you gave reminded me of the drug soma in Brave New World.
My partner, a Honduran immigrant, was always an overachiever. After coming to the US and succeeding here financially, he still couldn't get away from his family and friends asking him for money, especially with free communication now on WhatsApp. The older he gets, the more I see him lessening his social and family interactions there, but he struggles because he needs this contact, albeit from afar.
Do you think that worrying about fertility or socialization still makes any sense with impeding AGI? It seems highly unlikely at this point that anything we value today would still remain meaningful by 2100.
This is why I've never bought the "loneliness epidemic" narrative out of fashion not so much time ago. While there are people who could suffer solitude, there are also many others who voluntarly choose to have more time with themselves than with others. However, with regard of the debate about Smartphones killing socialization, a counterpoint would be people staying all day chatting online with their Social Media apps are not factually "alone", since they are still on some level interacting with other human beings.