What is the role of loneliness in an age of detachment?
THERE is a certain finality to the feeling of loneliness. Trapped in a shrinking box of isolation and despair, it seems as if no end is ever to come. The rational mind chimes in but is rebuffed by the irrational mind, convinced the current upset is unavoidable—or deserved.
But after tears and time have ensued, the rational mind wrests control once more. It reminds us that all feelings are ephemeral, all troughs followed by a peak. Eventually, we begin to recoup a sense of normality, a reversion to the mean. Yet, when the next trough inevitably threatens this peaceful equilibrium, we slip back into the same fatalism as before. Almost by default, humans are cyclical entities. If insanity is doing the same thing over with the expectation of different results, then humanity has been suffering from a perpetual pandemic of insanity.
The greatest salvation from this Sisyphean fate is connection. It is honesty in communication and a categorical rejection of cynicism. Connection offers us an escape from our insulated minds and an inroad into the beautiful conscious of another.
But in an era where “connection” is more buzzword than belief, forthright conversation is scarce and cynicism abounds. Technology facilitates proclamation at the expense of communication. The Church has lost its standing in American life. Even in secular life, a consistent world view is no longer a value. To the extent that people can meaningfully engage with one another, we are at a historic low—a pit of detachment, solipsism and mutually destructive ear-plugging.
What of the fallout? Having forsaken our most potent tool against loneliness, we suffer in silence, unwilling or unable to lay down the social media façade. Humans did not evolve to be our best selves at any given time. Indeed, divulging our loneliness to others, irrational or otherwise, is an essential piece of surviving the human experience. But whether through pride or through addiction to affectation, we have collectively decided that being a human ought to be a faux pas.
In today’s New York Times, David Brooks warns of an impending “perpetual moral war” created by the collapse of centralized institutions of morality: religion and secular philosophy. Mr. Brooks’ grim prognosis, as timely and correct as it is, is suggestive of the remedy for a disconnected society. A shared moral fabric—one which cuts across geographic, socio-economic, demographic and political lines—is sorely needed. Only then will the melancholy of the lonely ebb—and the joy of an interconnected humanity flow.
Discourse in a Discordant Society is a monthly column on society and politics.
