Skip to main content

The Redemptive Value of Loneliness

I remember taking a women's history class once in which the teacher asked how many planned to get married some day and how many planned to remain unmarried (it was a question apparently implied only for the female students). On the latter question, only a few raised their hands. I remember turning and thinking to myself, "Why would you want to be alone?"

Nevermind that the professor's question implied not that these students would remain alone, but only that they would remain unmarried. For all I knew, each hand represented a well-connected, vibrant life whose interest lay in friendships alone (or cohabitation). Still, it wasn't something I understood at the time. I didn't want to be lonely, and I couldn't understand how others could choose it, either.

My context-- and, I believe, my maturity level-- changed with time, however, as did my outlook on what it means to be alone. I've found that there is a distinct difference between loneliness and aloneness, and because I believe that experiencing the former is essential to being content in the latter, it has occurred to me that both are necessary parts of human nature. Loneliness can be a stepping stone to choosing either intimacy or aloneness.*

Choosing aloneness, it seems, is something some of us do consciously, and others unconsciously, anyway. A second memory I have from college is a theory of identity development elucidated by a psychologist named Erik Erikson. According to Erikson, there are eight stages that a person faces in his or her lifetime, each of which presents the person with a stage-specific conflict, or "crisis." The one that mattered to me at the time, and which still does, I suppose, was the sixth stage: Intimacy versus Isolation. A person in this stage must determine whether he or she will form loving relationships or be alone. If the individual was unable to resolve his or her identity crisis in the preceding stage, he or she will find it the harder to form close relationships in this one. In his spirit of healthy identity development, Erikson believed it was important for people to form close relationships with others.

As history and our own life experiences have taught us, though, life is not always progressive. Just as we reexperience those unwanted feelings we thought we'd beaten-- anger and disappointment, for example-- so we can reexperience loneliness, even amid wonderful relationships. This is not always a bad thing, however. Not only do experiences like these remind us that we are human, but they also compel us to change areas of our own or others' lives which would otherwise remain stagnant.

My point here is that while we should not invite loneliness into our lives, it is something which can give us opportunity to develop our character.** We can learn through our loneliness how to be alone, and thus how to be content. I believe, in fact, that moments of loneliness-- like moments of pain in general-- can be learning experiences. It is, then, not something from which we should always run. Rather, in the right mindset, loneliness gives us the chance to move in a meaningful direction.***



*I believe that loneliness can prepare us for healthy relationships-- whether friendships or otherwise-- because healthy intimacy occurs between people who are content in themselves and by themselves, between those who choose relationships rather than those who need relationships.
**At first glance, it may seem like I contradict myself when I speak in one paragraph about life not being progressive, and in the next about a progression of character. Both progress and setback can take place in the life of a person without excluding the possibility of either. They are not mutually exclusive.
***Keep in mind that I am not advocating loneliness as preferable to a life of connectedness to others. Rather, I am saying that when moments of loneliness do come, they present us with opportunities for growth.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Nice Guy Fallacy

I read part of a poem recently by one of my favorite poets. It reads: I envy not in any moods The captive void of noble rage The linnet born within the cage That never knew the summer woods. I envy not the beast that takes His license in the field of time Unfetter'd by the sense of crime To whom a conscience never wakes. Nor what may call itself as bles't The heart that never plighted troth But stagnates in the weeds of sloth Nor any want-begotten rest. I hold it true, whate'er befall I feel it, when I sorrow most 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. At base, Tennyson contrasted a life of risk, and consequent pain, with one of security. He sides conclusively with the life of risk, and says he fails to envy those who have faced no hardship. I agree with him; and, for good or ill, his words are just as relevant today as they were in the nineteenth century. Like then, there are those today who choose to live their lives with as little risk as...

Persuasion

At different points in history, governments have devoted men, women, and resources to try to persuade others to their side. One significant example of this occurred in Germany under Adolf Hitler. Hitler knew how important it was to make sure the German people were on his side as leader of the country. One way he did this was by controlling what people heard. Specifically, near the beginning of World War II, Hitler made it a crime for anyone in Germany to listen to foreign radio broadcasts. These were called the “extraordinary radio measures.” He did this to ensure that Germans weren’t being persuaded by enemy countries to question their loyalty to Hitler. He knew that a German listening to a radio broadcast from Britain might persuade that German to believe that Great Britain was the good guy and Hitler the bad guy. This was so important, in fact, that two people in Germany were actually executed because they had either listened to or planned to listen to a foreign radio broadcast (one...

Experiment

My social studies students and I are studying Islam right now. The other day, we were reading about one of the Five Pillars, zakat (charity in Islam that means "that which purifies"). Muslims believe that giving away money helps to purify it and also "safeguards [them] against miserliness" (1). I asked the class if this was true, that giving money away makes us less greedy. They generally agreed that it does. I wanted to test whether or not they really believed this, so I handed a volunteer a $10 bill. I told the class that I would ask for the bill back the next day. I said that they should pass the bill around among their classmates, and that as a result, there would be no way for me to know who had the bill. For that reason, whoever wanted to keep the money could keep it. Even if I did learn who kept it, I told them, I would not punish that person. I wanted them to be motivated by their own honesty. The next day, I asked for the bill, and a student handed it to me...