Is the problem loneliness or do we just not know how to be alone? To be able to be quiet? To be with our own thoughts with no other voices for a moment? Don’t get me wrong. I think community is essential but maybe the issue is more so that we run to many other things to manage or numb ourselves from what’s underneath it all. How can one be vulnerable if they haven’t given themselves the opportunity to explore what’s really going on under the surface?
That's really good insight. Learning to be alone in the silence is definitely something that has been lost in our culture. What comes first, doing the work to be vulnerable or engaging in community that highlights the importance of doing the work?
Great question. Going to go back to Freakonomics on this one and the idea of social trust. Conflict reduces social trust. Vulnerability allows us to find shared experiences with others, which makes them not "others" and builds social trust. Conflict is easier to walk away from than engage. Oh boy, do I feel this one. But does all conflict even need to be resolved? Or can it be resolved by acceptance, and not resolving anything at all? Does that acceptance come with a hit to trust?
I'd argue that not engaging in conflict is what reduces the social trust. Engaging in it and truly entering builds trust. To sit across from another and say, "I hear you. What I understand you to be saying is... I don't necessarily agree... How can I come alongside you to resolve..."
When we do this, my experience has been, that a deeper trust is formed and we can go deeper into vulnerability. Because, there is a trust that the other will hear, seek to understand, and be present in the conflict.
It does. It's a very fine line, and I think your approach is good, we all need lessons on engaging conflict without causing pain. I don't for two reasons, I know they are set in their ways, and I don't want to cause pain. I also personally can't stand being misunderstood, and I need more patience with that part.
A very fine line indeed. I have made a clear distinction in my mind about certain relationships. Jesus talks about not throwing pearls before swine. If I want to engage in community, I think I have to engage in loving conflict, making myself understood and seeking understanding.
However, if I've determined the other person is uninterested in that, then I simply don't engage.
Right! Those just for fun relationships are important to have. I think I sometimes don't necessarily think of those kinds of relationships as friends, but more as acquaintances. I also find that I surround myself with those kind of people because if I don't have to open myself up to them then they are unlikely to hurt me.
I'm trying to organize my thoughts a bit. I think isolation is a forced thing, either it's one's own mental health driving it, or society in various ways to those who are perceived as different. Loneliness is the emotion that either drives us to make contact with others, or may spiral down into mental health issues, which may lead to further self-isolation, and then each reinforces the other.
That's really good. I think loneliness is definitely an emotional state that we can experience even in a large crowd. It seems to me that loneliness is the more insidious of the two.
I'm not sure. Working as I do with the disability community, I see forced isolation. There's also frustration, anger, and deep hurt by being excluded from the community. Or when they are included it's superficial, tokenized, they are patronized, or praised for just living, not who they are as people.
Is the problem loneliness or do we just not know how to be alone? To be able to be quiet? To be with our own thoughts with no other voices for a moment? Don’t get me wrong. I think community is essential but maybe the issue is more so that we run to many other things to manage or numb ourselves from what’s underneath it all. How can one be vulnerable if they haven’t given themselves the opportunity to explore what’s really going on under the surface?
That's really good insight. Learning to be alone in the silence is definitely something that has been lost in our culture. What comes first, doing the work to be vulnerable or engaging in community that highlights the importance of doing the work?
How does vulnerability and conflict intersect in the building of community?
Great question. Going to go back to Freakonomics on this one and the idea of social trust. Conflict reduces social trust. Vulnerability allows us to find shared experiences with others, which makes them not "others" and builds social trust. Conflict is easier to walk away from than engage. Oh boy, do I feel this one. But does all conflict even need to be resolved? Or can it be resolved by acceptance, and not resolving anything at all? Does that acceptance come with a hit to trust?
I'd argue that not engaging in conflict is what reduces the social trust. Engaging in it and truly entering builds trust. To sit across from another and say, "I hear you. What I understand you to be saying is... I don't necessarily agree... How can I come alongside you to resolve..."
When we do this, my experience has been, that a deeper trust is formed and we can go deeper into vulnerability. Because, there is a trust that the other will hear, seek to understand, and be present in the conflict.
Does that resonate at all?
It does. It's a very fine line, and I think your approach is good, we all need lessons on engaging conflict without causing pain. I don't for two reasons, I know they are set in their ways, and I don't want to cause pain. I also personally can't stand being misunderstood, and I need more patience with that part.
A very fine line indeed. I have made a clear distinction in my mind about certain relationships. Jesus talks about not throwing pearls before swine. If I want to engage in community, I think I have to engage in loving conflict, making myself understood and seeking understanding.
However, if I've determined the other person is uninterested in that, then I simply don't engage.
Melissa said that "vulnerability is the crux of relationships."
I think this is a critical idea. Is it possible to have authentic relationships apart from those in the relationships being vulnerable?
Not deep ones. But I think we all have those friends who are just fun.
Right! Those just for fun relationships are important to have. I think I sometimes don't necessarily think of those kinds of relationships as friends, but more as acquaintances. I also find that I surround myself with those kind of people because if I don't have to open myself up to them then they are unlikely to hurt me.
Yes!!!
Let’s see if this whole discussion thread will be a thing or not.
I think there is a distinct difference between loneliness and isolation.
What do you all think?
Well, I'm here, hopefully more will stagger in late like I did!
This is a text based discussion. I'm not sure if it's useful for these kinds of discussions or not. But, I'm intrigued to try.
Sweet! What do you think the difference is between loneliness and isolation?
I'm trying to organize my thoughts a bit. I think isolation is a forced thing, either it's one's own mental health driving it, or society in various ways to those who are perceived as different. Loneliness is the emotion that either drives us to make contact with others, or may spiral down into mental health issues, which may lead to further self-isolation, and then each reinforces the other.
That's really good. I think loneliness is definitely an emotional state that we can experience even in a large crowd. It seems to me that loneliness is the more insidious of the two.
I'm not sure. Working as I do with the disability community, I see forced isolation. There's also frustration, anger, and deep hurt by being excluded from the community. Or when they are included it's superficial, tokenized, they are patronized, or praised for just living, not who they are as people.