References
Introduction
1 Stendhal,
On Love, p. 267.
2 C. S. Lewis,
The Four Loves, p. 12.
3 Simmel, âThe Metropolis and Mental Lifeâ, p. 108. See also Simmel,
Sociology: Inquiries into the Construction of Social Forms, p. 95.
4 Simmel,
The Philosophy of Money, p. 298.
5 Tocqueville,
Democracy in America, pp. 665, 701.
6 Tocqueville,
Selected Letters on Politics and Society, p. 326. On solitude in the wilderness, see further Tocqueville, âJourney to Lake Oneidaâ and âA Fortnight in the Wildernessâ, p. 665.
7 Cf. Marquard, âPlĂ€doyer fĂŒr die EinsamkeitsfĂ€higkeitâ, p. 113; Moody, âInternet Use and its Relationship to Lonelinessâ; Monbiot, âThe Age of Loneliness is Killing Usâ.
8 Chen and French, âChildrenâs Social Competence in Cultural Contextsâ.
9 Cf. Svendsen,
Philosophy of Boredom, p. 28.
10 Larson, âThe Solitary Side of Life: An Examination of the Time People Spend Alone from Childhood to Old Ageâ.
11 Cioran,
Drawn and Quartered, p. 159.
12 Sartre,
Nausea, p. 116.
13 Rilke,
Letters to a Young Poet, p. 23.
16 Ecclesiastes 4:9â12.
17 Kant,
Idea of a Universal History with a Cosmopolitan Purpose, p. 44.
18 Byron,
Childe Haroldâs Pilgrimage, Canto
III, v. 90, p. 131.
19 Milton, Paradise Lose, Book
IX, 249, p. 192.
20 Bierce,
The Enlarged Devilâs Dictionary, p. 44.
21 Butler, âA Melancholy Manâ, p. 59.
22 MacDonald and Leary, âWhy Does Social Exclusion Hurt? The Relationship Between Social and Physical Painâ; Eisenberger, Lieberman and Williams, âDoes Rejection Hurt? An f
MRI Study of Social Exclusionâ.
23 A good, precise overview of the genetic and neuroscientific aspects of loneliness can be found in Hawkley and Cacioppo, âPerceived Social Isolation: Social Threat Vigilance and its Implication for Healthâ. There is an extensive psychoanalytic literature on loneliness that I will take up only in limited capacity. For an overview and discussion of many of the most central contributions, see Quindoz,
The Taming of Solitude: Separation Anxiety in Psychoanalysis.
ONE The Essence of Loneliness
1 For example, the Norwegian Institute of Public Health gives this definition of loneliness: âGood social support means that one receives love and care, is respected and valued, and that one belongs to a social network and a community with mutual responsibilities. The opposite of good social support is loneliness.â Folkehelseinstituttet, âSosial stĂžtte og ensomhet â faktaarkâ.
2 Cf. Scarry,
The Body in Pain.
3 Eliot,
The Cocktail Party, p. 414.
4 An extreme expression of such metaphysical loneliness is Ben Lazare Mijuskovicâs
Loneliness in Philosophy, Psychology and Literature (1979), which reduces the entirety of human existence to a state of loneliness, and where those who might claim that loneliness is not so defining of his or her life cannot be described in any other way than individuals living in denial of their basic existential condition. Interpersonal communication is dismissed as a momentary, albeit comforting, illusion (Mijuskovic,
Loneliness in Philosophy, Psychology and Literature, p. 82). Mijuskovic claims that loneliness is the most fundamental fact of human life, that loneliness is the basic structure of self-consciousness, and that when one attempts to see through themselves completely, they find an emptiness
or desolation, in short: loneliness (ibid., pp. 13, 20). However, one can question whether this type of Cartesian introspection, where the self is made utterly transparent to itself, is even possible. Many philosophers, not least Kant, have provided arguments for why this is more than doubtful. One can further question why such introspection should yield a more basic truth than that revealed by extrospection. However that may be, the most important thing to keep in mind is that reflections such as Mijuskovicâs are so reductive and general that they overlook all multiplicity in the phenomenon they have set out to examine. It is tempting to turn to a Shakespearean citation that Wittgenstein considered using as a motto for
Philosophical Investigations, âIâll teach you differences!â (Shakespeare,
King Lear, Act
I, Scene 4.) As Wittgenstein underscored in his remarks to Frazerâs
The Golden Bough: âNothing is ...