No, I think for me at least if I feel lonely, it's more a out of a lack of real connection with other people. You can feel lonely in a group of people, I think because to interact with them you may feel like you have to put up this façade to fit in somewhat. And so you are not really connecting with them, because they are not relating to you, but to a projected image.

The feeling you describe seem more like dread, ennui, self-loathing.. or something like that.

I think that is a fascinating question! Thanks for positing same.

Ironically enough, I was just contemplating a similar phenomenon in another thread where it seems the take-away, as you suggest, is the we 'crave something outside' ourselves.

But isn't a lack-of connection with other people precisely the same type of thing as being alone with oneself? Just expressed in two different ways?

That's why I expressed it as a feeling instead of a descriptive state. It's an ontological form of attunement.

So when you are not connecting, you are by yourself. And you hate that in the disposition of loneliness.

But isn't a lack-of connection with other people precisely the same time of thing as being alone with oneself? Just expressed in two different ways? — Marty

I don't think I get what you are trying to get at. Being alone with oneself doesn't seem like a feeling to me, just a description of what is. I think people who are otherwise perfectly happy with themselves can feel the need to interact with other people too, so I don't think feeling lonely equals hating being alone with yourself.

I'm not talking about the literal sense of being alone. I'm saying talking about loneliness.

Note here I am talking about the feeling of loneliness and not actually being alone.

That's why I expressed it as a feeling instead of a descriptive state. It's an ontological form of attunement.

And that's what I'm putting into question: if they are content to be with themselves, they would have never sought out company. If they sought out company, inversely, they are not content to be by themselves. These have a logical relationship.

And that's what I'm putting into question: if they are content to be with themselves, they would have never sought out company. If they ought out company, inversely, they are not content to be by themselves. These have a logical relationship. — Marty

You but human psychology is not necessarily logical. You can be content to be with yourself and feel the need to seek out company I think. I don't think those feelings exclude each other.

There's a sense of where content here is being used differently. You're equivocating.

If someone is content, then they lack motivation in some specific area due to being fulfilled in that area already. So there would be no reason why they would satiate a desire that is already fulfilled. (Problem of motivation).

What I am saying is, there is at least some level of threshold that needs to be meet (a threshold of feeling content) that is needing to be satiated when a person craves or desires something. So there is no scenario where you can be content and still feel the need to seek out company.

Hey Marty it’s Bagel :) @Marty

Yeah ok I initially thought you meant being content with yourself, rather than being content to be alone with yourselves.

I suppose you are right that you cannot feel those two things at the exact same moment, though you certainly can, in say the span of a day.

Sure, but that's not the point. The point is when it is occurring these are the direct (and perhaps logical) consequences of such a dispositional state.

I mean yeah, they seem tautologous then.... in the sense that you are using other words to describe the same thing.

I wouldn't say it's a tautology, but it is a priori statement. Perhaps synthetic and therefore amplative (not trivial). That is to say, when we align these two statements, we find out something new about ourselves.

Could the feeling of need for company not be something that stands on it's own? Like something that is basic and directly hardwired? I'm just trying to poke holes in the argument here, not necessarily disagreeing with you...

So, you can highlight different aspects of the same thing.

Let me use another example in causality: the sugar cube causes the water to become saturated. Inversely, the water causes the sugar cube to dissolve. What is highlighted in one instance isn't highlighted in another. But that doesn't mean these are two different scenarios.

Likewise, what I am getting at, is that although you can say that I feel lonely because I am missing my friends, what is also inversely true is that I don't seem to like being with myself.

Yeah I'm not sure, It seems to me like you could have a desire for to see your friends, without the inverse being true. Unless you see it a mere tautology.

Yeah, I think you can separate particular (and therefore contingent states of affairs) of loneliness from your friends. What I don't think can be separated is the universal notion of loneliness and it's universal instance of craving someone that brings you out of the loneliness.

Do you think when you hate loneliness, that you hate the idea of being by your-self? — Marty

I find my-self repulsive and full of negativity, especially as of late.

Does that contribute to what you describe?

Everything you've said makes sense to me. I also think you can't connect with others if you can't be by yourself (in reasonable doses.) If you scour out all the phil-talk what you're left with is just yourself and a part of yourself that doesn't like yourself, and what that all is. I don't think there's a way of thinking around it (the temptation to adequately state a problem in a sanctified register, rather than undergo something). You have to plunge in. And figure out what you need in your life to allow that kind of plunging to happen safely.

We are social mammals. We are built to want social lives with certain qualities and quantities. If we don't have these, then we suffer. People may avoid being with themselves in ways that might also be good for them, but feelling lonely is NOT necessarily or as a general rule actually an inability to be with oneself. It's the unpleasant lacking of something we are hardwired to need and love and yearn for.

Hate is probably an inappropriate term to describe loneliness. Sadness is perhaps the most apt word here. Of course, we can say "I hate loneliness" but hate appears to be a reaction to loneliness rather than an essential part of what loneliness is and, as far as I can see, sadness is that essential part; I can imagine being lonely without hate but I can't imagine being lonely and not sad.

Why should we feel sad when being alone? Some have mentioned that humans are social animals and our sense of self-worth maybe linked to some kind of social approval. Being alone, rather being left alone, may be a sign that one's approval rating in society is falling and since our self-worth is tied to how much society approves of us, we diminish in our own eyes; hence the sadness in loneliness.

Note here I am talking about the feeling of loneliness and not actually being alone. — Marty

I wonder if there is a difference between the feeling of loneliness, and the feeling of desire for company/ intimacy?

One of the effects of being alone that I found significant was the amplification of one's mood; good days became ecstatic days, bad days found me literally crying intermittently all day long. But lonely? I'm not sure I was ever lonely, except in the sense that one who likes chocolate is pleased to come across some chocolate after a period of abstinence.

Company puts oneself into perspective; it is a second opinion on one's folly. It maintains - no in the long run it constitutes sanity. That is, one cannot be sane or mad except by reference to the other; indeed one cannot sustain any identity at all in the long run, and this is why the solitary silent life is a tool for self- transcendence - a dangerous tool that is equally effective as a form of torture.

I guess that this latter unwillingly endured attack on the self is what constitutes loneliness.

Terry Waite is maybe worth a read.