Self-imposed isolation is what you're getting at I suppose. This may come off as weird but I like to look at it from a causal perspective. Every single person is causally potent, some to a greater extent than others.

One can, as we all know, cause good things to happen or bad things to happen. Keeping to yourself, "voluntary loneliness", removes you from the causal web and while that's a good move since you can't cause trouble, it's in a way selfish because you can't do good as well. By the way, "selfish" is an inapproporiate word as far as self-imposed isolation is concerned because there's nothing to gain from it. If you really want to find a flaw in it, I suppose you should be focusing on the implicit indifference.

I generally agree with the sentiment.

It's difficult to make an argument for or against it though, because ultimately i think it boils down to an empirical claim whether we are social creatures or not. I think we are, and I think if you want, you could come up with evidence for this, such as stats for loneliness being an indicator for shorter lifespans and unhappiness etc... Bakunin feels alone and unhappy because of it, it's hard to argue with that. It is what it is.

I guess the question for me now personally is not whether we need social relations and communities, I think we do, but whether any kind of social relations and communities is better than being alone. I think the forms of social relations and communities we have today are not especially conductive to happiness either, so this end up being a bit of a conundrum.

If you really want to find a flaw in it, I suppose you should be focusing on the implicit indifference. — TheMadFool

It is true that I did not see it that way. As you perfectly explained it before if I isolate myself because I want it is quite selfish because I don’t make good things to others neither the ability of sharing the life experience with others. Since I understand the difference I guess it is not selfishness at all because there are people who self-imposed live alone but make good actions to others.
Also some people’s dreams is literally live the last days in a house hidden in the forest without socialising. I think it is respectful when someone wanted to make this step in their lives.

I think we are, and I think if you want, you could come up with evidence for this, such as stats for loneliness being an indicator for shorter lifespans and unhappiness etc... Bakunin feels alone and unhappy because of it, it's hard to argue with that. It is what it is.

I guess the question for me now personally is not whether we need social relations and communities, I think we do — ChatteringMonkey

Agree. We just do social relationships and communities because we literally need it. This is our reality. It is interesting why scientific researchers says we tend to be more unhappy if we want to live alone. Well it depends a lot of the person we are talking about. Sometimes we have that period of life with sadnesses and incomprehension. Some people go to their friends but imagine you don’t have any. We can say here go to a therapist or psychologist but somehow those people prefer to live alone or at least apart from social interaction.
Nevertheless, as you said, it is quite impossible make this practice in a long run because we are forced to interact with others. It looks like our mind is asking for this. But in this point I still disagree that introvert o more “lonely” people don’t need to be selfish at all.

But in this point I still disagree that introvert o more “lonely” people don’t need to be selfish at all. — javi2541997

Yeah I think the problem here is not necessarily equating lonely with selfish, but introverted with 'more lonely'. Introverted just means that they don't need or want the same frequency of social interaction as extroverted people. They are not necessarily lonely, or want to be alone all the time...

But sure, people do differ, and maybe you could question the validity of making these general claims about all of humanity like Bakunin does, based on his personal experiences alone.

But sure, people do differ, and maybe you could question the validity of making these general claims about all of humanity like Bakunin does, based on his personal experiences alone. — ChatteringMonkey

I think these claims from Bakunin not only comes from his personal experience but their political ideology. He rejected all state or political system establishing the anarchism. Nevertheless, back in the time Bakunin was a friend of Marx and then this is why he thought the importance of promote communities (equalities) instead of loneliness (selfishness/capitalism).
Probably it could be a reflection of sociology or just a research he did.

Good point, is it even possible to disentangle ideology, personal experience, the culture wherein one is raised etc etc, to arrive at some pristine fact about human nature?

Maybe not, but still even those ideologies have to come from somewhere...

I am agree with you. I think is difficult disentangle ideology or background experience to get an original about human nature. I guess the day we can do this we will turn back to prehistory time where nothing about this was that important or complex for humans as today.

I dont get why aloneness is inherently immoral. Why is there an obligation to be around others?

This is what I was questioning about. I think there is no obligation to stay with others but it looks like for some researchers that somehow we are forced to interact and then build communities.
But no, I am agree with you I do not see anything immoral of being lonely.

We're not forced to, we're just very strongly encouraged to be part of communities. But if someone really wants to self-isolate, they can do so.



That book is about the guy who drove to Maine, abandoned his car and lived in the wilderness for three decades. Granted, he did have to resort to stealing from cottages to survive, but he lived alone without interaction until he was finally arrested.

I haven't read the book, but I've heard about the story on the radio, and the guy (Christopher) claims he was never lonely or bored. His sense of being a self also dissolved during that time. I would guess that means his inner dialog was silenced because he no longer needed to think about himself in relation to others. Except that he did feel guilty about the stealing.

Of course there was the Into the Wild book and movie where another Christopher ends up living in the wilderness of Alaska in an abandoned bus. But he dies from starvation when he eats the wrong plant. The thing with trying to be a hermit is it's hard to survive totally independent of community. People who build cabins in the middle of Alaska tend to have planes fly supplies in from time to time. And some of them do tv shows to help foot the bill.

But in this point I still disagree that introvert o more “lonely” people don’t need to be selfish at all. — javi2541997

Studies have repeatedly shown that the loneliness has little to do intro- or extroversion. People just seem to require differing levels of external preoccupation.

Although I have not served myself, I would think that many who found themselves in military service (particularly back in the day when conditions must have been pretty rough) would be somewhat homesick/lonely.

Yes I already know that story. It is emotional and impacting. I remember an important scene where Christopher burned a few dollars as a metaphor of leaving the system. the decades he was living alone was difficult yes, but not impossible. I guess it is an interesting book where it shows the debate about if we are truly a social animal
Furthermore this story I also recommend to you another similar story called the history of Hayy Ibn Yaqzan here is the link of the free book: file:///C:/Users/javix/Desktop/Hayy%20empiricism.pdf/ http://www.muslimphilosophy.com/books/hayy.pdf where a little kid is raised in a savage island with a lot of antelopes ans then at the age of 49 years old he tells their experience when he meets civilisation for the first time.

Studies have repeatedly shown that the loneliness has little to do intro- or extroversion

True but somehow introverted people tend to go more loneliness than extroverted ones because it isnjust their nature. We can see it in the pandemic covid era. There were people who is hard for them stay a lot inside their homes while other do not care at all or are even more comfortable with themselves.
Also, yes, as you remarked we all ned have issues about external preoccupation. I guess this is another argument why Bakunin defended the selfishness practicing loneliness because somehow if we self-imposed us stay away of people we do not make other have expectations or whatever about us

“Obsession with the harvest and indifference to history are the two extremities of my bow.” ~René Char

In order to understand the world, one has to turn away from it on occasion; in order to serve others better, one has to hold them at a distance for a time. But where can one find the solitude necessary to vigor, the deep breath in which the mind collects itself and courage gauges its strength? There remain big cities. — Albert Camus, a moralist-anarchist

Somewhere Camus writes "solitaire et solidaire" – a nietzschean pendulum which, like breathing, must swing back & forth between being free from fear/hope & being free for danger-rebellion – which I signify when signing-off my posts here on TPF with :death: & :flower: (also interpretable as memento mori & memento vivere), respectively. Perhaps Bakunin didn't appreciate, for whatever (ideological?) reasons, how much his bouts of "loneliness" had invigorated his promethean rages against the machine ...

Well, we humans are no less natal than fatal beings – yet both (vide Levinas & Arendt contra Heidegger).

Nevertheless, it surprised me why he thought being lonely for voluntary or personal reasons is considered as “selfish” then, he established that a selfish man cannot reach happiness. — javi2541997

I'm not sure whether he was equating "aloneness" to loneliness -- cause in ordinary understanding the two can be exclusively defined. One can be in the company of friends but still feel lonely. So, is it isolation that's being explained here? If so, I can see his point that voluntary isolation is selfish.

So, is it isolation that's being explained here? If so, I can see his point that voluntary isolation is selfish. — Caldwell

I think he was referring to isolation as an act of not sharing with others. As you said, I can hang out with friends o people but I can feel lonely. But at least I try go there and meeting people, in this context the problem is not me but the others who don’t respect me or don’t want to be me with me.
Bakunin (I guess) thought that those people who don’t want to be with anybody and also not interact at all so not making communities is somehow selfish. But I think we have to consider it in their political beliefs in terms that probably he compares a loneliness man with a capitalist/powerful man of the state, etc... that only wants keep his richness

Perhaps Bakunin didn't appreciate, for whatever (ideological?) reasons, how much his bouts of "loneliness" had invigorized his promethean rages against the machine ... — 180 Proof

True. This point is interesting. Because back in time in his loneliness time he was somehow tired or frustrated of what is going around him. As you said, perhaps he was influenced so much by Karl Max because they were even friends. So probably he was so much focused in establishing communities of working class instead of being selfish and being alone in home

Bakunin (I guess) thought that those people who don’t want to be with anybody and also not interact at all so not making communities is somehow selfish. — javi2541997

Not bad as a view. Interacting is sharing your thoughts and gestures with others. If one chooses isolation, the question is why. Not enough introspection regarding this point, I believe. Why would someone isolate himself from the rest?

Why would someone isolate himself from the rest? — Caldwell

Probably because the subject does not believe in social interactions. I guess he thinks he will end up being hurt or disappointed. So he pretends isolate himself just to live with their own circumstances not depending from the rest. Imagine living alone in an island full of resources. Why not? This action is not necessarily selfish or bad if it is a personal decision.
This somehow breaks the theory of Karl Marx of human is a social animal and is forced to live in communities. So here opens a tangent in the debate about if we are free of living in our own or we are forced to live with others because this is how ever works.

Thoughts? — javi2541997

It is not surprising that Bakunin would see the act of man to isolate himself and remain alone as a selfish act, since he believed that man was by nature a communal being.

Ironic that in his youth, being the son of nobles, he spent most of his time isolated in his private library reading the most diverse books.

The hypocrisy of the left making itself present!

The hypocrisy of the left making itself present!

I think Bakunin was somehow misunderstood back in the day. Probably he started being communist or socialist but he ended up not believing in anything at all. I guess this is why his friendship with Marx ended. It is interesting despite his studies about working class or other leftist stuff he established the real enemy is the politics with the State. Thus, developing anarchism.
He also defended the idea of European United States without politics. What a pradox! Today exists Euopean Union but Russia is not part of it, hmm...

This somehow breaks the theory of Karl Marx of human is a social animal and is forced to live in communities. So here opens a tangent in the debate about if we are free of living in our own or we are forced to live with others because this is how ever works. — javi2541997

Yes, I'm not arguing against this. The question of why isolate oneself from the rest is a matter of looking within ourselves for answers, as it seems every a person asked this question, there seems to be no clear answer. Think about it. For example you say:

This action is not necessarily selfish or bad if it is a personal decision. — javi2541997

It is a personal decision, absolutely, but still does not provide an answer to why isolation? Could it be a rejection of something? And then there's the continued questioning which doesn't seem to go anywhere.
Not sure if I'm making this clearer.

provide an answer to why isolation? Could it be a rejection of something? — Caldwell

It could be a rejection of everything around us. One person can decide to isolate himself because literally want to live alone with his ownthoughts. Simple.
For example. Imagine a researcher. He isolates himself in a library for one year without social interaction due to their investigation and studies.
Also another example. Imagine a person who has been retired and then buys a house in the middle of nowhere and wants to live alone with their own circumstances.

The fact here is, against Bakunin was saying, I tried to argument that despite there are a lot of causes which drive a person isolate himself, does not necessarily mean selfish or even "sadness" which is what Bakunin was questioning about.
I isolate myself because I want to. I don't even have to express a clear cause to do it.

Bakunin never really gave a reason for why isolation is selfish. I re-read back the quote you provided, there's nothing there to explain why he thinks isolation is stupid. He just said it is selfish.

Also another example. Imagine a person who has been retired and then buys a house in the middle of nowhere and wants to live alone with their own circumstances. — javi2541997

Another example, yet it only begs what is being asked. They retired in the middle of nowhere because they want to live in the middle of nowhere. I hope this is getting to the point.

I'm not sure I've gotten an answer, in my opinion, except one wants to exclude the others in his existence. We can then ask, why does he exclude others in his day to day existence, it's cause he is not a sharing person, he is not an inclusion person. So is he not selfish at this point?

This is the point I want to debate with you about. It is interesting how Bakunin defended a life with social relation and then communities. Nevertheless, it surprised me why he thought being lonely for voluntary or personal reasons is considered as “selfish” then, he established that a selfish man cannot reach happiness. — javi2541997

I can see it. Choosing to be alone could be seen as narcissistic, self-important and entitled. My reading would be: Who am I that I need to set myself apart from all others just to spend time with my self-absorption?

Bakunin never really gave a reason for why isolation is selfish

He literally did in the rest of his works or books. Bakunin in his first political days was socialist so probably he criticised loneliness as an act of selfishness because it reminds him about bourgeois or capitalism. the fact of not sharing your interests with others is a selfish act for Bakunin thought

So is he not selfish at this point?

I guess no. This is why I was trying to argue against Bakunin criteria. I think the simple act of living alone because some wants to it is not connected with political or economical beliefs. So this is why I say Bakunin was wrong when he estated a loneliness person is forced to be more sad than others when it is not necessarily to.

Who am I that I need to set myself apart from all others just to spend time with my self-absorption?

Probably some who gives up in social interactions and then wants to isolate. I guess the point is simple but Bakunin thought that this act is somehow selfish for all of those who don't try to live in communities
I guess we all have at least the right of decided if we want to self-imposed us the isolation right? Then we can argue if it is good or bad for whatever reasons

Then we can argue if it is good or bad for whatever reasons — javi2541997

Sure - I don't really have an opinion on this but I understand how it might be seen by some. I imagine a pragmatic person who finds introspection somewhat, shall we say pretentious, might bend this way. The time you are spending off by yourself you could be contributing to community, either in terms of actual work and interaction, or even via solidarity.

The time you are spending off by yourself you could be contributing to community, either in terms of actual work and interaction, or even via solidarity.

This point is very important because it reflects what I wanted to argued previously. Sometimes spending time off by ourselves can also develop good or efficiency to others or the community itself. Probably because for some people this is the right path to concentrate and then developing their thoughts.
It reminds me about John Locke. He lived in a mansion in UK completely alone where he wrote An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. He gave to humanity a lot of wisdom despite he lived alone by self decision...