This quote comes from Blaise Pascal's Pensées, accessible here.
"That is why we like noise and activity so much. That is why imprisonment is such a horrific punishment. That is why the pleasure of being alone is incomprehensible. That is, in fact, the main joy of the condition of kingship, because people are constantly trying to amuse kings and provide them with all sorts of distraction.—The king is surrounded by people whose only thought is to entertain him and prevent him from thinking about himself. King though he may be, he is unhappy if he thinks about it"
That has a lot of resonance for me. In this modern age, we are all kings, and there are vast industries to save us from ever being alone from our thoughts.
For December, I quit sugar, social media, and video games. It's been really interesting to notice what state I'm in when I go to reach for those things. Sometimes it's just habit, but often it's because I'm uncomfortable or in distress and want to avoid those feelings. But indulging in those things often just kicks the problem down the road.
Indeed, breaking my social media habits reminds me of Oscar Wilde talking about cigarettes: "A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want?" The same for me is definitely true with Twitter and Facebook. An infinite feed of shiny, entertaining, funny, and outraging things, but almost nothing that's ever satisfying.
Just a bit more on why Pascal thought even a king is unhappy when he thinks about himself:
Whatever condition we picture to ourselves, if we muster all the good
things which it is possible to possess, royalty is the finest position
in the world. Yet, when we imagine a king attended with every pleasure
he can feel, if he be without diversion, and be left to consider and
reflect on what he is, this feeble happiness will not sustain him; he
will necessarily fall into forebodings of dangers, of revolutions which
may happen, and, finally, of death and inevitable disease; so that if he
be without what is called diversion, he is unhappy, and more unhappy
than the least of his subjects who plays and diverts himself.
Hence it comes that play and the society of women, war, and high posts,
are so sought after. Not that there is in fact any happiness in them, or
that men imagine true bliss to consist in money won at play, or in the
hare which they hunt; we would not take these as a gift. We do not seek
that easy and peaceful lot which permits us to think of our unhappy
condition, nor the dangers of war, nor the labour of office, but the
bustle which averts these thoughts of ours, and amuses us.
Reasons why we like the chase better than the quarry.
Hence it comes that men so much love noise and stir; hence it comes that
the prison is so horrible a punishment; hence it comes that the pleasure
of solitude is a thing incomprehensible. And it is in fact the greatest
source of happiness in the condition of kings, that men try incessantly
to divert them, and to procure for them all kinds of pleasures.
The king is surrounded by persons whose only thought is to divert the
king, and to prevent his thinking of self. For he is unhappy, king
though he be, if he think of himself.
This is all that men have been able to discover to make themselves
happy. And those who philosophise on the matter, and who think men
unreasonable for spending a whole day in chasing a hare which they would
not have bought, scarce know our nature. The hare in itself would not
screen us from the sight of death and calamities; but the chase which
turns away our attention from these, does screen us.
>The king is surrounded by people whose only thought is to entertain him and prevent him from thinking about himself.
This is really interesting from a modern perspective. I'm an audiophile - I've spent countless hours just sitting in a chair in front of a stereo system I've spent a couple thousand on. If I ever lapse into non-attention to the music, I try and get back to the music. It's like mindfulness meditation, but unlike the monk, my mind is focusing on a sense, not emptying itself.
On the other hand, I can't lie in bed for more than two minutes without deep introspection - my morality, arguments for and against all positions, what projects I want to work on, the papers I've read, etc.
But before writing some comments on this website and elsewhere, I'll have a deep think about what I'm arguing, and why. Other times I'll just jump at it for the engagement, the thrill of refreshing in the morning to check the Hacker News Engagement Number, whatever else. I've tried to make an effort to not read outrage-bait on Reddit, I've deleted my Twitter account years ago, I've done countless things. This i my third HN account.
The best part of my day, after work and my energy is exhausted? Gaming. I only play one game - online and multi-player, with an Icelandic man I've never met. It's all a distraction. Why continue learning piano, Japanese, philosophy, literature, introspection, when I have this pleasure right here? Where will I be in 30 years? 20 years? Even writing this comment sadness comes over me.
To think that in the 19th century, there were men being compared to Hegel and Feuerbach at age 21. What the hell am I doing?
"Modern humans spend virtually no time on "inward-directed thought", and not solely because we're too busy: in one US survey, 95% of adults said they'd found time for a leisure activity in the previous 24 hours, but 83% said they'd spent zero time just thinking."
I think Pascal was correct because at least those people I know well enough to discuss such matters with tell me they don't spend much time thinking or contemplating about much at all. This is a bit strange to me as I've always thought about things—mind you, not necessarily things of great importance but about things in general. It's dead easy for me to daydream time away (unfortunately). (When I was at school one of the punishments was to be sent to stand in a corner and stare at the wall. It used to send some kids almost crazy but never bothered me much—all I had to do was to go into daydream mode to pass time away!)
Since reading this article it's occurred to me that those people who've really struggled with the isolation of COVID-19 lockdowns and who continually seek the company of other people are perhaps those who suffer this 'inability to sit quietly in a room alone'. I mention this because during earlier posts on the topic of large numbers of people who were not coping with the enforced isolation, I said that for me, if anything, the enforced lockdown was a blessing as I wasn't continually having to deal with people I'd rather not deal with. Similarly, I find noise and activity distracting, even annoying at times.
No doubt when COVID-19 is over and the postmortems begin in earnest, this connection will be researched.
Another afterthought, perhaps those best suited to interplanetary traveling will be those who do have a good ability to quietly contemplate things (after all, it's likely they'll be forced to do lots of it).
What helps me is to walk, instead of sitting in a room. When I walk, my fidgety body is kept busy, and leaves my brain in peace, not even costing any brain-cpu cycles.
Then, it is a lot harder to reach to your cellphone when you walk. So it helps me get rid of 2 major distractions, body and phone, with very little effort. Now I can think.
This. Unfortunately it's much harder in winter due to short days where I live (currently 7 hour days) but in summer it's great.
I find audiobooks and podcasts are also great for walking. Popular science and good self help is interesting but the best ones for a quiet state of complementation are thoughtful interviews, biographies and story driven intellectual books (Yuval Noah Harari is particularly excellent). In some ways they are another distraction but I like to listen for a while then take off the headphones and think on a section while I walk another mile.
Walking helps me too. Long walks rather than short/brisk ones.
I think this has to be about the 'diffused mode' of the brain- they talked about in the course 'Learning How To Learn'- as opposed to the focused mode.
Though you mention that walking is what helps you keep distractions under control, I like to go walking while listening to history/science podcasts, since it helps me understand the content a lot better.
The act of walking is said to be greatly beneficial for thinking in its own right [0].
So when I get an idea, I usually drop everything I'm doing and go for walk. And my anecdata can only confirm that it's beneficial.
This is why I am so excited about the idea of working remotely using AR glasses. Just imagine going hiking through the mountains while checking your emails or being on a conference call – only taking breaks to type out some code on a portable keyboard.
Regardless of the cognitive performance boost this would give you, it would also mitigate a lot of the health issues we humans have started accumulating since we started sitting down all day.
Of course Einstein also famously claimed to have only moved to Princeton for the walks home with Gödel [1].
[1] I would have to do some digging to find the original phrasing (Einstein is often misattributted), so take it with a pinch of salt. But there is an entire book who's title alludes to this :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Einstein_Walked_with_G%C3...
I completely agree here. In "Think Fast and Slow" the author talks about how much more productive and clear his time was when he took his thinking time and walked for it.
“You do not need to leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. Do not even listen, simply wait, be quiet, still and solitary. The world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked, it has no choice, it will roll in ecstasy at your feet.”
Ecstasy. This dude knew how to meditate. A lot of people think meditation is just an exercise in patience and self discipline to stop the chatter of the mind, and that that is the end in itself. They are unaware of where meditation can lead.
When the central channel (referred to as sushumna in yoga) is open and energy flows freely, you can feel ecstatic sensations in the centre of the brain as the upper centres become energised. It's important to relax the body, including the eyes, head and brain itself.
I feel it like a sort of exhilaration, like the first time I went on a rollercoaster or cycled my bike fast down a hill etc. It's an electrically alive feeling.
I hear this is just the start: what starts as a trickle becomes a torrent, apparently.
I was looking at this quote for a long time. I forgot who it was from, and only remembered it paraphrased. Thank you.
To also contribute to the discussion. I often joke that it takes effort to mess things up. You could instead lay on the beach enjoy the evening breeze than putting in that effort. So before you delve into that process, take a step back and think carefully what you want out of it.
I like long walks accompanied by music (ambient music). Walking can be a deeply meditative experience, just pick terrain that won't give you trouble (no high traffic streets, no steep hills etc) and just go. Walk until your body starts doing it mechanically, and don't focus on the destination nor in search of stimuli.
Maybe because walking exerts energy, it can be more effective than just sitting or laying down - when you are really energetic and not tired. Maybe because the scenery changes and it acts as a context switch to our minds.
It has been both effective as a form of emotion regulation, coming up with novel solutions, and just feeling more in sync with myself.
Just my interpretation (of the Pascal quote), beginning with the full quote.
> When I have occasionally set myself to consider the different distractions of men, the pains and perils to which they expose themselves at court or in war, whence arise so many quarrels, passions, bold and often bad ventures, etc., I have discovered that all the unhappiness of men arises from one single fact, that they cannot stay quietly in their own chamber. A man who has enough to live on, if he knew how to stay with pleasure at home, would not leave it to go to sea or to besiege a town. A commission in the army would not be bought so dearly, but that it is found insufferable not to budge from the town; and men only seek conversation and entering games, because they cannot remain with pleasure at home.[139][#201908302349]
This quote is often summarized roughly as: "all of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone." (i.e. the title of this post). Taken out of context, this would seem to suggest (to me) a belief that if we could simply meditate and avoid external distractions (a commission in the army, conversation, games, Pascal suggests), we might find happiness.
However, a reading of the full passage reveals that "on further consideration" he thinks the reason for this is that if we were to sit with our thoughts, the "natural poverty of our feeble and mortal condition" would drive us to despair.
He thinks that someone who truly understands the human condition would do everything they could to avoid sitting alone with their thoughts ("there is nothing they leave undone in seeking turmoil") . We seek diversion because if we didn't have any distraction, we would end up dwelling on the miserable human condition (selfish, pre-occupied with self-gratification, sensitive to the opinion of others, judgmental, etc. - basically, 'sinful').
In the end, he suggests that we should look for happiness externally, in God, which he then talks about a lot.
[#201908302349]: Blaise Pascal (1958): _Pascal's Pensées_, New York: E.P. Dutton.
Thanks. I was reading this thread thinking that sitting alone with your thoughts does not necessarily bring you peace. It can often do the opposite.
I take time and pray to God each morning. I find that this gives me peace. I feel better prepared to deal with the day when I pray.
My routine is focused around praying the Lord's Prayer, as in the prayer Jesus taught. Praying this prayer over years has enabled some truths to sink in. For example, the first part of the prayer is not about us, it is about God. I think it is good to start the day with the understanding we are not the centre of the universe. Secondly, I have been struck by how the Lord's prayer does not start at the place of forgiveness. Whether that be seeking forgiveness or asking for forgiveness. This gives me peace in the knowledge I don't need to have it all together before I engage with God in prayer.
A buddhist, occultist, or existentialist might suggest Pascal just didn't explore this space far enough. Those with the courage to question even the existence of God and meaning might find more rewarding insights or experiences.
With all the sociological data we have now, it’s almost certain that Pascal’s wager has never been more true for those looking to lead a meaningful life.
I used to have a close friend who was constantly getting into trouble (and calling me to bail her out, sometimes literally). Minor run ins with the police, car accidents, making shady deals or getting into debt to random lowlifes she just met. I always used to say that I wished she would just stay in her room and sit on the bed. Save both of us so much trouble!
This was in the days before social media, otherwise I'm sure she would have done plenty of damage from her room.
I really liked Konrad Lorenz's explanation of this. He said that every innate ability to learn has a corresponding innate "teaching mechanism".
For example, an animal like a duck won't necessarily reason "hmm, is this a safe spot? Maybe I should find an area with more protection from [predator]", instead it will have an innate anxiety that it feels when it is in an unsafe place, and that anxiety will drive it to find a different spot.
This was really an a-ha moment for me. Where I previously thought that anxiety and "depression" (not clinical depression) were mysterious unexplainable side-effects of evolution, now I see that they are probably innate mechanisms that spur us to go out, learn more, find opportunity, exercise, meet people etc. Our bodies know when we are stagnating before our minds do.
The fact that we can override those innate mechanisms and sit alone in a quiet, empty room at all is what is really impressive.
This quote has fascinated me for a long time. It seems that this is a skill that can be sharpened with deliberate practice.
I went to a 10 day silent meditation retreat (Vipasana) abs felt I got much more comfortable sitting by myself just observing my thoughts. The practice part was difficult, probably one of the hardest things I have ever done. 10 days of no talking/reading/writing, sitting in a room, observing your sensations, for hours on end, punctuated by 5 minute breaks. I felt the world temporarily go from HD to 4K after a couple of days.
Anyways, this really made me reconsider my relationship with thoughts. I feel I can separate the sense of my being from my thoughts some times. This helps me with my anxiety.
Which is just depression. I don't think about dying, unless its the topic of conversation or whatever. I think about living. There's no real point in dwelling on the other.
For me it's definitely more that I have a smartphone which facilitates easy access to a socially accepted addiction - sitting alone might make me passingly think about some eventual demise but it certainly doesn't dominate my thinking. Wasn't this the basis of Terror Management theory ? I'm not sure that ever had much evidence for it, other than in some extremely general sense.
While still of course afraid of actually dying, instead of being perennial fearful of death I am instead now grateful for being alive this day. Try that change in perspective.
Background anxiety about our "eventual demise" is the consequence of false entitlement to life and health. Young and healthy people imagine good life without end, the dying and people who've lost health and ability often know better.
This change in perspective also helps you make the most out of each day, because those who make a point to remember that their good days are finite will not want to have spent them in waste.
For virtually everybody, that quiet room is not a given, but has to be acquired and maintained. How can you sit in that room and give yourself to silence if you know deep down that the silence is a temporary illusion? You have to leave that room and either defend your wealth or acquire the means to be able to return.
Additionally, the experiment doesn't measure what it wants to measure:
>people detest being made to spend six to 15 minutes in a room by themselves with nothing to do but think
The participants hadn't chosen to sit in silence. They chose to participate in an experiment. Sitting in silence for somebody else is not the same as sitting in silence. A better setup would have been a space where sitting in silence would have been one option among many.
Sitting in silence allows your brain to change, such that back outside you are more resourceful.
If you accept that premise, the a journey begins how to guide the time in silence such that your life quality "in noise" actually benefits well from investing into silence.
Notice that this has absolutely nothing to do with finance, material wealth, neither as precondition nor as outcome.
I don’t like this gatekeeping philosophy. I feel that this line of thinking discourages self reflection because the first thing we usually notice when we look honestly at ourselves is what we don’t like about ourselves, but that is just a small part of who we really are. Discomfort from self awareness may be the first step to self improvement. Instead of (falsely) equating mental discomfort with causing “all problems”, we should instead work to understand our imperfections and work together to correct them.
The point of the quote is that people use distraction to mask the discomfort of sitting alone with their thoughts and that this distraction causes problems. It’s not saying that the discomfort is a problem.
Don't all of human achievements also come from this inability? The curiosity to find what's out there, and to explore the environment? I think this quote needs a lot of context to be useful - it makes sense to balance seeking stimulation with inward exploration. But to ban it outright is also flawed. Take time off to be with yourself, but don't renounce the world.
Why would you sit quietly alone in a room when you could be enjoying a sauna, soaking up the sun at the beach, or picnicking in a park? I don’t think the problem is sitting alone with one’s thoughts - but rather that an indoor room isn’t a particularly desirable environment. At least it isn’t as undesirable as an airplane seat though.
I know there is an activity center in the center of the brain, which randomly fires impulses in all different directions of the brain.
It is keeping the brain from shutting down itself.
Brain neurons are connected the way that a thought needs to start from somewhere.
No induction/initiation - no involuntary thought.
The associative thinking seem also to start as a cause of that activity center, when two or more random independent thought chains are being randomly initiated and come together eventually, at the bottom of the chains, causing cross-thinking.
This gives me a nice excuse why I'm restless and need to think all the time.
I cannot close eyes in a dark room and have no thought.
My brain is just working as usual -- I like it so.
Trying to not have a thought is one of, in not the biggest misconceptions about meditation. You can’t turn your brain off. It’s going to think. That’s what it does. The point is to notice those thoughts in a nonjudgmental way. See them for what they are: ephemeral and passing. Practicing that has a great many benefits, not least of which is an increased sense of well-being.
Do people here feel the same way? That is, do you feel that it is uncomfortable to not do anything? I, like most people I guess, am easily distracted with various things like reading HN or fiddling with whatever is on the table. When given the opportunity to sit down with nothing with my thoughts however, I always feel very enjoyable. It is definitely nothing I would think about as uncomfortable.
Yeh and to think society rewards extroverts as leaders but often introverts make the best leaders as in they take long periods of time to think alone and often avoid many pitfalls by doing so instead of moving fast and breaking everyone and everything along the way.
To be a good leader, you have to be willing to confront AND navigate conflict within a group setting in a productive manner that ultimately achieves an agreed upon goal. One of the defining traits of an introvert is avoiding conflict. Thus, no, introverts don't INHERENTLY make good leaders. If you've ever dealt with even a moderately diverse group of individuals due to their capabilities (not in the sense of level of skill, but range of skills), you'd know that the motivations of individuals vary wildly. Even if they are similar, they're oddly unique in their own ways at their own times. Regardless of your unicorn-fart fantasies, extrovert personalities are better equipped to handle groups with varying motivations to achieve the same goal. Not to say introverts can't be good or even great leaders. To name one, Eisenhower was an introvert and he is regarded as one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century for a multitude of reasons. Leadership takes intent and purposeful practice/training for them to achieve. The absolution concept that they're the "best" just means you've never been in even a mild range of real world team projects. You would have seen many easily fall apart in the midst of dealing with somewhat strenuous situations. It's an easier absolution that extroverts make the best leaders, yet even that is untrue. It just takes extroverts less practice to achieve "great" than it does for introverts since they already possess a lot of the skill sets that introverts are lacking. Ultimately, leaders are made, not born.
What's really interesting is that it's not so clear cut. Introverted leaders tend to outperform when they lead extroverts and extroverted leaders tend to outperform when they lead introverts[1].
When you start talking about introverts and extroverts you would first have to state to which ideas behind those concepts you subscribe to. If Jungian then you can be both introvert and extrovert in the same time.
If by wikipedia then you think they are exclusive and might even think that introverts are people who just want to sit at home.
Not wanting too much company can also be associated with highly sensitive people and not necessarily introverts. About 30% of highly sensitive people are in fact extroverted.
And there is no single trait or concept that makes someone a good leader but rather a mix of lot different psychological and biological setups.
Maybe I'm just weird, but I actually quite like being able to sit alone with my thoughts. Sometimes the thoughts are not good, but most of the times its just about something that's been troubling me and I haven't figured out what the solution is. When I was in education I had to take a 1 hour bus each way for 8 years, before we had the whole internet in our pockets, so maybe thats why.
I do actually meditate as well, but the meditation I do is where you try to be thoughtless, not to ponder whatever thoughts are on your mind.
My favourite Christmas activity is a 7-day digital detox. A weeklong solo offline retreat in a cabin. I do it during the holidays because it is the easiest to block off the calendar.
The retreat it self is not very "exciting", but the effect on mental clarity around the 4th day is profound.
I like to say, most people are afraid of being alone with themselves in their head.
It's just practice. Most folks don't know what to do, so when they find themselves alone with their thoughts they instantly decide to leave that state. Its a sort of Attention Deficit thing. With practice you can figure out something to think about when in this state. Review, question, or just observe. Anything can be interesting if you invest it with value and do it deliberately.
[+] [-] codechicago277|5 years ago|reply
"That is why we like noise and activity so much. That is why imprisonment is such a horrific punishment. That is why the pleasure of being alone is incomprehensible. That is, in fact, the main joy of the condition of kingship, because people are constantly trying to amuse kings and provide them with all sorts of distraction.—The king is surrounded by people whose only thought is to entertain him and prevent him from thinking about himself. King though he may be, he is unhappy if he thinks about it"
https://books.google.com/books?id=KezeDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA45&lpg=P...
[+] [-] wpietri|5 years ago|reply
For December, I quit sugar, social media, and video games. It's been really interesting to notice what state I'm in when I go to reach for those things. Sometimes it's just habit, but often it's because I'm uncomfortable or in distress and want to avoid those feelings. But indulging in those things often just kicks the problem down the road.
Indeed, breaking my social media habits reminds me of Oscar Wilde talking about cigarettes: "A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want?" The same for me is definitely true with Twitter and Facebook. An infinite feed of shiny, entertaining, funny, and outraging things, but almost nothing that's ever satisfying.
[+] [-] pmoriarty|5 years ago|reply
Whatever condition we picture to ourselves, if we muster all the good things which it is possible to possess, royalty is the finest position in the world. Yet, when we imagine a king attended with every pleasure he can feel, if he be without diversion, and be left to consider and reflect on what he is, this feeble happiness will not sustain him; he will necessarily fall into forebodings of dangers, of revolutions which may happen, and, finally, of death and inevitable disease; so that if he be without what is called diversion, he is unhappy, and more unhappy than the least of his subjects who plays and diverts himself.
Hence it comes that play and the society of women, war, and high posts, are so sought after. Not that there is in fact any happiness in them, or that men imagine true bliss to consist in money won at play, or in the hare which they hunt; we would not take these as a gift. We do not seek that easy and peaceful lot which permits us to think of our unhappy condition, nor the dangers of war, nor the labour of office, but the bustle which averts these thoughts of ours, and amuses us.
Reasons why we like the chase better than the quarry.
Hence it comes that men so much love noise and stir; hence it comes that the prison is so horrible a punishment; hence it comes that the pleasure of solitude is a thing incomprehensible. And it is in fact the greatest source of happiness in the condition of kings, that men try incessantly to divert them, and to procure for them all kinds of pleasures.
The king is surrounded by persons whose only thought is to divert the king, and to prevent his thinking of self. For he is unhappy, king though he be, if he think of himself.
This is all that men have been able to discover to make themselves happy. And those who philosophise on the matter, and who think men unreasonable for spending a whole day in chasing a hare which they would not have bought, scarce know our nature. The hare in itself would not screen us from the sight of death and calamities; but the chase which turns away our attention from these, does screen us.
[+] [-] claudiawerner|5 years ago|reply
This is really interesting from a modern perspective. I'm an audiophile - I've spent countless hours just sitting in a chair in front of a stereo system I've spent a couple thousand on. If I ever lapse into non-attention to the music, I try and get back to the music. It's like mindfulness meditation, but unlike the monk, my mind is focusing on a sense, not emptying itself.
On the other hand, I can't lie in bed for more than two minutes without deep introspection - my morality, arguments for and against all positions, what projects I want to work on, the papers I've read, etc.
But before writing some comments on this website and elsewhere, I'll have a deep think about what I'm arguing, and why. Other times I'll just jump at it for the engagement, the thrill of refreshing in the morning to check the Hacker News Engagement Number, whatever else. I've tried to make an effort to not read outrage-bait on Reddit, I've deleted my Twitter account years ago, I've done countless things. This i my third HN account.
The best part of my day, after work and my energy is exhausted? Gaming. I only play one game - online and multi-player, with an Icelandic man I've never met. It's all a distraction. Why continue learning piano, Japanese, philosophy, literature, introspection, when I have this pleasure right here? Where will I be in 30 years? 20 years? Even writing this comment sadness comes over me.
To think that in the 19th century, there were men being compared to Hegel and Feuerbach at age 21. What the hell am I doing?
[+] [-] unknown|5 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] EGreg|5 years ago|reply
Someone can paste it here after googling.
[+] [-] hilbert42|5 years ago|reply
I think Pascal was correct because at least those people I know well enough to discuss such matters with tell me they don't spend much time thinking or contemplating about much at all. This is a bit strange to me as I've always thought about things—mind you, not necessarily things of great importance but about things in general. It's dead easy for me to daydream time away (unfortunately). (When I was at school one of the punishments was to be sent to stand in a corner and stare at the wall. It used to send some kids almost crazy but never bothered me much—all I had to do was to go into daydream mode to pass time away!)
Since reading this article it's occurred to me that those people who've really struggled with the isolation of COVID-19 lockdowns and who continually seek the company of other people are perhaps those who suffer this 'inability to sit quietly in a room alone'. I mention this because during earlier posts on the topic of large numbers of people who were not coping with the enforced isolation, I said that for me, if anything, the enforced lockdown was a blessing as I wasn't continually having to deal with people I'd rather not deal with. Similarly, I find noise and activity distracting, even annoying at times.
No doubt when COVID-19 is over and the postmortems begin in earnest, this connection will be researched.
Another afterthought, perhaps those best suited to interplanetary traveling will be those who do have a good ability to quietly contemplate things (after all, it's likely they'll be forced to do lots of it).
[+] [-] Mulpze15|5 years ago|reply
Then, it is a lot harder to reach to your cellphone when you walk. So it helps me get rid of 2 major distractions, body and phone, with very little effort. Now I can think.
[+] [-] ck425|5 years ago|reply
I find audiobooks and podcasts are also great for walking. Popular science and good self help is interesting but the best ones for a quiet state of complementation are thoughtful interviews, biographies and story driven intellectual books (Yuval Noah Harari is particularly excellent). In some ways they are another distraction but I like to listen for a while then take off the headphones and think on a section while I walk another mile.
[+] [-] atulatul|5 years ago|reply
I think this has to be about the 'diffused mode' of the brain- they talked about in the course 'Learning How To Learn'- as opposed to the focused mode.
[+] [-] not_knuth|5 years ago|reply
Though you mention that walking is what helps you keep distractions under control, I like to go walking while listening to history/science podcasts, since it helps me understand the content a lot better.
The act of walking is said to be greatly beneficial for thinking in its own right [0].
So when I get an idea, I usually drop everything I'm doing and go for walk. And my anecdata can only confirm that it's beneficial.
This is why I am so excited about the idea of working remotely using AR glasses. Just imagine going hiking through the mountains while checking your emails or being on a conference call – only taking breaks to type out some code on a portable keyboard.
Regardless of the cognitive performance boost this would give you, it would also mitigate a lot of the health issues we humans have started accumulating since we started sitting down all day.
Of course Einstein also famously claimed to have only moved to Princeton for the walks home with Gödel [1].
[0] I found this news item in a pinch, but I'm sure there are many studies to substantiate the claim: https://news.stanford.edu/2014/04/24/walking-vs-sitting-0424...
[1] I would have to do some digging to find the original phrasing (Einstein is often misattributted), so take it with a pinch of salt. But there is an entire book who's title alludes to this : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_Einstein_Walked_with_G%C3...
(the book is great btw)
[+] [-] loufe|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wazoox|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] onecommentman|5 years ago|reply
- Franz Kafka
[+] [-] nprateem|5 years ago|reply
When the central channel (referred to as sushumna in yoga) is open and energy flows freely, you can feel ecstatic sensations in the centre of the brain as the upper centres become energised. It's important to relax the body, including the eyes, head and brain itself.
I feel it like a sort of exhilaration, like the first time I went on a rollercoaster or cycled my bike fast down a hill etc. It's an electrically alive feeling.
I hear this is just the start: what starts as a trickle becomes a torrent, apparently.
[+] [-] pantelisk|5 years ago|reply
To also contribute to the discussion. I often joke that it takes effort to mess things up. You could instead lay on the beach enjoy the evening breeze than putting in that effort. So before you delve into that process, take a step back and think carefully what you want out of it.
I like long walks accompanied by music (ambient music). Walking can be a deeply meditative experience, just pick terrain that won't give you trouble (no high traffic streets, no steep hills etc) and just go. Walk until your body starts doing it mechanically, and don't focus on the destination nor in search of stimuli. Maybe because walking exerts energy, it can be more effective than just sitting or laying down - when you are really energetic and not tired. Maybe because the scenery changes and it acts as a context switch to our minds.
It has been both effective as a form of emotion regulation, coming up with novel solutions, and just feeling more in sync with myself.
[+] [-] egor2820|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] perchard|5 years ago|reply
> When I have occasionally set myself to consider the different distractions of men, the pains and perils to which they expose themselves at court or in war, whence arise so many quarrels, passions, bold and often bad ventures, etc., I have discovered that all the unhappiness of men arises from one single fact, that they cannot stay quietly in their own chamber. A man who has enough to live on, if he knew how to stay with pleasure at home, would not leave it to go to sea or to besiege a town. A commission in the army would not be bought so dearly, but that it is found insufferable not to budge from the town; and men only seek conversation and entering games, because they cannot remain with pleasure at home.[139][#201908302349]
This quote is often summarized roughly as: "all of humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone." (i.e. the title of this post). Taken out of context, this would seem to suggest (to me) a belief that if we could simply meditate and avoid external distractions (a commission in the army, conversation, games, Pascal suggests), we might find happiness.
However, a reading of the full passage reveals that "on further consideration" he thinks the reason for this is that if we were to sit with our thoughts, the "natural poverty of our feeble and mortal condition" would drive us to despair.
He thinks that someone who truly understands the human condition would do everything they could to avoid sitting alone with their thoughts ("there is nothing they leave undone in seeking turmoil") . We seek diversion because if we didn't have any distraction, we would end up dwelling on the miserable human condition (selfish, pre-occupied with self-gratification, sensitive to the opinion of others, judgmental, etc. - basically, 'sinful').
In the end, he suggests that we should look for happiness externally, in God, which he then talks about a lot.
[#201908302349]: Blaise Pascal (1958): _Pascal's Pensées_, New York: E.P. Dutton.
[+] [-] p0d|5 years ago|reply
I take time and pray to God each morning. I find that this gives me peace. I feel better prepared to deal with the day when I pray.
My routine is focused around praying the Lord's Prayer, as in the prayer Jesus taught. Praying this prayer over years has enabled some truths to sink in. For example, the first part of the prayer is not about us, it is about God. I think it is good to start the day with the understanding we are not the centre of the universe. Secondly, I have been struck by how the Lord's prayer does not start at the place of forgiveness. Whether that be seeking forgiveness or asking for forgiveness. This gives me peace in the knowledge I don't need to have it all together before I engage with God in prayer.
[+] [-] SyzygistSix|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mensetmanusman|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] psyc|5 years ago|reply
This was in the days before social media, otherwise I'm sure she would have done plenty of damage from her room.
[+] [-] jhedwards|5 years ago|reply
For example, an animal like a duck won't necessarily reason "hmm, is this a safe spot? Maybe I should find an area with more protection from [predator]", instead it will have an innate anxiety that it feels when it is in an unsafe place, and that anxiety will drive it to find a different spot.
This was really an a-ha moment for me. Where I previously thought that anxiety and "depression" (not clinical depression) were mysterious unexplainable side-effects of evolution, now I see that they are probably innate mechanisms that spur us to go out, learn more, find opportunity, exercise, meet people etc. Our bodies know when we are stagnating before our minds do.
The fact that we can override those innate mechanisms and sit alone in a quiet, empty room at all is what is really impressive.
[+] [-] occamschainsaw|5 years ago|reply
I went to a 10 day silent meditation retreat (Vipasana) abs felt I got much more comfortable sitting by myself just observing my thoughts. The practice part was difficult, probably one of the hardest things I have ever done. 10 days of no talking/reading/writing, sitting in a room, observing your sensations, for hours on end, punctuated by 5 minute breaks. I felt the world temporarily go from HD to 4K after a couple of days.
Anyways, this really made me reconsider my relationship with thoughts. I feel I can separate the sense of my being from my thoughts some times. This helps me with my anxiety.
[+] [-] dedev54|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] camjohnson26|5 years ago|reply
“Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for miseries and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries.”
[+] [-] JoeAltmaier|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] giantDinosaur|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rosywoozlechan|5 years ago|reply
Background anxiety about our "eventual demise" is the consequence of false entitlement to life and health. Young and healthy people imagine good life without end, the dying and people who've lost health and ability often know better.
This change in perspective also helps you make the most out of each day, because those who make a point to remember that their good days are finite will not want to have spent them in waste.
[+] [-] Aeolun|5 years ago|reply
At least, I’m still expecting to someday figure out why mortality isn’t a problem after all (or not mortality in the first place).
[+] [-] birdsbirdsbirds|5 years ago|reply
For virtually everybody, that quiet room is not a given, but has to be acquired and maintained. How can you sit in that room and give yourself to silence if you know deep down that the silence is a temporary illusion? You have to leave that room and either defend your wealth or acquire the means to be able to return.
Additionally, the experiment doesn't measure what it wants to measure:
>people detest being made to spend six to 15 minutes in a room by themselves with nothing to do but think
The participants hadn't chosen to sit in silence. They chose to participate in an experiment. Sitting in silence for somebody else is not the same as sitting in silence. A better setup would have been a space where sitting in silence would have been one option among many.
[+] [-] froh|5 years ago|reply
If you accept that premise, the a journey begins how to guide the time in silence such that your life quality "in noise" actually benefits well from investing into silence.
Notice that this has absolutely nothing to do with finance, material wealth, neither as precondition nor as outcome.
[+] [-] Aeolun|5 years ago|reply
I don’t see the difference? If some researcher asks me between sitting in silenceand getting an electric shock, I know what I’d pick.
[+] [-] chris5745|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] camjohnson26|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] austincheney|5 years ago|reply
Most people cannot achieve that level of objectivity or self-awareness. That is measurable.
[+] [-] raz32dust|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ummonk|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] idiocrat|5 years ago|reply
It is keeping the brain from shutting down itself.
Brain neurons are connected the way that a thought needs to start from somewhere. No induction/initiation - no involuntary thought.
The associative thinking seem also to start as a cause of that activity center, when two or more random independent thought chains are being randomly initiated and come together eventually, at the bottom of the chains, causing cross-thinking.
This gives me a nice excuse why I'm restless and need to think all the time. I cannot close eyes in a dark room and have no thought. My brain is just working as usual -- I like it so.
[+] [-] Zelphyr|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] birktj|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hypervisorxxx|5 years ago|reply
[+] [-] NoOneNew|5 years ago|reply
To be a good leader, you have to be willing to confront AND navigate conflict within a group setting in a productive manner that ultimately achieves an agreed upon goal. One of the defining traits of an introvert is avoiding conflict. Thus, no, introverts don't INHERENTLY make good leaders. If you've ever dealt with even a moderately diverse group of individuals due to their capabilities (not in the sense of level of skill, but range of skills), you'd know that the motivations of individuals vary wildly. Even if they are similar, they're oddly unique in their own ways at their own times. Regardless of your unicorn-fart fantasies, extrovert personalities are better equipped to handle groups with varying motivations to achieve the same goal. Not to say introverts can't be good or even great leaders. To name one, Eisenhower was an introvert and he is regarded as one of the greatest leaders of the 20th century for a multitude of reasons. Leadership takes intent and purposeful practice/training for them to achieve. The absolution concept that they're the "best" just means you've never been in even a mild range of real world team projects. You would have seen many easily fall apart in the midst of dealing with somewhat strenuous situations. It's an easier absolution that extroverts make the best leaders, yet even that is untrue. It just takes extroverts less practice to achieve "great" than it does for introverts since they already possess a lot of the skill sets that introverts are lacking. Ultimately, leaders are made, not born.
[+] [-] OliverGilan|5 years ago|reply
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet:_The_Power_of_Introverts...
[+] [-] mirko22|5 years ago|reply
If by wikipedia then you think they are exclusive and might even think that introverts are people who just want to sit at home.
Not wanting too much company can also be associated with highly sensitive people and not necessarily introverts. About 30% of highly sensitive people are in fact extroverted.
And there is no single trait or concept that makes someone a good leader but rather a mix of lot different psychological and biological setups.
[+] [-] throwaway50203|5 years ago|reply
It's even worse: some societies reward quick thinking and shun deep thinking.
Mostly the English-speaking societies, people can even become unsettled or giggle if they see someone staring at a wall, deep in though.
[+] [-] fy20|5 years ago|reply
I do actually meditate as well, but the meditation I do is where you try to be thoughtless, not to ponder whatever thoughts are on your mind.
[+] [-] arnejenssen|5 years ago|reply
The retreat it self is not very "exciting", but the effect on mental clarity around the 4th day is profound.
[+] [-] JoeAltmaier|5 years ago|reply
It's just practice. Most folks don't know what to do, so when they find themselves alone with their thoughts they instantly decide to leave that state. Its a sort of Attention Deficit thing. With practice you can figure out something to think about when in this state. Review, question, or just observe. Anything can be interesting if you invest it with value and do it deliberately.
[+] [-] MichaelZuo|5 years ago|reply