This entry was posted on Friday, November 2nd, 2007 at 10:09 pm and is filed under Positive Psychology Tips. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
I remember the times when I was hermitting (hmmm, wonder if that’s a real word?) I figure there are “good” hermit times, and the “not so good hermit times.”
Chris Peterson, U Michigan , is teaching a wonderful telecourse on positive psychology through the Mentor Coach program. Frequently he states, “there are no happy hermits.” I pondered that statement, as did many of my classmates. Then he mentioned that extroverts score higher on happiness ratings than introverts AND, to top it off, in one study,when introverts were coached on extravert-like behavior, they indeed reported higher levels of happiness. So….
Last night during my wonderful Happiness Boot Camp women’s group , this idea of “no happy hermits” was presented. Interesting responses came from my group of bright, intelligent and thoughtful women. If one is “peopled out” and does not have enough alone time, that alone time is indeed refreshing and refueling. Good point. Maybe that is an example of “okay self-care hermitting.” If, on the other hand, the retreat from the world, no real social connnections is based on a need to isolate to salve a wound, is that necessarily a “not okay” form of hermitting, or is that another okay form of self- care hermitting ? Or if one is avoidant, afraid of people, and essentially a-social PERHAPS those are the “no happy hermits.” I will, of course, leave out the yak farmers in Tibet, now are they INDEED happy hermits, the real deal??? Perhaps Professor Peterson could use THAT as a question on a pre doctoral exam ?
Following the death of my late husband, I spent a lot of time alone. Yes, I had been peopled out both at home and at work, but more importantly I was taking time to integrate the changes that occured in ME as a result of his sudden death. Thankfully, a friend directed me to the wonderful book, The Dark Night of the Soul by Thomas Moore. (side note: I haven’t learned to underline yet, in Word Press, forgive me)…and Moore does a wonderful job of the need to isolate, to regroup, to redefine following a transition. The transition may be a transition of empty-nest, divorce, illness, whatever….anytime we are redefining our Self whether by choice or by circumstance.
So, although, I agree we are people who need people, there are some times when pulling in and figuring all that “stuff” out may indeed be exactly what we need.
Challenge, be honest. If you are isolating, does the isolation feed your soul? Or, does the isolation build even a greater wall between you and your fellow beings?
Just some thoughts on this first day of November for me, and you, to ponder.
In the meantime, is “hermitting” a verb? Will check, gee, if I was a coffee barista, I might offer you .50 cents off on your non-fat-sugar-free-soy-latte-iced if you KNEW the answer to that question, but alas, I am not. However, if you post the correct answer, and send me back channel your address, I actually might send you a coupon for coffee at Starbuck’s. After all, that’s what we Pacific Northwest folks have to offer…
Beth
read comments (6)
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:24 pm
Hmm…hermitting fits the modern tradition of “verbing” a noun. Issues “impact” voters, for example. So if doing what a hermit does is “hermitting,” so be it. And if “to hermit” enters the dictionary, then Beth Waddel’s name will be in the OED, along with the first usage of the verb form of “hermit.” That’s how a living language evolves, right?
Now a question for you, Miz Beth. If there are no happy hermits (a concept I agree with), does that mean that we don’t need or benefit from time alone, to recharge our batteries, to think about our options, to take care of physical needs (like working out), or, yes, to nurse our wounds? Isn’t being a hermit a habitual, continuing action? So if we don’t STAY like hermits, can’t we have a balance?
I don’t mean to quibble, but it seems to me that you’re warning against being habitually alone, rather than seeking occasional “alone time.”
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:26 am
I think there are times when being a hermit is a good thing. It gives me a chance to work though things in my own head.
On the other hand I can also get lost in my own little world and the longer I stay there the more my walls go up and I block people out. It also makes it even harder for me to force myself back into the world of people.
So I guess that in my mind it is a good thing, but just like everything else we (I) can push that good thing to a point where it is no longer working for me but against.
November 11th, 2007 at 9:03 am
Peterson’s statements make me wonder how he defines happiness, introversion, and extroversion. Our culture admires and rewards extroverts, and I tried to shift towards that for a long time. But I found much peace upon accepting that I am basically an introvert–the definition being that introverts get their energy by going within. Acceptance and stopping the chase after something I wasn’t brought more happiness instead of less. For me, balance is the pivot point. Too much of either takes us to the wrong place. But what is too much for me will be just fine for someone else.
I wonder if the motivation to be alone (or not) is what is important here. To wall off from people and experiences out of fear is out of balance. On the other hand, who hasn’t run into people who surround themselves with others out of fear of the silence and dealing with what’s going on within? So, saying that extroversion brings happiness seems like a stretch to me.
November 14th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
I agree that the important element here is the motivation to be alone, or not. And, I totally agree that there are folks out there who surround themselves with people out of the fear of their own company.
I think that the research is suggesting that it’s not so much introversion or extoversion that is the “happiness key”, but instead an element of engagement with others that is important. I can be introverted (ie gathering energy from being by myself), while at the same time be very engaged with friends and family. The critical key here, I believe, is that people are happiest when they have significant relationships with people. I imagine when the shy or retiring person was encouraged to engage with others by either smiling or striking up a conversation with someone, rather than walking with head down and not establishing eye contact, they reported greater happiness.
It seems to me that once again the notion of ISOLATION is the issue, and as you suggest, it’s the motivation BEHIND the isolation that is critical here. Is the alone time rejuvenating, as it is for introverts, or is the alone time a way to avoid interacting?
Long story short, I agree, I don’t think the research really suggests that extroversion = happiness, that is a huge stretch. i think the research suggests that engagement with others in a meaningful and purposeful way contributes to happiness and well-being.
November 14th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Hi Beth, Just found your blog. I’m so computer illiterate that I didn’t even know what a blog was. Wow, I’m so jazzed you turned me onto this and others, and will surely give you some input, but not right now. I’m off to LIVING MY LIFE for what feels like the first time in decades. I’m Pres. of my condo’s homeowners’ assoc. and must take some ACTION. Feels good to feel good. Much love to all of you, Your Cuz Jane
April 9th, 2008 at 7:16 am
“The transition may be a transition of empty-nest, divorce, illness, whatever….anytime we are redefining our Self whether by choice or by circumstance” Ilike the terms we are using here “transition” “redefine” going thru some late bold career changes right now and it is intimidating…to say the least. Isolation will be defined individually and i feel a person will realize that point if it begins to build a wall. Thomas Moore book looks very good.