In the realm of ancient kingdoms and the arid lands of history, a tale of a dried-up lake exists in the kingdom of Chu. The prolonged drought had left the fish in the pond grappling with adversity, their survival hanging by a thread as they desperately wriggled through the remaining mud puddles. Within this hardship, Zhuangzi, the philosopher, observed something peculiar—the fish smeared each other with slime and exchanged saliva to aid their fellow creatures in their quest for survival.
But as much as Zhuangzi admired their solidarity, he couldn’t help but ponder whether it would be preferable for the lake to brim with water, allowing the fish to swim freely without the need for such drastic measures. This sentiment resonates with our modern-day individualism, where we often look back nostalgically at the degree of human solidarity and community of times past.
The Tale of the Struggling Fish
Once, a lake dried up in the ancient kingdom of Chu due to a prolonged drought. The fish in the pond, once thriving in their aquatic home, were now floundering in the remaining mud puddles, desperately trying to survive. Their plight was heart-wrenching. They smeared each other with slime and exchanged saliva to keep their skin moist, a desperate measure to sustain life in a rapidly deteriorating environment. A renowned philosopher Zhuangzi witnessed this scene and admired the fishes’ solidarity and mutual aid. He saw how, in their struggle, they clung to each other for survival.
Yet, Zhuangzi also pondered a more profound question: wouldn’t it be better if the lake were full, so the fish could swim freely, without such extreme measures? This thought experiment extends to human society. From a place of modern-day individualism, we often look back nostalgically on the past’s strong sense of community and solidarity. Much like the fish in Zhuangzi’s story, people used to rely heavily on each other, forming close-knit communities that provided safety, social interaction, and a sense of belonging.
During crises, such as wartime, this group solidarity became even more pronounced. Stories from these times often paint a romantic picture of human resilience and camaraderie. Communities came together, shared resources, and supported each other in the face of adversity. The shared experience of hardship fostered a sense of unity and mutual reliance that is less common in today’s individualistic society.
The Rise of Individualism
In recent decades, periods of relative stability, economic growth, and technological advancement have led to a more individualistic society. The need for mutual reliance has diminished significantly. While collectivism and close communities still exist in many parts of the world, overall, humans have become less dependent on each other. Particularly in wealthy Western countries, people no longer need each other as they once did. This shift is not only due to increased wealth but also because technology has made human interaction increasingly obsolete in many areas.
Consider the conveniences of modern life: we can order food, clothes, and even companionship with a few clicks. Technology has created an environment where human interaction is optional rather than necessary. Automated systems handle tasks that once required human labor and social interaction. Self-checkout stations, online banking, and home delivery services are just a few examples. This transformation means that, like the fish in a full lake, we can swim freely, choosing when and if we want to interact with others.
This independence has fostered a culture of self-reliance and personal autonomy. People can pursue their interests and goals without the constraints of community expectations or the need to conform to societal norms. While this freedom is empowering, it also has led to a decline in communal bonds and a rise in individualism.
The Freedom of Self-Reliance
Imagine a lone fish swimming in a vast, full lake. It decides where to go, looking for food and shelter when needed. It can meet other fish but part ways whenever it wishes to continue its journey. Similarly, in an individualistic society, socializing becomes an option rather than a necessity. This freedom allows people to choose their own paths and move on from relationships that no longer serve them.
In our well-oiled system, technology takes care of our needs. We can order anything with a mouse click, hire services for almost any task, and even replace human companionship with advanced robots. While this scenario may sound dystopian to some, it highlights how little we may need each other’s company to meet our needs if such technological advancements become mainstream.
For example, consider the rise of AI-driven personal assistants and smart home devices. These technologies can manage household chores, provide companionship, and even offer emotional support. The independence afforded by these innovations means that people can focus on personal growth, hobbies, and self-fulfillment without the constraints of traditional social structures.
Embracing Solitude
A world where human interaction is minimal may seem like a nightmare to some, but the absence of needing others can have its benefits. Imagine exploring the depths and mysteries of a rich, vast ocean without the constant need for companionship. The freedom to spend every waking minute pursuing our interests can be a great pleasure for those who enjoy the solitary path.
Albert Einstein, for example, thrived in solitude while profoundly caring about others’ well-being. He once expressed his paradoxical sense of social justice alongside his lack of need for direct human contact. Similarly, Carl Jung, despite his commitment to marriage and family, lamented the loss of the beautiful feeling of solitude.
Solitude offers a unique opportunity for introspection and self-discovery. Without the constant influence of others, we can explore our thoughts, beliefs, and desires in depth. This introspection can lead to greater self-awareness and personal growth. Many creative individuals, from writers to artists to scientists, have found that solitude provides the mental space needed for deep thinking and innovation.
The Perks of Optional Relationships
When dealing with people is optional, we can retreat and spend time in solitude. While some people cannot tolerate being alone and prefer constant companionship, the experience of solitude benefits those who appreciate it. Not needing people can also improve interpersonal relationships. In earlier times, close-knit communities could harm one’s tranquility due to the inevitable drama and conflicts. When we don’t need others for survival, we can avoid these negative aspects and set boundaries more easily.
The institution of marriage has also evolved. In many parts of the world, particularly in the West, marriage is no longer mandatory for survival. Men and women can sustain themselves independently, increasing selectivity in choosing partners. While this has led to higher divorce rates and declining birth rates in some countries, it also means that relationships are based on genuine connection rather than necessity.
This shift has profound implications for personal freedom and happiness. People are no longer bound by social or economic necessity to stay in unfulfilling or toxic relationships. They can pursue connections that bring joy and enrichment to their lives. Moreover, the freedom to end relationships without dire consequences allows individuals to maintain their integrity and personal standards.
The Downside of Conformity
Belonging to a group often requires conformity, which can stifle individuality. Jean-Paul Sartre famously said, “Hell is other people,” highlighting how others’ opinions and expectations can trap us. Arthur Schopenhauer criticized the human obsession with others’ opinions, arguing that it detracts from our happiness. By not needing others’ validation, we can live authentically.
Conformity pressures us to align with the group’s norms, often at the expense of our true selves. This pressure can lead to a loss of individuality and creativity. The need to fit in can cause us to suppress our unique ideas and talents, which is detrimental to personal and societal growth.
Friedrich Nietzsche encouraged us to break away from societal constraints and become the “Overman,” creating our own values and meaning. Whether we seek self-actualization or the tranquility of solitude, not needing people allows us to choose our own direction.
Nietzsche’s philosophy promotes self-overcoming, where individuals transcend their limitations and societal norms to achieve their full potential. This process requires courage and a willingness to stand apart from the crowd. By embracing solitude and independence, we can forge our path and contribute to the world in unique and meaningful ways.
Conclusion
Not needing people does not negate the importance of human connection, which plays a significant role in most individuals’ well-being. Instead, it grants the freedom to embrace solitude when desired. We can associate with others, form friendships, and engage in intimate relationships, but with the freedom to walk away and enjoy the peace of solitude when we choose.
In a world where we can fend for ourselves, we have the liberty to pursue our own paths, unburdened by the necessity of constant human interaction. This freedom, while not without its challenges, can lead to a richer, more fulfilling life for those who appreciate the joys of not needing people.