Should Individualism And Independence Be Our Ideals?
Many recent studies show that meaning, rather than happiness, is essential to a fulfilling life. We don’t really need science to show us the truth of this, however. When we realize that happiness (positive feelings) is transient in nature, while a sense of meaning is a deep and lasting condition, it becomes clearer. As humans, we long for a guide for how to live and how to make sense of our world, and this is where meaning takes precedence.
In her book The Power of Meaning author Emily Esfahani Smith describes 4 essential pillars of meaning and belonging is first on her list. I’ve written before about the loneliness epidemic, and among its harmful effects she adds, “people who are lonely and isolated feel like their lives are less meaningful.”
There are many reasons we feel lonely and less connected, including the loss of traditional forms of community. Compared to a generation ago, we are less likely to belong to a religious organization, are frequently mobile in our places of residence and work, and our leisure activity is more likely to be solitary (often involving a phone, TV or computer).
A less obvious influence on the importance of community can be ascribed to a culture’s values and ideals. Esfahani writes, “Places where individualism is highly valued; places where people are excessively self-sufficient; places that look a lot like twenty-first century America, Canada and Europe – people don’t flourish in these environments, but suicide does.”
That sounds extreme. Why suicide? Esfahani paraphrases the work of sociologist Emile Durkheim, who concluded, “Without the constraints and traditions of the community… society devolves into a purposeless and normless state that he called anomie, where people feel directionless and despairing.”
Early humans lived in small groups to survive – they were highly interdependent. Even after we began to live in large communities starting 6000 years ago most people experienced multiple layers of belonging: to a religious institution, a neighborhood organization, a tradesperson group, and many more. They felt connected (and often bound) to these affiliations and their culture placed high value on loyalty and contribution to these groups. This provided a sense of meaning (although those who did not fit in felt alienated and were often rejected.)
With the ideas of the Age of Enlightenment, individualism came to be seen as what mattered, further influenced by a consumer economy and evolutionary theory’s “survival of the fittest.” Cultures that adopted these ideals value self-reliance and independence, standing out and being unique, and individual rights over collective ones. Concern for, and connection with, others in society has become less important.
However, I would not advocate that we embrace a collectivist social structure, as in communism, to renew a sense of belonging! I believe there can exist a middle ground, a culture that respects and celebrates individual uniqueness and diversity AND values community and connection. Public policy changes that foster this can be made, and in some places, they are, but it’s up to all of us to remember the many benefits of developing deeper connections and being active, contributing members of groups and communities.
It’s not a weakness to depend on each other, despite the messages from our Western culture to the contrary; the need to belong is an undeniable part of the human condition. Ignoring interdependence in favor of “rugged individualism” will ultimately make us unhappy and unfulfilled. And while all types of relationships can be challenging and complicated sometimes, they provide incredible opportunities to enhance both the quality of our lives and our personal growth. How might you become a more integral, connected part of the groups around you?
Photo by Yoal Desurmont on Unsplash
Comments