I loved this essay. I consider myself a systems thinker, someone who naturally looks for patterns, especially those that appear unrelated at first glance. One pattern I noticed early in life was how some of my most brilliant aunts and uncles gradually became more reclusive as they aged.
When they were younger, they eagerly shared ideas, debated different perspectives, and enjoyed intellectual exchange. But over time, they seemed to withdraw from those conversations. Eventually, several of them told me they had come to trust that I was capable of figuring out the world for myself, and no longer felt the need to persuade or guide me.
As I have grown older, I have begun to recognize the same tendency within myself. I find that I am more selective about the conversations I engage in, not because my curiosity has diminished, but because I have become more aware of the limitations that naturally accompany aging. I notice subtle changes in certain cognitive processes, particularly memory. Sometimes I hesitate to express a complex idea because I worry that I may not recall every nuance of a previous argument, leaving my thoughts vulnerable to being misunderstood or interpreted as contradictory.
I suspect these two forces work together. With age often comes both a greater appreciation for the limits of persuasion and a greater awareness of our own cognitive imperfections. The result is not necessarily a loss of curiosity, but a growing preference for thoughtful observation over constant debate. Perhaps wisdom is not simply knowing more, but also recognizing when silence communicates more effectively than another argument.
You may be onto something with that observation. Highly sensitive people (HSPs) often pick up on very subtle cognitive and emotional cues that others either miss or dismiss. Because they perceive these faint signals, they may become more cautious, or even view those who don’t notice them as lacking awareness. Perhaps it’s an adaptive form of self protection, a way of avoiding the “porcupines” before getting too close and getting hurt.
When discussing low level signals, ChatGPT reminded me that heightened sensitivity is not infallible. It can be a gift for detecting patterns, but it can also lead to false positives. Interestingly, our two systems are optimized differently. ChatGPT is designed to minimize false positives, preferring uncertainty over confidently stating something that isn’t true. Humans, on the other hand, evolved for survival. Faced with uncertainty, we often err on the side of caution, accepting more false positives because missing a real threat, a false negative, could be far more costly.
The challenge is learning when those quiet signals reflect genuine insight and when they are simply echoes of our own fears, biases, or past experiences. Neither system is flawless. Wisdom lies not in eliminating error, but in finding the right balance between caution and discernment.
This is a great essay. One of the articles I've written on substack is also about loneliness of free thinking specifically on the topic of politics. My first reaction to this essay was, maybe this is why alcohol is called the social lubricant. Maybe booze allows the deep thinker to tolerate the superficial. You also describe a symptom of ADHD, a disorder that has a long, varied spectrum. Some ADHD people have no problem seeing thru charm, artificiality, and the fake, superficial nature of some people. Schopenhauer may have been an expert in solitude but maybe he just believed he was always the smartest person in the room. There is a lot of that going around. "A person of real inner wealth wants little from other people and mostly wants to be left alone.” There is a fine line between wanting to be left alone and resentment". Self-centeredness also leads to a lonely life. Maybe deep thinkers simply don't want to share their ice cream. Or maybe deep thinkers simply feel safe with no one around to hurt the feelings. Or maybe deep thinkers are on a part of the autism spectrum that no realizes exists. I LOVE your statement that says to "allow the ordinary to be without judging it. This is called "cognitive restructuring" and is probably the most POWERFUL way to "feel better". I really enjoyed reading this and shall subscribe to your page. Nice to meet you.
Engaging in small talk or in social situations that depend on it can be an act of charity because who am I to believe that my intellect towers over all? It’s fucking ridiculous. That’s not to say that some people aren’t smarter than others, or more sensitive than others, or otherwise neurologically divergent. Those differences are real. But in my experience, at any gathering of souls, there is always someone smarter than me and likewise, someone not as smart at I am. Why do those two people deserve different levels of attention or intellectual engagement? Why do those of “inferior” intellect deserve the Irish Exit? Sacrifice your almighty IQ once in a while for the “common” man. You’ll be less lonely, less judgmental, and virtuous because you’ve engaged in an act of humility and low-level sacrifice that is transmuted into charity and caring for a fellow human. I appreciate Schopenhauer’s formal pessimism, but as you’ve pointed out, he paid the triple price of isolation, perpetual dissatisfaction, and a heart filled with contempt for us “bipeds.” We’re all in this together and it’s later than you think. Also, listen to this song by The Rolling Stones:
I have always found it difficult to understand whyvin a room full of people, I am the loneliest person on earth yet when I am in the middle of nowhere, with not a single living soul in sight, I do not feel alone. The tendency to isolate has always been overwhelming.
Food for thought. There has been a continual search by me for understanding. I really do not know it makes any difference. No one lives long enough. Maybe Jesus and the bible that followed him? I was labeled a "curse" by Carl Yung. Interesting but really unimportant.
I loved this essay. I consider myself a systems thinker, someone who naturally looks for patterns, especially those that appear unrelated at first glance. One pattern I noticed early in life was how some of my most brilliant aunts and uncles gradually became more reclusive as they aged.
When they were younger, they eagerly shared ideas, debated different perspectives, and enjoyed intellectual exchange. But over time, they seemed to withdraw from those conversations. Eventually, several of them told me they had come to trust that I was capable of figuring out the world for myself, and no longer felt the need to persuade or guide me.
As I have grown older, I have begun to recognize the same tendency within myself. I find that I am more selective about the conversations I engage in, not because my curiosity has diminished, but because I have become more aware of the limitations that naturally accompany aging. I notice subtle changes in certain cognitive processes, particularly memory. Sometimes I hesitate to express a complex idea because I worry that I may not recall every nuance of a previous argument, leaving my thoughts vulnerable to being misunderstood or interpreted as contradictory.
I suspect these two forces work together. With age often comes both a greater appreciation for the limits of persuasion and a greater awareness of our own cognitive imperfections. The result is not necessarily a loss of curiosity, but a growing preference for thoughtful observation over constant debate. Perhaps wisdom is not simply knowing more, but also recognizing when silence communicates more effectively than another argument.
I wonder how may people who "see to much" are highly sensitive persons (HSP). I feel like there is a lot of overlap in the experience.
You may be onto something with that observation. Highly sensitive people (HSPs) often pick up on very subtle cognitive and emotional cues that others either miss or dismiss. Because they perceive these faint signals, they may become more cautious, or even view those who don’t notice them as lacking awareness. Perhaps it’s an adaptive form of self protection, a way of avoiding the “porcupines” before getting too close and getting hurt.
When discussing low level signals, ChatGPT reminded me that heightened sensitivity is not infallible. It can be a gift for detecting patterns, but it can also lead to false positives. Interestingly, our two systems are optimized differently. ChatGPT is designed to minimize false positives, preferring uncertainty over confidently stating something that isn’t true. Humans, on the other hand, evolved for survival. Faced with uncertainty, we often err on the side of caution, accepting more false positives because missing a real threat, a false negative, could be far more costly.
The challenge is learning when those quiet signals reflect genuine insight and when they are simply echoes of our own fears, biases, or past experiences. Neither system is flawless. Wisdom lies not in eliminating error, but in finding the right balance between caution and discernment.
This is a great essay. One of the articles I've written on substack is also about loneliness of free thinking specifically on the topic of politics. My first reaction to this essay was, maybe this is why alcohol is called the social lubricant. Maybe booze allows the deep thinker to tolerate the superficial. You also describe a symptom of ADHD, a disorder that has a long, varied spectrum. Some ADHD people have no problem seeing thru charm, artificiality, and the fake, superficial nature of some people. Schopenhauer may have been an expert in solitude but maybe he just believed he was always the smartest person in the room. There is a lot of that going around. "A person of real inner wealth wants little from other people and mostly wants to be left alone.” There is a fine line between wanting to be left alone and resentment". Self-centeredness also leads to a lonely life. Maybe deep thinkers simply don't want to share their ice cream. Or maybe deep thinkers simply feel safe with no one around to hurt the feelings. Or maybe deep thinkers are on a part of the autism spectrum that no realizes exists. I LOVE your statement that says to "allow the ordinary to be without judging it. This is called "cognitive restructuring" and is probably the most POWERFUL way to "feel better". I really enjoyed reading this and shall subscribe to your page. Nice to meet you.
Engaging in small talk or in social situations that depend on it can be an act of charity because who am I to believe that my intellect towers over all? It’s fucking ridiculous. That’s not to say that some people aren’t smarter than others, or more sensitive than others, or otherwise neurologically divergent. Those differences are real. But in my experience, at any gathering of souls, there is always someone smarter than me and likewise, someone not as smart at I am. Why do those two people deserve different levels of attention or intellectual engagement? Why do those of “inferior” intellect deserve the Irish Exit? Sacrifice your almighty IQ once in a while for the “common” man. You’ll be less lonely, less judgmental, and virtuous because you’ve engaged in an act of humility and low-level sacrifice that is transmuted into charity and caring for a fellow human. I appreciate Schopenhauer’s formal pessimism, but as you’ve pointed out, he paid the triple price of isolation, perpetual dissatisfaction, and a heart filled with contempt for us “bipeds.” We’re all in this together and it’s later than you think. Also, listen to this song by The Rolling Stones:
https://youtu.be/eOiLH-2hTPQ?is=dCGg5LnYvNy7Aac1
I have always found it difficult to understand whyvin a room full of people, I am the loneliest person on earth yet when I am in the middle of nowhere, with not a single living soul in sight, I do not feel alone. The tendency to isolate has always been overwhelming.
Food for thought. There has been a continual search by me for understanding. I really do not know it makes any difference. No one lives long enough. Maybe Jesus and the bible that followed him? I was labeled a "curse" by Carl Yung. Interesting but really unimportant.