At the other end of the relationship spectrum, we find a renewed focus on the psychology of loneliness (e.g. Cacioppo and Patrick, 2008). In the past, the study of loneliness has often been founded on neo-Marxist attention to alienation. Recent studies have tended to focus on the impact which digital technology (and the Internet in particular) has had on the sense of personal (and collective) loneliness. Production machines and automation helped to create the alienation during the 19th and 20th Century that has been associated with loneliness. Now the digital “machines” and Internet have produced the loneliness of the 21st Century.
The Relationship Spectrum
In this essay (the first of five in this series), I wish to focus on both ends of the relationship spectrum. We find that there is loneliness and the accompanying push away from relationships at one end of the spectrum. At the personal level, this push might relate to the Introversion trait that Carl Jung (1971) has portrayed—though one form of Introversion concerns a focus on a few very important relationships rather than the push away from all relationships.
At the societal level, we find the push represented in what Robert Sommers (1969) and other environmental psychologists identify as socio-fugal forces (ranging from societal norms to architectural design). This push is also represented by a fancy German term: Gesellschaft. In a Gesellschaft-based society, primary concerns are directed toward practical matters and to groups and associations that preserve individual identity and freedom. Personal achievement is acknowledged and rewarded. People can be outstanding in their life endeavors. Impersonal and formal relationships prevail. It is “all about business”.
At the level of family, the push is represented in the disengagement found in many contemporary families. Members of the family end up spending very little time with one another. This is either representative of families being a low priority in a world filled with conflicting demands, or representative of a specific cultural factor (found in some societies) that places lower value on family than other groupings. One often spends very little time with people living next door. The identity of neighbors is often unknown.
The pull end of the relationship spectrum is represented at the personal level by the Jungian trait called extraversion. Once again, there are multiple interpretations of this trait, only one of which offers a portrait of the extravert as wanting always to be with other people. At the societal level, we find the pull represented in what Sommers (1969) identifies as socio-petal forces (once again, ranging from societal norms to architectural design).
There is another German word that labels this condition—it is Gemeinschaft. This word represents a primary concern for community and society. Emphasis is placed on commitments to shared goals and on the basic need to care for other people. Identity in Gemeinschaft-based societies is founded on shared and collective identities. It is not acceptable to be “outstanding” as an individual. We are outstanding as a group or institution. As one of my Asian colleagues had reminded me, to be “outstanding” in his society is to “stand outside” of the group—which in turn means to be socially isolated and even ostracized.
