Between Monolectical and Dialectical Philosophy of Loneliness and Communitiveness

Abstract

It is commonly known that maybe less solitude but more loneliness deserves on clear and firm criticism while communitiveness is assessed in a univocally positive way. This, in turn, translates to an unquestionable preference to ideas, feelings, motives and acts which are of community character and use. On the other hand, loneliness is recognized as a reason of our pain, suffering, fears, sadness and horrible despair. It results that our key ambition, need and aim should be avoiding and preventing each form of solitude or loneliness in our private and social life at all costs. But, as it occurs, this causes a lot of further – not only theoretical but unfortunately also practical – problems, which some researchers and ordinary people must face. This kind of unilateral and unambiguous interpretation of both solitude/loneliness and communitiveness I used to call ‘monolectical’. In my presentation I am going to show that ‘monolectics’ of communitiveness or solitude/loneliness is insufficient for possibly objective and complete picture of this two. In consequence I will be arguing that monoseological discourse is able to gain it and to develop itself only by turning to the dialectical method of explaining. The fundamental thesis and belief as well, expressed on the ground of the dialectics of solitude/loneliness and communitiveness, is that solitude/loneliness and communitiveness are not at all isolated but strongly complementary. A practical conclusion arises from this statement according to which each of us should intertwine in his or her life some periods of communitiveness and then some episodes of solitude.