I was alone and bored so I went along to a philosophical discussion I saw taking place at a local café.
The topic, serendipitously enough, was Is solitude the result of a lack of imagination?
Now, it was a loaded question -obviously- so the first issue was to argue if it was well posed. It suggested that solitude was negative whereas solitude could be positive. Solitude could be suffered or chosen, pathological or essential. Furthermore, solitude was a state whereas imagination was a function so could the two be equated? Ironically, it could be argued that solitude lead to imagination, all great ideas having come from moments of quiet seclusion. So the question was already hanging by a thread…
Flipping it around, imagination could help lead out of solitude through thinking of ways not to be alone, much as I had just done. Although thinking also lead to anxiety which could lead to feelings of aloneness. Or, an old man asked, was it not imagination but understanding that was the real issue: if solitude is often the result of a lack of interest in things is it simply because we don’t understand them?
I didn’t have an answer to that. I didn’t have an answer to any of it. But I sat there, alone with other people, forming ideas and thoughts and buzzing.
There is something not quite right about trying to understand solitude by seeking out other people to discuss it with. Still, there's always the chance of meeting a chick into solitude too.
ReplyDeleteWe have a winner! Who said anything about trying to understand solitude? The topic was a fortuity. What was interesting was the discussion, the exchange of views, the search for understanding... What is 'not quite right' about that?
ReplyDelete