For an introvert, aloneness does not necessarily imply loneliness. Introverts can be lonely too - but we often need to be alone. Knowing there are specific people out there who will want to spend time with you again when you're ready to engage can be enough to stave off loneliness for an extreme introvert even through very long periods of aloneness.

While I’m wary of what people who categorize themselves as “introverts” claim, my comment above was about social withdrawal as a response to loneliness; and further about how a response (reaction) to stress is not necessarily a solution.

A lot of people who isolate themselves can be perfectly normal and it can be a valid solution to the source of their stress. Deep thinking, introspection and creativity thrives without interruption.

It depends on the individual.

The only solution that is worth its name is the utter or virtual absence of the problem (loneliness) it is intended to solve, otherwise it is a second-rate one.

Withdrawal, no matter how "valid" and "normal" as deemed by a segment of society, does not fall under that felicitous characterization.

Do the people that withdraw generally demonstrate bien dans ma peau and joie de vivre?

> Do the people that withdraw generally demonstrate bien dans ma peau and joie de vivre?

Generally, no.

But if someone withdrew to a monastery to seek enlightenment then this question lacks significance. Withdrawal can be a tool that allows us to control envy, desire, distraction and other aspects of human existence which can be destructive or a mental nuisance.

How would you posit your question to an existential nihilist? To them it would have no meaning.

> Generally, no.

Then, no matter how “valid” and “normal” their modus operandi may be it is of no relevance to someone looking to enjoy life (bien dans ma peau and joie de vivre) instead of wasting time — and it is indeed such a waste of life, don’t you think — feeling alone or withdrawing (via dissociating from the said loneliness).

> How would you posit your question to an existential nihilist? To them it would have no meaning.

It takes the naiveté (innocence/ unsophistication; not gullibility) of a child to want to enjoy life. Nihilists, and spiritualists, are too sophisticated for that.

Withdrawal can be a solution to stress and cauterized is correct in saying it depends on the person. I know I don't speak for the general case, but for me personally time alone withdrawn from other people is absolutely essential to experience the joy of life and feeling good about myself. That is not to say that I don't enjoy time with family and friends, but I become morose and listless if I go too long without withdrawing from people.

I get frustrated when I read articles like this and comments like yours. I understand intellectually and through secondhand experience of others how crippling loneliness and isolation can be for most people. However, I can honestly say that I have no memories of ever having felt "lonely" in the way described as the article and I know myself well enough to know what makes me happy. Telling me that because my life doesn't fit your pattern I must be unhappy is a bit presumptuous, don't you think?

> Telling me that because my life doesn't fit your pattern I must be unhappy is a bit presumptuous, don't you think?

No, what I’m telling you is that because your goal is evidently not to enjoy life no matter what — you’d rather feel morose and listless and frustrated at times — your solutions (withdrawal) are of no relevance to someone whose goal is to enjoy life no matter what (bien dans ma peau and joie de vivre).

It is a such simple thing, no?

You really are presumptuous, aren't you? OK. Let's assume my goal is not to be morose and listless, but to enjoy life no matter what. What is your suggestion?

> You really are presumptuous, aren't you?

Indeed not, and the irony of you asking the question is not lost on me. I am not telling you what to do (thereby failing to observe the limits of what is permitted or appropriate) — your goal is evidently not to enjoy life no matter what (you’d rather feel morose and listless and frustrated at times) — rather I’m conveying that what you, the nihilists and the spiritualists are doing (withdrawal) is a second-rate solution for the purpose of enjoying life no matter what.

Is it really that difficult to grasp such a simple thing?

> Let's assume my goal is not to be morose and listless, but to enjoy life no matter what. What is your suggestion?

To not withdraw, of course, as a reaction to stress is not the same as a solution to (ending of) it.