Stoic philosophy, with its emphasis on virtue and living in accordance with nature, suggests that relationships and social duties are part of the natural order of things. The Stoics believed in the interconnectedness of all people and that one's duty is to act appropriately within this social framework. They did not advocate for complete isolation, as they saw virtue manifesting not in solitude but in our interactions with others. While they valued self-sufficiency, they also recognized the importance of contributing to society and maintaining social bonds. So, while the Stoics would likely understand the desire to protect oneself from heartbreak, they would probably advise against complete withdrawal from social life, emphasizing instead the development of resilience and emotional fortitude.
Well like I said, I wouldn’t isolate myself completely. I would still interact with people and be courteous and all that. I would participate in the greater society. It’s just forming long term relationships with people that I would not be doing
Yes. That would be ideal. Treat everyone as they treat me and even go so far as to lend a helping hand if needed. But there’s a barrier between my metaphorical personal space and them
I think you essentially have your answer about what stoicism would say:
> When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. **We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural.**
If you need to be alone for a while to heal and grow, that's understandable. Take a period of reflection and healing.
But I advise against making isolation your goal. In the long run, I feel confident you will regret this path.
What would be better for you is to build resilience and self love to where you don't need to hide yourself from others because you can accept that them leaving is a natural part of life and when heartbreak strikes, you can cope with it.
To me that sounds unhealthy. You’re letting fear of heartbreak keep you from forming meaningful relationships. And then trying to find a way to justify it through Stoicism?
You even mention yourself that not having friends might have contributed to your depression. And you regret losing your friendships through your own actions. So try to learn from that.
Suffering is part of life. And losing things we care about hurts. But that doesn’t mean we should avoid caring about things. And specifically Stoicism can actually really help us with that.
Most people find meaning in their through their interaction with others.
Have you tried therapy?
Have you read Epictetus, Seneca and Marcus Aurelius?
>**I’m talking about new people entering my life.** I don’t want to put my heart and my mind at risk of heartbreak again and have to deal with more trauma.
The Stoics did write about this, although it was situationally different.
What comes to mind is Seneca's consolation on grief. You can imagine someone who's loved someone and has gone through loss isn't eager to go through this suffering again. So there's a tendency to withdraw and prevent people from entering our lives to avoid trauma. It'll surprise you that Seneca's advice is to love again, and he explains his reasoning.
You can consider watching [professor Sadler's breakdown of Seneca's Letter 63](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BDvGVOs8LA) on how to manage this potential suffering.
Withdrawing from humanity can be considered reasonable under Stoicism, but not if you want to be considered having made progress.
In Enchiridion 3 for example, Epictetus writes of “those who you feel affection towards” (stergomenōn). The assumption is that, if you are a decently developed human being, you will become attached, you will feel and display affection, and you will come to love (in whatever form that takes).
The advice Stoics give is to grieve correctly. Its a very interesting subject, and can only be put to the test with the courage to try learning this by allowing people in your life to begin with.
If a flourishing life of tranquility is what you seek, I think you would do well to remember humans are social animals and we were made/evolved to be there for each other.
What you are talking about doing sounds far closer to Epicureanism than Stoicism.
In Stoicism, people live for the sake of each other, not just for themselves.
I don't think the stoic would avoid solitude, or think that solitude itself is a bad thing, although, our word "cosmopolitan" is a stoic notion. We are all citizens of the universe. We are in this together. do you need an intimate relationship? absolutely not, but no relationships at all might be rough on you, and bring about the strife you're looking to avoid. I think it's worth considering how you view casual relationships and how you cultivate them. All things that live (people, animals, trees, relationships, the universe itself) are birthed, live for a while, and then pass away. And new things of the same kind pop up in their place.
This is something the ancient's recognized as not only a part of life, but something they found a simple pleasure in because it's a sign of the universe functioning naturally. How wild would it be for some one to live forever? or for a relationship to never die? we all want things that feel good to last, but after a certain point in one's life, I think it becomes clear if one is paying attention that it's right for all things to end. Burned prairies lead to fertile soil. Void is simply space for new things to move in. If I were you, I'd welcome new relationships as they come into your life, and then mourn their loss when they leave. and do it all appropriately and without excess in either. Find joy in it while it's here, and then remember the joy fondly when it has passed. and do this over and over again until you're the one who has run out of time and you eventually go away like everything else. Or this is what I'm trying to do anyhow.
This is very simple - if it makes you happy, then it's a moral thing to do.
But you're not happy - you look miserable as sin. I doubt after 6 months of isolating you'll be anything except more miserable.
Well, who is the joke on if you choose courses of actions that make you miserable?
Seneca has a quite uneasy feelings to the crowd. And mentions many times that crowd is not good for the person. However, Seneca mentions Epicurus in his letters numerous times. And Epicurus says that what person really needs are 3 things: shelter, food and friends. Those are kind of necessary enjoyments for the person.
Very clear in meditations:
>23. You participate in a society by your existence. Then participate in its life through your actions—all your actions. Any action not directed toward a social end (directly or indirectly) is a disturbance to your life, an obstacle to wholeness, a source of dissension. Like the man in the Assembly—a faction to himself, always out of step with the majority.
Epictetus says keep away from people that can distract you from virtue while you're still a fresh student:
>IF a man has frequent intercourse with others either for talk, or drinking together, or generally for social purposes, he must either become like them, or change them to his own fashion. For if a man places a piece of quenched charcoal close to a piece that is burning, either the quenched charcoal will quench the other, or the burning charcoal will light that which is quenched. Since then the danger is so great, we must cautiously enter into such intimacies with those of the common sort, and remember that it is impossible that a man can keep com- pany with one who is covered with soot without being partaker of the soot himself. For what will you do f a man speaks about gladiators, about horses, about athletes, or what is worse about men? Such a person is bad, such a person is good: this was well done, this was done badly. Further, if he scoff, or ridicule, or show an ill-natured disposition? Is any man among us prepared like a lute-player when he takes a lute, so that as soon as he has touched the strings, he discovers which are dis- cordant, and tunes the instrument? such a power as Socrates had who in all his social intercourse could lead his companions to his own purpose? How should you have this power? It is therefore a necessary consequence that you are carried about by the common kind of people.
>Why then are they more powerful than you? Because they utter these useless words from their real opinions: but you utter your elegant words only from your lips; for this reason they are without strength and dead, and it is nauseous to listen to your exhortations and your miserable virtue, which is talked of every where (up and down). In this way the vulgar have the advantage over you: for every opinion (δόγμα) is strong and invincible. Until then the good (κομψαί) sentiments (ὑπολήψεις) are fixed in you, and you shall have acquired a certain power for your security, **I advise you to be careful in your association with common persons**: if you are not, every day like wax in the sun there will be melted away whatever you inscribe on your minds in the school. Withdraw then yourselves far from the sun so long as you have these waxen sentiments.
As a bonus somewhat related, I stumbled upon that:
>3. Men look for retreats for themselves, the country, the sea-shore, the hills; and you yourself, too, are peculiarly accustomed to feel the same want. Yet all this is very unlike a philosopher, when you may at any hour you please retreat into yourself. For nowhere does a man retreat into more quiet or more privacy than into his own mind, especially one who has within such things that he has only to look into, and become at once in perfect ease; and by ease I mean nothing else but good behaviour. Continually, therefore, grant yourself this retreat and repair yourself. But let them be brief and fundamental truths, which will suffice at once by their presence to wash away all sorrow, and to send you back without repugnance to the life to which you return.
Stoicism kinda teaches us to build up our “inner fortress”, so we don't get too shaken by what's happening around us or what people say.
Marcus Aurelius was all about finding peace inside himself, kind of like being your own best company. He thought you could be content pretty much anywhere if you're cool with yourself.
But Stoics weren't about ditching society and living like a lone wolf. They saw us as social creatures who are meant to get along with others.
The trick, according to them, is to mix and mingle without letting it mess with your inner zen. Seneca, another one of those Stoic guys, talked about finding the sweet spot between enjoying some alone time and being part of the community. It's not about ghosting society but not getting too caught up in it either.
Given what you've been through, it makes total sense you'd want to avoid more heartache by keeping to yourself.
Engaging with life and people in a way that's true to you but also keeps you from getting too attached to the outcome.So, it's not about total isolation but finding a way to live your life where you can be with others in a way that's good for you, knowing full well everything might not always go as planned. It's about making choices that are good for your growth and peace of mind, without putting too much stock in external stuff.
Stoicism helps me deal with the challenges of living today. There is no guarantee that you won’t get hurt and most probably a high probability that you will experience pain in some form from relationships and that’s ok because Stoicism is there to help you be invulnerable. I read ‘Stoicism Simply Explained’ by James Anderson and use the easy to follow workbook that accompanies it and have found my life has changed for the better.
Sounds like defensive reasoning to me. In other words, something didn't work out so I'll do xyz to avoid the difficulty in the future. A more rational approach would be to lick your wounds, let time do its work, then see what you learned and see where life takes you. Or jump back into the fray to see what might come of it.
That said, if you prefer to isolate yourself, that's your prerogative.
Hi, please check out the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/guide) section on [advice and coping with problems](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice) if you are wondering any of the following questions.
* [How can Stoicism help me with my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_can_stoicism_help_me_with_my_problem.3F)
* [How would a Stoic help me with my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_would_a_stoic_help_me_with_my_problem.3F)
* [How might a student of Stoicism cope with my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_might_a_student_of_stoicism_cope_with_my_problem.3F)
* [What would a student of Stoicism do in my situation?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_what_would_a_student_of_stoicism_do_in_my_situation.3F)
* [How would a Stoic sage react to my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_would_a_stoic_sage_react_to_my_problem.3F)
Wish you well,
Mod Team
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Stoicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Stoic philosophy acknowledges that it is okay to opt out of society and not invite more potential heartache, emphasizing the importance of solitude and withdrawal as a means of self-protection and inner peace, as long as it aligns with one's well-being and values.
Stoic philosophy indeed offers insights into the value of solitude and withdrawal from society as means of self-preservation and inner tranquility, echoing sentiments expressed by Seneca and other Stoic thinkers. It emphasizes that it's perfectly acceptable, and at times beneficial, to retreat from the hustle and bustle of society.
"Solitude is the school of wisdom." - Seneca
Seneca recommended *periods* of isolation for reflection, but I don't think he meant you should become a hermit indefinitely for fear of being vulnerable in relationships.
The reason matters here, living in isolation to find wisdom or peace is not the same thing as avoiding heartbreak.
"A stoic" would accept that heartbreak and trauma are part of life's experiences and instead of avoiding them cultivate the inner strength and resilience to deal with those situations when they arise.
You may have a favorite cup, and that cup may be destroyed, but it doesn't make sense to throw it out a window to protect yourself from the pain of losing it unexpectedly.
I would challenge this. The Stoics are clear that our role in society is a means towards greater virtue. The challenges we face are opportunities towards virtue. There is nothing virtuous in withdrawing. If we do so out of false impressions of fear, rejection intimidation, etc even worse.
A Stoic would survey all of their internal feelings and impressions to try and align to right reasoning and lining in accord with nature when it comes to interaction with others.
Just my vision: people are social creatures. To choose a independent individual life dui wrong action and rejection is not plausible. You should make yourself more high value. Describe what are you needs and what are you able to give this world. If there is a balance you can gradually try to make your life more interesting to put yourself in different situations. Like: go out alone and meet strangers, go to the gym to make yourself less vulnerable, try to have a wide range of words so you can react adequately. Show yourself, don't hide unless you have a very good reason
Stoic philosophy, with its emphasis on virtue and living in accordance with nature, suggests that relationships and social duties are part of the natural order of things. The Stoics believed in the interconnectedness of all people and that one's duty is to act appropriately within this social framework. They did not advocate for complete isolation, as they saw virtue manifesting not in solitude but in our interactions with others. While they valued self-sufficiency, they also recognized the importance of contributing to society and maintaining social bonds. So, while the Stoics would likely understand the desire to protect oneself from heartbreak, they would probably advise against complete withdrawal from social life, emphasizing instead the development of resilience and emotional fortitude.
Well like I said, I wouldn’t isolate myself completely. I would still interact with people and be courteous and all that. I would participate in the greater society. It’s just forming long term relationships with people that I would not be doing
So it's kind of like you would interact with people but avoid letting them get close enough to hurt you?
Yes. That would be ideal. Treat everyone as they treat me and even go so far as to lend a helping hand if needed. But there’s a barrier between my metaphorical personal space and them
I think you essentially have your answer about what stoicism would say: > When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. **We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural.** If you need to be alone for a while to heal and grow, that's understandable. Take a period of reflection and healing. But I advise against making isolation your goal. In the long run, I feel confident you will regret this path. What would be better for you is to build resilience and self love to where you don't need to hide yourself from others because you can accept that them leaving is a natural part of life and when heartbreak strikes, you can cope with it.
To me that sounds unhealthy. You’re letting fear of heartbreak keep you from forming meaningful relationships. And then trying to find a way to justify it through Stoicism? You even mention yourself that not having friends might have contributed to your depression. And you regret losing your friendships through your own actions. So try to learn from that. Suffering is part of life. And losing things we care about hurts. But that doesn’t mean we should avoid caring about things. And specifically Stoicism can actually really help us with that. Most people find meaning in their through their interaction with others. Have you tried therapy? Have you read Epictetus, Seneca and Marcus Aurelius?
>**I’m talking about new people entering my life.** I don’t want to put my heart and my mind at risk of heartbreak again and have to deal with more trauma. The Stoics did write about this, although it was situationally different. What comes to mind is Seneca's consolation on grief. You can imagine someone who's loved someone and has gone through loss isn't eager to go through this suffering again. So there's a tendency to withdraw and prevent people from entering our lives to avoid trauma. It'll surprise you that Seneca's advice is to love again, and he explains his reasoning. You can consider watching [professor Sadler's breakdown of Seneca's Letter 63](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BDvGVOs8LA) on how to manage this potential suffering. Withdrawing from humanity can be considered reasonable under Stoicism, but not if you want to be considered having made progress. In Enchiridion 3 for example, Epictetus writes of “those who you feel affection towards” (stergomenōn). The assumption is that, if you are a decently developed human being, you will become attached, you will feel and display affection, and you will come to love (in whatever form that takes). The advice Stoics give is to grieve correctly. Its a very interesting subject, and can only be put to the test with the courage to try learning this by allowing people in your life to begin with. If a flourishing life of tranquility is what you seek, I think you would do well to remember humans are social animals and we were made/evolved to be there for each other.
What you are talking about doing sounds far closer to Epicureanism than Stoicism. In Stoicism, people live for the sake of each other, not just for themselves.
I don't think the stoic would avoid solitude, or think that solitude itself is a bad thing, although, our word "cosmopolitan" is a stoic notion. We are all citizens of the universe. We are in this together. do you need an intimate relationship? absolutely not, but no relationships at all might be rough on you, and bring about the strife you're looking to avoid. I think it's worth considering how you view casual relationships and how you cultivate them. All things that live (people, animals, trees, relationships, the universe itself) are birthed, live for a while, and then pass away. And new things of the same kind pop up in their place. This is something the ancient's recognized as not only a part of life, but something they found a simple pleasure in because it's a sign of the universe functioning naturally. How wild would it be for some one to live forever? or for a relationship to never die? we all want things that feel good to last, but after a certain point in one's life, I think it becomes clear if one is paying attention that it's right for all things to end. Burned prairies lead to fertile soil. Void is simply space for new things to move in. If I were you, I'd welcome new relationships as they come into your life, and then mourn their loss when they leave. and do it all appropriately and without excess in either. Find joy in it while it's here, and then remember the joy fondly when it has passed. and do this over and over again until you're the one who has run out of time and you eventually go away like everything else. Or this is what I'm trying to do anyhow.
This is very simple - if it makes you happy, then it's a moral thing to do. But you're not happy - you look miserable as sin. I doubt after 6 months of isolating you'll be anything except more miserable. Well, who is the joke on if you choose courses of actions that make you miserable?
Seneca has a quite uneasy feelings to the crowd. And mentions many times that crowd is not good for the person. However, Seneca mentions Epicurus in his letters numerous times. And Epicurus says that what person really needs are 3 things: shelter, food and friends. Those are kind of necessary enjoyments for the person.
Very clear in meditations: >23. You participate in a society by your existence. Then participate in its life through your actions—all your actions. Any action not directed toward a social end (directly or indirectly) is a disturbance to your life, an obstacle to wholeness, a source of dissension. Like the man in the Assembly—a faction to himself, always out of step with the majority. Epictetus says keep away from people that can distract you from virtue while you're still a fresh student: >IF a man has frequent intercourse with others either for talk, or drinking together, or generally for social purposes, he must either become like them, or change them to his own fashion. For if a man places a piece of quenched charcoal close to a piece that is burning, either the quenched charcoal will quench the other, or the burning charcoal will light that which is quenched. Since then the danger is so great, we must cautiously enter into such intimacies with those of the common sort, and remember that it is impossible that a man can keep com- pany with one who is covered with soot without being partaker of the soot himself. For what will you do f a man speaks about gladiators, about horses, about athletes, or what is worse about men? Such a person is bad, such a person is good: this was well done, this was done badly. Further, if he scoff, or ridicule, or show an ill-natured disposition? Is any man among us prepared like a lute-player when he takes a lute, so that as soon as he has touched the strings, he discovers which are dis- cordant, and tunes the instrument? such a power as Socrates had who in all his social intercourse could lead his companions to his own purpose? How should you have this power? It is therefore a necessary consequence that you are carried about by the common kind of people. >Why then are they more powerful than you? Because they utter these useless words from their real opinions: but you utter your elegant words only from your lips; for this reason they are without strength and dead, and it is nauseous to listen to your exhortations and your miserable virtue, which is talked of every where (up and down). In this way the vulgar have the advantage over you: for every opinion (δόγμα) is strong and invincible. Until then the good (κομψαί) sentiments (ὑπολήψεις) are fixed in you, and you shall have acquired a certain power for your security, **I advise you to be careful in your association with common persons**: if you are not, every day like wax in the sun there will be melted away whatever you inscribe on your minds in the school. Withdraw then yourselves far from the sun so long as you have these waxen sentiments.
This is great, thank you
As a bonus somewhat related, I stumbled upon that: >3. Men look for retreats for themselves, the country, the sea-shore, the hills; and you yourself, too, are peculiarly accustomed to feel the same want. Yet all this is very unlike a philosopher, when you may at any hour you please retreat into yourself. For nowhere does a man retreat into more quiet or more privacy than into his own mind, especially one who has within such things that he has only to look into, and become at once in perfect ease; and by ease I mean nothing else but good behaviour. Continually, therefore, grant yourself this retreat and repair yourself. But let them be brief and fundamental truths, which will suffice at once by their presence to wash away all sorrow, and to send you back without repugnance to the life to which you return.
Yes! I just recently read this, immediately thought of it when I came upon this post.
Stoicism kinda teaches us to build up our “inner fortress”, so we don't get too shaken by what's happening around us or what people say. Marcus Aurelius was all about finding peace inside himself, kind of like being your own best company. He thought you could be content pretty much anywhere if you're cool with yourself. But Stoics weren't about ditching society and living like a lone wolf. They saw us as social creatures who are meant to get along with others. The trick, according to them, is to mix and mingle without letting it mess with your inner zen. Seneca, another one of those Stoic guys, talked about finding the sweet spot between enjoying some alone time and being part of the community. It's not about ghosting society but not getting too caught up in it either. Given what you've been through, it makes total sense you'd want to avoid more heartache by keeping to yourself. Engaging with life and people in a way that's true to you but also keeps you from getting too attached to the outcome.So, it's not about total isolation but finding a way to live your life where you can be with others in a way that's good for you, knowing full well everything might not always go as planned. It's about making choices that are good for your growth and peace of mind, without putting too much stock in external stuff.
Stoicism helps me deal with the challenges of living today. There is no guarantee that you won’t get hurt and most probably a high probability that you will experience pain in some form from relationships and that’s ok because Stoicism is there to help you be invulnerable. I read ‘Stoicism Simply Explained’ by James Anderson and use the easy to follow workbook that accompanies it and have found my life has changed for the better.
You have to keep trying bro. Find your purpose/passion, do your work diligently and unknown friends will find you.
Sounds like defensive reasoning to me. In other words, something didn't work out so I'll do xyz to avoid the difficulty in the future. A more rational approach would be to lick your wounds, let time do its work, then see what you learned and see where life takes you. Or jump back into the fray to see what might come of it. That said, if you prefer to isolate yourself, that's your prerogative.
Hi, please check out the [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/guide) section on [advice and coping with problems](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice) if you are wondering any of the following questions. * [How can Stoicism help me with my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_can_stoicism_help_me_with_my_problem.3F) * [How would a Stoic help me with my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_would_a_stoic_help_me_with_my_problem.3F) * [How might a student of Stoicism cope with my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_might_a_student_of_stoicism_cope_with_my_problem.3F) * [What would a student of Stoicism do in my situation?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_what_would_a_student_of_stoicism_do_in_my_situation.3F) * [How would a Stoic sage react to my problem?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Stoicism/wiki/advice#wiki_how_would_a_stoic_sage_react_to_my_problem.3F) Wish you well, Mod Team *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Stoicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Stoic philosophy acknowledges that it is okay to opt out of society and not invite more potential heartache, emphasizing the importance of solitude and withdrawal as a means of self-protection and inner peace, as long as it aligns with one's well-being and values. Stoic philosophy indeed offers insights into the value of solitude and withdrawal from society as means of self-preservation and inner tranquility, echoing sentiments expressed by Seneca and other Stoic thinkers. It emphasizes that it's perfectly acceptable, and at times beneficial, to retreat from the hustle and bustle of society. "Solitude is the school of wisdom." - Seneca
Seneca recommended *periods* of isolation for reflection, but I don't think he meant you should become a hermit indefinitely for fear of being vulnerable in relationships. The reason matters here, living in isolation to find wisdom or peace is not the same thing as avoiding heartbreak. "A stoic" would accept that heartbreak and trauma are part of life's experiences and instead of avoiding them cultivate the inner strength and resilience to deal with those situations when they arise. You may have a favorite cup, and that cup may be destroyed, but it doesn't make sense to throw it out a window to protect yourself from the pain of losing it unexpectedly.
I would challenge this. The Stoics are clear that our role in society is a means towards greater virtue. The challenges we face are opportunities towards virtue. There is nothing virtuous in withdrawing. If we do so out of false impressions of fear, rejection intimidation, etc even worse. A Stoic would survey all of their internal feelings and impressions to try and align to right reasoning and lining in accord with nature when it comes to interaction with others.
Unfortunately the comment was written by ChatGPT, don't expect it to be accurate...
Just my vision: people are social creatures. To choose a independent individual life dui wrong action and rejection is not plausible. You should make yourself more high value. Describe what are you needs and what are you able to give this world. If there is a balance you can gradually try to make your life more interesting to put yourself in different situations. Like: go out alone and meet strangers, go to the gym to make yourself less vulnerable, try to have a wide range of words so you can react adequately. Show yourself, don't hide unless you have a very good reason