Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by lloeki 2529 days ago
Sounds like you have an introvert trait (in the Myers Briggs sense), which does not mean despising human interaction but that even though you enjoy it, it’s taxing at some level (but you get some benefit at another level). If this is the case, the rejection comes from energy being exhausted (no one enjoys being exhausted) and you have to recharge your social interactions batteries.

At some point you may have intuitively associated meeting with people with that exhaustion and balanced your NN towards “not meeting” by default, hence the doominess feeling.

Active, conscious steps I took to get me out of that:

1. Recognise that being social brings you something internal (mood improvements)

2. Recognise that being social costs you some energy (depletes a battery)

3. Stop self-bashing for “not being social” at times (battery needs topping up)

4. Create a positive feedback loop instead of a negative one, by having less long/intense social interactions but more frequent, so that the battery never truly runs out and has time to recharge quickly

This takes time as the NN has to be retrained to break the default fight or flight reaction of staying in the safe zone at home.

It’s a bit like enjoying running a marathon and have a happy and relaxed mind following that, but the body is exhausted and certainly doesn’t want to run again back to back as it needs time to recover.

The introvert trait will not go away but the battery can be trained and improved in capacity, and end up looking forward to meeting people as long as it’s properly managed.

4 comments

Protip: Volunteer somewhere. Or just find people who enjoy your company.

If you're treating this like a diet or exercise regimen, it will probably turn out the way most of those turn out.

Instead, maybe think about the other people involved and consider them important as well. There are plenty of people that need some attention, care, resources, advice, and so on. If people come to rely on you, it is motivating, meaningful, and is more in line with the Golden Rule. I'm sure most of us would rather be friends with someone than be their weekly dose of socializing.

If you really don't like people, help out animals. Or the environment. Or "the commu ity". As long as it's part of a team.

On the opposite end of the scale: go to a sporting event and cheer on the home team. You’ll be in an energetic group with common purpose, and no expectation to hold a conversation of any kind.
My point was that "how am I minmaxing my life?" is a poor foundation for a healthy relationship on an ethical level if not a practical one. Go ahead and start with being focused on others and trust that the personal benefits will follow.

Cheering on an underappreciated club might have the same benefits, but I'm mostly doubtful that consumer activities, albeit fun and mildly social ones, qualify as being externally focused.

Can confirm; generally dislike going out around people, but love me a good baseball/softball game.
What if you don't feel social interactions bring you anything positive at all? I get exhausted _and_ depressed by meeting people. Totally not worth it.
Then you should talk to someone, because that doesn't sound healthy. There are no externalities that should be triggering depression.
My father just died, my mother is depressed. That's a natural, normal, healthy reaction to a traumatic externality.

Being depressed as a result of meeting people that you don't want to meet seems perfectly normal to me. Talking to someone when you don't want to talk to them seems like it would only get you more depressed.

IMO, bad advice, please rethink.

Your mother isn't depressed because your father died. You should not be feeling depressed because you meet some people you'd rather not. It seems like there are some unhealthy internalizations going on that can be identified by talking to someone (for a start). I hope for the best.
His mother emotional state should be unaffected by husbands death?
> NN

Neural network??

Yes, nobody uses brain anymore.
This was on purpose, as "brain" is a fuzzy, complex thing whereas taking a license to use NN as a (limited) model of learning and reinforcement echoes to some much more precise concept including its behaviour and corner cases that many around here know about when playing with CUDA but fail to make the leap that our brain/mind/psychology (see? fuzzy!) works quite the same way.
Mushy grey stuff.
> balanced your NN towards “not meeting” by default

I'm wondering what does NN mean, am I losing some context?