Doing What We Have To

Recently, in a new book called "Looking Out Looking In" by Ronald Adler and Russell Proctor, I read of an experiment testing isolation. Specifically, five subjects were left alone in separate rooms with the idea of seeing how long they would last. One held out for eight days, three for two days, and one for only two hours. I am not sure how long I would last under similar circumstances. On the one hand, there are times when I definitely could see me being the eight-day-person, while other times I would be pressing the buzzer to be released after two hours.  As is the case with food and water, what this experiment demonstrates is that all of us need some form of interaction or connection with others eventually.

This, then, speaks to the question of why it is we communicate. The answer is because we have to. It is a fundamental need we as humans share. Even if that interaction is only periodic, it is something we have to do because it enhances our desire to survive for as long as we can. Adler and Proctor note that socially-connected people live, on the average, nearly four years longer than those who are not; divorced, separated or widowed people are more likely to require mental hospitalization than married folks; those who are socially isolated tend to be more susceptible to the common cold; and socially active people tend to have better memories.

Given these reasons for all of us to be more active communicators, the challenge becomes how we can be the best we can at it. After all, the above-mentioned facts suggest by being socially active and generally satisfied with our various interactions, we tend to live longer and more fulfilling lives. To that, I, for one, say "sign me up!" This points to the need for people to learn more about the mechanics of communication. Knowledge about this field helps us learn more about ourselves and that, in turn, improves our ability to connect with others.