Loneliness can have a very negative impact on quality of life. One of the main recommendations we hear is to "go out and meet people" to combat its effects, but the truth is that we are not all the same, and some people might feel much better being alone. According to psychologists Satoshi Kanazawa from the London School of Economics and Norman Li from the Singapore Management University, those with greater intelligence represent that exception: the less they socialize, the happier they are.
"I hate people." I've heard that phrase dozens of times, from very different people with nothing in common. There are days when the world turns up the meat grinder a bit too much, and the simple act of sharing a public space with the rest of the human species becomes unbearable. This is striking if we consider several interpretations, among which the so-called "savanna happiness theory" stands out. By working in groups, our ancestors had access to more nutritious food and were better protected against the elements and the hostility of nature. By extension, their quality of life was superior, and that made them happier.
According to a study published in 2016 by psychologists Satoshi Kanazawa from the London School of Economics and Norman Li from the Singapore Management University, the savanna theory has merit: analyzing data from 15,000 participants, they found that high population density reduces satisfaction, but a greater number of social interactions increases it. In other words, ample spaces and constant contact. However...
... there's an asterisk in the study, which affects intelligent people. We can debate for ages the most "scientifically correct" way to quantify intelligence, but the text suggests that those with a higher coefficient are less happy if they interact too much with friends and family. Now... why? One idea is that those with greater intelligence and the ability to apply it prioritize long-term goals, and excessive socializing becomes a distraction, which decreases their quality of life.
Still, the savanna theory relies on a simple "evolutionary wiring": The human brain prefers rural environments with fewer people. The difference is that intelligent people can adapt to modern challenges, better resist the negative aspect of high population density, and not depend so much on contact with others. Interesting theory, but a theory after all. For many, happiness is a choice, not a result derived from prior conditions. What do you think?
https://old.neoteo.com/el-efecto-de-la-puerta-o-por-que-te-olvidas-las-cosas-al-pasar-de-una-habitacion-a-otra/
