We’ve been told all our lives that humans are social animals—that we need each other to thrive. But what if this isn’t the full story?

Today, I want to challenge a notion I’ve heard over and over again, almost like a mantra:
Humans are social animals; we need one another.

The first part? Yes.
The second part? I’m not so sure.

Developmentally, we are indeed social animals. We evolved to live in herds and tribes. Our strength as a species has always been built on helping and supporting one another, and specializing in different skills so that, together, we could survive and thrive.

This wouldn’t have been possible otherwise. Our minds developed in a way that made our existence directly dependent on how we interacted with each other—providing safety, love, and connection. This has been the role of our subconscious mind all along.

We’ve been brilliant at it.

However, in today’s society, we can survive by exchanging skills and services without much direct social interaction. This is something entirely new for our system. Until not too long ago, to access someone’s skills, services, or goods, we had to interact with another human being.

Being completely self-sufficient—without ever buying or acquiring the things we need—is highly unlikely and would throw us back into the uncertainty of the caveman days, something none of us want.

Yet now, for the first time in history, we can function like cavemen—locked inside an apartment—and still survive without direct human interaction, thanks to technology. We can order food and everything else we need through the internet.

Ironically, this is also a time in history when social disconnection is at its peak because of this very convenience. Dating apps are exploding, and people feel lonelier than ever.

This is where personal development comes into play, helping us achieve the sense of connection we crave. Many argue:
“Humans are social animals, and we need to interact with one another to thrive.”
And here’s where I pause.

I understand—it feels good. Connection with others, human touch—these are at the core of being human. You could argue that love often travels through human touch. After all, what happens to a baby who is never held or cuddled by their parents? It would cause psychological problems, no doubt.

But still, I’m here to offer a different perspective:
The real connection we are longing for isn’t “out there.” It’s within.

To those who believe happiness requires a partner, a family, a tribe, or an active social life, I say:
Yes—those things are beautiful.
But they are not necessary.

We don’t need any of it to be whole.
What we do need is a deep, unshakable connection with ourselves.

This isn’t to say we should avoid others or deny our desire for connection.
Connection with others is not the source of happiness; it’s an extension of the happiness we create within ourselves.

History proves this time and time again:

• Nelson Mandela, who spent 27 years in prison, found inner strength and purpose that no physical confinement could break.

• Emily Dickinson, one of the greatest poets of all time, lived much of her life in seclusion, yet touched countless hearts with her words.

• Spiritual figures like Buddha reached enlightenment not through constant social engagement but through deep, solitary self-inquiry.

So if you’re feeling lonely, disconnected, or craving someone to fill that void—consider this:
What if that emptiness is a reflection of inner fragmentation?
Not a lack of people, but a lack of you being with you.

It’s great to be with one another.
But the thing is—we don’t need one another to be whole.
We already are.