This might work as long as I do not take anyone from my family along... In fact, everything would be better then staying two weeks with memebers of my family at a remote place. The more I think of it, the more I understand why this article is abou solitude.

Right, the article talks about isolation more as if going on a spa retreat.

In reality, an actual hermit will more likely tend to be an antisocial misanthrope, rather than a caring neighbor.

The way I interpreted the article, it’s not about being a hermit at all.

It doesn’t talk about isolation either, which is distinct from solitude, even if the two at times resemble each other.

Instead it points out the opposite extreme. Solitude as a sharp contrast to the realities of city life that we often don’t pause to consider.

As a city dweller, I find myself doing the same things described by the author (minus the nakedness, but to each their own). I spend time away from others so that I can spend time with them.

This is more about finding balance than embracing any extreme or becoming a hermit.

but also has to act that way, otherwise people will not leave them alone

interesting take, love it :)

> all war and all other man made problems of the world could be solved if everyone got to experience just a few days of this one-ness with nature that you are bound to feel in the fresh air of the mountains when you are there all by yourself with not a soul in sight in any direction

Unless someone figured out that in order to keep the solutide in the mountains, they need to own the mountains, which leads to conflict and wars...

To compare the monk vs the city-dweller. Hmm. I think I’ll go with monk.