Just want to share this brilliant matemathical social life metaphor by Mathematician Cartoonist* Ben Orlin of Math with Bad Drawings, illustrating what a “social circle” looks like on paper.
I quite like the symbolism and its implications:
The social people
People who have large social circles, have plenty of space at their disposal inside their circle. It gives them flexibility, mobility and dynamism, and exposes them to the inputs and perspectives of different people (although people inside social circles tend to be somewhat culturally alike, or at least compatible).
People with large social circles can cover a lot of ground and have many resources of whatever they need within their circle. They know a tons of people who can tip them off to opportunities they hadn’t even thought of, connect them up with useful people, and explain the complicated political insider dynamics of specific social groups and organisation. Also, they’ll typically have had ample social skills practice for many years.
People with large social circles probably don’t need to venture out of their circles often, but due to their extensive practice in navigating social networks, may find it relatively easy to do so, or to expand or alter their circle when they need it.
In contrast, a social circle with a radius of zero is a small and inflexible space. It tends to be more static than dynamic, there aren’t many fresh inputs and blending of perspectives, and not many opportunities dropping by. Outings are lone expeditions, like walking around in a circle, meeting no one, and ending back at start. The boundary is uncomfortably close, like right outside the window, exposing the loneliness to random strangers if the pay attention (they usually don’t).
Loneliness is seen as a mark of dysfunction in society. It signals that “This person is not good enough for anyone in the world”. So a social circle with a radius of Zero has a stigma attached to it, casting a shadow over it.