In narrow circles individuality requires leadership or complete inner independence
Evidence
In a narrow circle, one can preserve one’s individuality, as a rule, in only two ways. Either one leads the circle (it is for this reason that strong personalities sometimes like to be “number one in the village”), or one exists in it only externally, being independent of it in all essential matters. The latter alternative is possible only through great stability of character or through eccentricity—both traits that are conspicuous most often in small towns. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 621
Categorization
- XREF: Connects to Simmel’s blasé attitude and the urban type: the city expands the circle precisely so individuality no longer requires leadership or eccentricity. — connects to: Larger social circles encourage individual freedom; smaller ones restrict it — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 642; Individualism of equality and individualism of inequality both require large social circles. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 652; Greatly widened circles permit misanthropic detachment and extreme individualism — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 648 (+9 more)
- SEED: Angles a contrast piece: rural eccentricity as forced individuality vs. urban freedom from it.
Related
- Larger social circles encourage individual freedom; smaller ones restrict it (similarity 0.86)
- Individuality increases as the social circle expands (similarity 0.84)
- Leadership derives from reciprocal imitation that frees the leader from individual obedience demands (similarity 0.82)
- Larger social circles expand possibilities for developing unique inner lives. (similarity 0.82)
- Greatly widened circles permit misanthropic detachment and extreme individualism (similarity 0.81)
- Richer individuals need wider choice circles to satisfy their specific needs (similarity 0.81)
- Individualism of equality and individualism of inequality both require large social circles. (similarity 0.80)
- Feudalism’s narrow circles suppressed both collective spirit and individual freedom (similarity 0.80)
- The narrow circle and the large circle yield equal life chances (similarity 0.80)
- Expanded social circles throw the individual back upon himself (similarity 0.80)
- Extreme social control occurs in both the widest and narrowest circles simultaneously (similarity 0.79)
Broader Connections
- Individualism of equality and individualism of inequality both require large social circles.
#qualifies(0.45) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 652 - Larger social circles encourage individual freedom; smaller ones restrict it
#expands(0.40) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 642 - Richer individuals need wider choice circles to satisfy their specific needs
#expands(0.40) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 646 - Freedom grows by ceding outward conformity while guarding an inner core
#expands(0.40) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 736 - Feudalism’s narrow circles suppressed both collective spirit and individual freedom
#exemplifies(0.40) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 647 - Greatly widened circles permit misanthropic detachment and extreme individualism
#expands(0.35) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 648 - Larger social circles expand possibilities for developing unique inner lives.
#contradicts(0.35) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 655 - Solitary instincts conflict with the gregarious self-interest required for society
#corroborates(0.35) — Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, 2471 - Ruling-personality cohesion and individual freedom both stem from group-shackle breaking
#contradicts(0.30) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 670 - Extreme social control occurs in both the widest and narrowest circles simultaneously
#corroborates(0.30) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 641