Conceiving of the human as "social animal" rather than individualized monadic unit may be new, but the evidence for the human as socially constructed being is not. From our very first experience as infants we are engaged in social relationships with our primary care giver that lays the groundwork for who we will become. It can be said that it is impossible for any human to escape her community, for she <i>is</i>, in a sense, her community. See Heinz Kohut for more on this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_Kohut

This presents and interesting answer to the following:

>> That's a contradiction, humans are social animal and the rise of telecommunications and the internet is just the current technological advancement in that direction.

Sometimes one might need to get away from the buzz of the other's communication to listen to the community we carry around in our heads.

As for Monasticism: While a completely individual monastic lifestyle has been practiced, it is rare in the history of Western monasticism. Also, as I said above, an individual withdrawing from human contact does not mean she is not in "community." Medieval Christian monastic communities, for their part, were just that, "communities." Monks in these communities lived together and depended on one another for survival. And while they did feel the urge (maybe more properly understood as a 'call') to separate themselves from the community at large, they normally did not cloister their communities far away from urban population centers and were often an integral part of the Medieval economy.

Even the "Desert Fathers," one of the earliest forms of Christian Monasticism, though often viewed as making a radical break from their society, distanced themselves from society in general but not from all humans specifically. Furthermore, these communities depended heavily on links back to the community they had originated from for food, water, and the prayer they thought necessary to exist in the harsh climate of the dessert.

I would go so far as to say that Monasticism, though it does necessitate an intentional distancing of oneself from society at large, is actually a form of a radically <i>social</i> community not experienced by most humans. I think the same can be said about colonialists and rural farmers. Individuals in both of these groups can be said to depend heavily on support from the other for their survival.

Finally, urban existence can be a very lonely for many people. Industrialization and urbanization both create a feeling of what Max Weber termed "anomie." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomie In the history of colonization especially, I would think one thing colonists sought to escape was not social interaction with other humans, but the felt sense of anomie created by living amongst too many humans at once in an oppressive environment. Seen this way, colonists, monks, and farmers all escape from environments hostile to the human "social animal" and arrive in an environment more suitable for the social interaction we cannot help but crave.

Footnote: I should add that I know there are rich traditions of monasticism other than Christian monasticism but I'm not qualified to speak on them.