What's a functional relationship? apendrapew's post inspires me to think about dysfunctional relationships - whatever those are. Isn't the term 'dysfunctional relationship' a pleonasm? What is a relationship's function, anyways? Wouldn't a functional relationship be meaningless?
jps: But a relationship doesn't make you happy, what you get out of the relationship makes you happy. sargentlard: Yeah - a sex partner who's readily available. But sane people are bad lays, right?
I would define a functional relationship as one in which both parties benefit from it in some way. This actually doesn't even need to be in a "desired" way, as some relationships might result in benefit to one or both parties in a way which was not originally intended.
Yes...they lack the imigaination and the stamina for the good stuff.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
whats the difference? so a functional relationship is one in you get more things that make you happy then unhappy.
The function of a relationship would be, as I see it, to add to the 'fullness' of each persons life, via companionship, intimacy(physical and/or mental), and support in a variety of areas, be it emotional, psychological, or financial. Mind you fullness is a subjective term, but I'm hoping you can all understand what I mean. Also, because not everyone needs or even wants a 'significant other' in their life, a relationship is not necessarily required by all. So I would say, in cases where a relationship is wanted/needed, it is anything but meaningless.
I'd say where two people are able to be together, and able to assert their individuality. Where they can be honest with each other and not play phony games. Where there's open communication from both people. Only if all the relationships a person has experienced have been dysfunctional. People get all kinds of things from relationships, here's the ones I can think of right now... -sex -economic benefits -children and support for them -emotional support (probably the largest) -relief from loneliness -sometimes status Meaning is subjective. Everything is meaningless unless one places meaning onto it. (Which is important, because, it seems humans have an almost biological need for meaning.)
sargentlard: Exactly, it'd be like...listening to the same cd for the rest of your life. Xenu: But if the essence of love is to strip off your skin like Narcissus in Midian, and being skinless and devoted means being vulnerable...well you see where I'm going. So a functional relationship is one in which you can best exploit your partner to your own ends? Thanks guys.
A functional relationship is one where both people have both social, sexual, and mental stability with one another. It doesn't have to be a long relationship either, it simply must balance out the weaknesses and strengths of both partners. For instance, The masochist seeks out the sadist. The Mommas boy seeks a women who will take care of him. The high maintenance woman seeks out $$$. A functional relationship isn't the Leave it to Beaver, All-American, white picket fence dream, that is put out there by physchologists. It's one that fills the voids in your life and keeps challenging you every step of the way.
A functional relationship is one in which all parties are able to have a relationship without having to invest more maintenance in it than is due. Functional relationships are very rare; it is better to think of most "relationships" as attempted procreations, as they are physical or based on physical convenience only. For me, the ideal relationship would have the following: - Mutual respect - Sex and procreation - Friendship - Cuddling A functional partner would also be able to handle my political/ethical beliefs without vomiting, running away, etc. Relationships for sex only, and sex becoming boring: I think sex is overrated. Not saying that I don't enjoy it, but that I think the variations between individuals are overemphasized when the attitudes of individuals are underemphasized. I doubt I would enter a relationship for sex alone; :m: is much better for solo flying and has fewer disadvantages.
A functional relationship is like a Tango, in unspoken harmony, two must read each other perfectly. This relationship needs two syncronized players to make it work perfectly. For two to be in a functional relationship, they must be self correcting to each other's weaknesses and supplemental to other's strength. Terms that need to complimented are: - Physical strength - Understanding - Skill level - Passion - Emotions - Economic powers - Sexual satisfaction - Ect...Ect.. This is why I have always found that opposites attract and make for a good couple. When one lacks patience, the others must substitue, when one is scared, the other should be brave, when one is bad with money, the other must watch out, when one in mad the other must be ready to patch things up, when one likes to be complimented, the other likes to compliments, ect..ect..
With this definition of functional, we can see that a 'functional relationship' is simply a relationship where both members receive what they desire out of said relationship. This differs, obviously, from person to person. So, a 'functional relationship' is a subjective thing. What appears functional to some is not functional to others.
Semantically, a relationship that functions--which would therefore apply to all relationships. Because the existence of a relationship constitutes its functionality. Pragmatically, every individual in or intending to be in a relationship expects (subconciosly or not) that relationship to provide certain functions. This is true for all relationships--business, emtional, parental, sexual, etc. However, since no two or more individuals in a given relationship share the shame expectations or rewards, the existence of a relationship indicates some DESIRED function. Else, that relationship woud be ceased. Therefore, all relationships are inherently functional. No, it is an oxymoron. A relationship provides certain functions desired by by the individuals in that relationship. So far as that relationship exists, it is provide all or some functions. It depends on the ralationship; each one has a various functions. Sex, for one. This is a pleonasm, and No as it performs a function---assuming of course that you are attributing meaning to functionality.:m:
No No No. You could have a dissfunctional relatioship. It exists. Look at the machines, they can be deemed disfunctional, while they are really somewhat functional, just the efficiency is not functioning correctly. A disfunctional relationship is one that skips a beat, lot of beats, one that you wouldn't buy if you saw on the shelf.
I wouldn't say that's the essence of love. Honesty about oneself doesn't necessarily mean vulnerability. Honesty about oneself equals vulnerability only if you are ashamed of yourself. Oops, took your question wrong the first time. I would say that list is a partial answer to your question "What is a relationship's function, anyways?". Humans do need to satisfy needs, and relationships make that easier. However on another level, functional relationships provide dynamics in our lives. Being close to someone and being open to them, gives you a new unique perspective on the world. It can round a person out. Shoot I had more, but I got distracted because I just found that Reason 2.5 is out. www.propellerheads.se Ahh, who needs women when you've got Reason. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I'll post more later.
Efficiency and dynfunctionality are two different things. Dysfucntional means abnormal or impaired functioning. A perfectly functioning machine can be less efficient than another. A dysfunctional gun might blow up in your hand when you try to fire it. A less efficient gun might only fire its bullet 6 meters instead of a potential 9 meters. If a relationship exists, it provides a fucntion. A machine has a (set of) function/functions. A relationship never provides all its potential functions--as they change. While it exists, a desired function, whether negative or not, is desired, and thus the relationship's prolonged existence. Thus every relationship is functional. -->Instead of dysnfunctional relationhip, I would say, a relationship that is relatively non-beneficial to one or more of the participants. This is different from dysnfunctional.
Boring word games - the existence of a relationship does not denote its functionality. A relationship, like all things, has an inception, a duration and a conclusion; during the time it is a relationship, it is most often trying to be a relationship. Kids, don't confuse a few things memorized in semantics textbooks for real philosophical knowledge. TheFountainHead, you're named after a philosophically-ignorant book.
