Do you think there any obligations between friends? I guess the right answer is no, but what if say somebody is a good friend of yours, but hardly ever listenes to you in a large goup of people? Say you are really close to each other, share thoughts, and when something bad happens, you call or write each other, but when there are many ppl around, s/he kinda ignores you? Do friends have to always be there for you or it's their choice and you can't expect anything from them? What do you think?
Friends should be there when you need them and when you just want to talk about personal things, among many things friends are for. Being at a social event doesn't always mean that your friend will visit with you but wants to visit with others that s/he hasn't seen in awhile perhaps. Since they see you allot then they wouldn't think it should bother you UNLESS you bring it up to them that it does. I think they aren't trying to hurt you but that you are making to much out of nothing. That being said and if it bothers you then by all means talk to h/she about your feelings in private.
My own outlook is grim: • At present, what obligations friends recognize, at least in my corner of the Universe, are few and superficial. The burdens they carry on each other's behalf are strangely removed from the focus of of commonality. • Among the burdens friends expect but don't recognize, trust is foremost. Everybody needs somebody, and that somebody isn't always the person you're having sex with. One's spouse or partner cannot always be everything one needs, and that's what your friends are for. • The purpose of friends, as near as I can observe in the present context of my own Universe, is to provide amusement and distraction. Obviously, I find this state of things disturbing. I haven't seen one of my own best friends in over a year; hell, I didn't even call him on his birthday. Of course, he's feeling about like I do these days, so we both have a high standard for action. In the meantime, we're where the other turns when things seem so bleak that nothing else works. Another ... hell, in her life I think I've been there for all of two major events or rites of passage. Okay, three, if we count sex, but still .... We have different worlds and different priorities these days, but it's nice to know there's someone out there who knows you that well and doesn't actually hate you. And no, we don't always do right by each other. But hey, we're human, so there's no reason to not keep trying.
Tiassa, Why do you still consider that person your best friend if you almost never talk, don't see each other and you even forgot about his birthday? Some people can just plug their friends out of their lifes temporarily because they are busy, and have other very important things to do, and still think they are the best friends. I've been there, and it hurts. With the time I get used to it, find other ways to entertain myself, find new friends, and then it turns out that person just didn't have time, missed me, now wants to see me... although she didn't return my messages and didn't call me herself. May be being able to say no when you are busy is the right way to act, and is healthy egoism, but I always try to be with a friend when s/he needs me and expect that from others...
Friends are obligations, for they are as a vegetable garden. If you do not attend to it regularly, water it daily, and weed it, it will not grow. Worse, it may die. Friends are obligations, for they are fickle things sometimes. Sometimes it is appropriate to laugh and jest, make fun and tease, while other times you must remain quite sober. Sometimes, many times, you don't know when is when. You'll fight, and make up, if the friendship is any good. Friends are obligations, for how many good friends worth their salt do you have in which if they were hurt, you would not feel obligated to console? Or at least, find a way to help ease their pain? Maybe you have told them you wished you could feel the pain they did, so you might better understand them. Friends are obligations, for if I was a hermit, with no one to be obligated to but myself, I would have a miserable life indeed.
Well, what if the obligation is to not have sex? And to prevent torture? Do those count as your two obligations of friendship at least?
"Do those count as your two obligations of friendship at least?" No, these count as the boring relations one has with their grandmother.
One very smart man said: "Be loyal to nobody but yourself." Ponder upon that. This statement resolves many questions about relations and other aspects of life.
What confidance can you have that you will not betray you? Because being human, we are still susceptible to betrayal. Is having a hermit's life, with no obligations to anyone but yourself truly loyalty? Humans by nature are social creatures, we depend upon others in vaying degrees whether we admit it or not. In my opinion, which really doesn't amount to much, to be truly loyal to yourself, you must also be loyal to others.
The idea was that while being loyal to others, we often betray ourselves. Well, we often vow to be loyal and end up betraying, this way betraying the person and our own vow to self. Yes, being loyal to self includes taking care that the self also has friends. But "friends" does not mean blind loyalty or any other kind of blind obligations. Always consider your own interests first; nobody else will do that.
I wasn't insisting upon blind loyalty, I was merely suggesting that to maintain a healthy friendship of any kind, there are ceratin obligations. That doesn't mean you become a slave to the friendship, but a friendship does require time, effort, and cooperation with the friend. If it had none of that, could it really be called a friendship? Or should it be called an aquaintance? Or a passing memory? You can at least concur with that.
But we were discussing the 1st post I made in this thread, which had to do with loyalty, right? Yeah, yeah, time and effort is necessary, fine. But, with age, I find there's less and less time for that. So, all of these things necessary for long-term communication are minimal. Also, why are you so against self-reliability?
I'm not opposed to self-reliabilty- I live for it. I loathe dependance for it is a weakness. I loathe weakness. I am simply aware of the necessity of interaction with other human beings. This act of interaction alone requires obligation. For one to be true to oneself and honestly do whats best for oneself to remain, as you say, "loyal to oneself" you have to engage in the sometimes unpleasant task of dealing with people. Sometimes this is pleasant. Then you have a "friend." To keep this friend, requires obligation, of this you agreed to. With age, it is not that there is less time, I believe that the longer the friendship lasts, the less work it truly needs. Using the garden analogy again, it becomes resistent to times of drought, and weeds don't choke the large, healthy vines so quickly. It still requires obligation, but to a lesser degree perhaps. But to what degree of obligation I don't believe was in question. The question I believe, was whether or not you had an obligation between friends.
You've betrayed yourself in just asking. One with a strong grip on his Thyself is indomitable. The purest. Why must we always speak of necessity? There are millions of hardware stores where one can buy a hammer, a screwdirever and a can opener. If you lose the screw in your drawer today will the world end? The common man is an expendible- the most insecrue people in this world see him as comfort and validation. Why? Becuase they are needy and clingy and attract sticky people. Even the ones who claim self reliabilty and yet cannot bring themselves to see people for what they are, are just as clingy. But sophisticated about all their ignorance.
I have just been reading a book that mentions reciprocal altruism. A pity that it only gives the basics and points the reader to another book where more is said. Quickly said, reciprocal altruism is when one helps others in order to have others help him. Apes and other mammals perform this type of altruism all the time. When a new ape seeks to join a group, it appears that the ape has a plan that it needs so many female friends, so many male allies, so many infant and child friends. The ape will then enter the group and act accordingly. What's astonishing about this behavior is the length of time which may pass before the favors are called in. Months, sometimes. It is also likely that we have selected for altruism. When one's partner (in any endeavor) cheats then this is a less than efficient relationship. The ones who cheat would do better than those who do not cheat. So, it would seem likely that those who are better able to determine cheaters would succeed more than those who cannot determine cheaters. Even in apes this determination of cheating is advanced. We, with our language, advance it even more. We are able to lie in more ways. And able to detect the lie in more ways as well.
How altruistic. Exactly. Three kinds of love, yes?: erotic, platonic, agapic. In all three, none is given without exacting a price. In all communes, from the San to the United kingdom, men are drawn by mutual interests. What a gift giver sees is not a good deed, but a debtor. Illustrated perfectly everytime that a mortal was granted a wish by Olympus-the immortals of Gulliver's tales knew this as well.
Yes, but with language we lie even to ourselves. In this manner we abstract ourselves from our true motives and think that we are doing things for others rather than ourselves. It is in this way that men can bring to martyr themselves. Language has prepared them for this level of abstraction. The self loses meaning and the other becomes all.
Not as much language, but a rampant fear and hatred of life and self. Why does the Chritian dream of heaven? He fears living in this world and his ineptutude only terrifies his condition. Fucking weaklings- every last monk at La Trappe was too sensitive to deal with his world so he scurried away to live it vicariously. Only the malnourished in spirit go in for martyrdom. Except me of course- I plan on killing myself if I don't get Reznor.
