1.
a person attached to another by feelings of affection, esteem, or personal regard.
This is a subject of particular relevance to me in the last year, because everywhere you go in mainstream American culture, you hear, "don't let any body judge you," "don't judge me!"
I've even been told by some rather needy people "not to judge" them when they spiral into self destruction or badly use myself or their other friends without return.
So, I wonder; where did this idea come from that we are supposed to suspend morality for our friends of all people?
I'm firm believer in the idea that we should be helping people through the hard times, and have history of doing so, but friendship should NEVER be unconditional. That's just a bunch of nonsense.
To me, friendship means that you have a relationship with some you like, have affection for, but most of all hold in mutual esteem.
I hear a lot of this grade-school romanticism talk wherein people say to each other, "I'll be there for you no matter what!"
No, I won't. I even had a conversation with my own mother, wherein we were in total agreement that if one of us became a Nazi we'd expect the other to cut that person off. I know that my mom holds not only love, but friendship for me as well, so it's out of respect for the person I am that she doesn't care for the person I'm not.
You hold friends responsible for what they do, if they are going through hard times then you exercise patience, give them chances to change their lives, and you help them out with all your reasonable(and some times not so reasonable) means, but if they become someone you don't like THEN THEY AREN'T YOUR FRIEND ANYMORE. Here, I am talking about behaviors that become habitual. I'm a firm believer that if friend A is behaving badly, and friend B is counseling A to make changes and A becomes unpleasantly recognizable, then B is not so much demonstrating loyalty as they are demonstrating codependency and facilitation.
I have found that it is characteristic of grade-school relationships (which are fewer but not gone in adult life) is that the only way B can help A change at this point is to send the most powerful message about A's behavior possible and break off contact. B can expound however they wish about how disappointed and unsettled they are about A's behavior, but if the behavior continues and B sticks around indefinitely, the only message A receives is that their behavior is ultimately allowable. Not only is this bad for B, it's extremely bad for A because it reinforces a lack of character and teaches them not to hold themselves accountable. This is a situation wherein "tough love" is necessary.
As I said, I don't AT ALL cleave to the notion that friendship means "no matter what."
Maybe that makes my friendships sound worthlessly conditional, but I like to think that I don't form friendships like some people form relationships; because I'm just plain scared of being alone, and that's going to be my overwhelming motivator.
No, friends, I won't be there for you no matter what. I love you for who you are, if you turn into a monster then you're some one else and not my friend.
I'm friends with you because of who you are, you earned it, I like you for your unique personality that includes traits I admire and hold in very high esteem. If you don't resemble that at all, no, I don't still like you. Why keep the flame going when it always ends in pain after that happens? There is more than enough emphirical support for that!
I'm a firm believer (maybe just short of Ayn Rand, haha) in respecting autonomy and the idea of the sacred definition of each personality. Respect yourself first, and you have the keys to the kingdom of respecting the whole world, and thereby using empathy effectively.
This definition of friendship I'm undressing does not respect individuals, neither B or A. That's the definition of co dependence. It's keeping acquaintances around cause you're too scared to end it and are afraid of having no one to drink with Saturday night.
The friends I have I love more than that, and that's why I can trust their particular brand of impartiality, because I know they'll check my behavior when I step out of line instead of permissively allowing me to fall into moral disrepair. Hard times are aptly the hardest times to make good decisions, and that's when you need people judging you the most. "Judging," as I hear it used by the layman, is often thought of as the opposite of it's definition; as forming a conclusion based on a lack of evidence. Judgment:
–noun
Only a real friend will have to cajones to speak up to me in spite of how uncomfortable it makes us both feel, because those are the ones who care about me and what happens to me more than they care about companionship at any price.
*"All men by nature desire to know. An indication of this is the delight we take in our senses; for even apart from their usefulness they are loved for themselves; and above all others the sense of sight. For not only with a view to action, but even when we are not going to do anything, we prefer sight to almost everything else. The reason is that this, most of all the senses, makes us know and brings to light many differences between things."
-Aristotle
Do we not use our sight to know light and dark, to know difference?
This is a subject of particular relevance to me in the last year, because everywhere you go in mainstream American culture, you hear, "don't let any body judge you," "don't judge me!"
I've even been told by some rather needy people "not to judge" them when they spiral into self destruction or badly use myself or their other friends without return.
So, I wonder; where did this idea come from that we are supposed to suspend morality for our friends of all people?
I'm firm believer in the idea that we should be helping people through the hard times, and have history of doing so, but friendship should NEVER be unconditional. That's just a bunch of nonsense.
To me, friendship means that you have a relationship with some you like, have affection for, but most of all hold in mutual esteem.
I hear a lot of this grade-school romanticism talk wherein people say to each other, "I'll be there for you no matter what!"
No, I won't. I even had a conversation with my own mother, wherein we were in total agreement that if one of us became a Nazi we'd expect the other to cut that person off. I know that my mom holds not only love, but friendship for me as well, so it's out of respect for the person I am that she doesn't care for the person I'm not.
You hold friends responsible for what they do, if they are going through hard times then you exercise patience, give them chances to change their lives, and you help them out with all your reasonable(and some times not so reasonable) means, but if they become someone you don't like THEN THEY AREN'T YOUR FRIEND ANYMORE. Here, I am talking about behaviors that become habitual. I'm a firm believer that if friend A is behaving badly, and friend B is counseling A to make changes and A becomes unpleasantly recognizable, then B is not so much demonstrating loyalty as they are demonstrating codependency and facilitation.
I have found that it is characteristic of grade-school relationships (which are fewer but not gone in adult life) is that the only way B can help A change at this point is to send the most powerful message about A's behavior possible and break off contact. B can expound however they wish about how disappointed and unsettled they are about A's behavior, but if the behavior continues and B sticks around indefinitely, the only message A receives is that their behavior is ultimately allowable. Not only is this bad for B, it's extremely bad for A because it reinforces a lack of character and teaches them not to hold themselves accountable. This is a situation wherein "tough love" is necessary.
As I said, I don't AT ALL cleave to the notion that friendship means "no matter what."
Maybe that makes my friendships sound worthlessly conditional, but I like to think that I don't form friendships like some people form relationships; because I'm just plain scared of being alone, and that's going to be my overwhelming motivator.
No, friends, I won't be there for you no matter what. I love you for who you are, if you turn into a monster then you're some one else and not my friend.
I'm friends with you because of who you are, you earned it, I like you for your unique personality that includes traits I admire and hold in very high esteem. If you don't resemble that at all, no, I don't still like you. Why keep the flame going when it always ends in pain after that happens? There is more than enough emphirical support for that!
I'm a firm believer (maybe just short of Ayn Rand, haha) in respecting autonomy and the idea of the sacred definition of each personality. Respect yourself first, and you have the keys to the kingdom of respecting the whole world, and thereby using empathy effectively.
This definition of friendship I'm undressing does not respect individuals, neither B or A. That's the definition of co dependence. It's keeping acquaintances around cause you're too scared to end it and are afraid of having no one to drink with Saturday night.
The friends I have I love more than that, and that's why I can trust their particular brand of impartiality, because I know they'll check my behavior when I step out of line instead of permissively allowing me to fall into moral disrepair. Hard times are aptly the hardest times to make good decisions, and that's when you need people judging you the most. "Judging," as I hear it used by the layman, is often thought of as the opposite of it's definition; as forming a conclusion based on a lack of evidence. Judgment:
–noun
1.
an act or instance of judging.
2.
the ability to judge, make a decision, or form an opinion objectively, authoritatively, and wisely, esp. in matters affecting action; good sense; discretion: a man of sound judgment.
3.
the demonstration or exercise of such ability or capacity: The major was decorated for the judgment he showed under fire.
4.
the forming of an opinion, estimate, notion, or conclusion, as from circumstances presented to the mind: Our judgment as to the cause of his failure must rest on the evidence.
5.
Anyone on the street can "be supportive" and tell me what I want to hear while I go on a drug bender and do all sorts of messed up things those around me, or some other such thing. Lying, bullshitting, and omission are surprisingly easy in the moment, even if they prove unprofitable in the long run.the opinion formed: He regretted his hasty judgment.
Notice that their are 4 perfectly lovely definitions of judgment before a negative context is presented. I think peoples' omission of this is behind a notion that we should suspend judgment. Which is just silly. Imagine walking around with your eyes closed to everything! Sadly it happens, and people who do so are mostly incapable of not forming mores of some kind,* simply end up applying it to themselves(don't judge me!) and still judge other people all the more sporadically, and therefore with extreme results(gossip instead of honestly telling some one how you feel).
Notice that their are 4 perfectly lovely definitions of judgment before a negative context is presented. I think peoples' omission of this is behind a notion that we should suspend judgment. Which is just silly. Imagine walking around with your eyes closed to everything! Sadly it happens, and people who do so are mostly incapable of not forming mores of some kind,* simply end up applying it to themselves(don't judge me!) and still judge other people all the more sporadically, and therefore with extreme results(gossip instead of honestly telling some one how you feel).
Only a real friend will have to cajones to speak up to me in spite of how uncomfortable it makes us both feel, because those are the ones who care about me and what happens to me more than they care about companionship at any price.
*"All men by nature desire to know. An indication of this is the delight we take in our senses; for even apart from their usefulness they are loved for themselves; and above all others the sense of sight. For not only with a view to action, but even when we are not going to do anything, we prefer sight to almost everything else. The reason is that this, most of all the senses, makes us know and brings to light many differences between things."
-Aristotle
Do we not use our sight to know light and dark, to know difference?
No comments:
Post a Comment