Does anyone else not have any friends IRL?

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

but surely there's more to it than simply willingness to help. I mean what if someone is willing to help you, but never does? Their heart is in the right place, but their free time isn't? Every time you need their help, they're busy, but they would have helped you in they were free, and they really do feel bad about it, but they're just so busy.
Is that functionally different than someone who isn't willing to help you?

What if they're willing to help you, and have the time, but not any relevant skills, or are impaired somehow? Like someone with a bad back, there on moving day to help, but can't do all that much? Are they more a casual friend?

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

SNIP

but surely there's more to it than simply willingness to help. I mean what if someone is willing to help you, but never does? Their heart is in the right place, but their free time isn't? Every time you need their help, they're busy, but they would have helped you in they were free, and they really do feel bad about it, but they're just so busy.
Is that functionally different than someone who isn't willing to help you?

What if they're willing to help you, and have the time, but not any relevant skills, or are impaired somehow? Like someone with a bad back, there on moving day to help, but can't do all that much? Are they more a casual friend?

Lol you make accusations of others wanting people only for what they can do but you're the one only looking at *functional* differences

I answered that already, for some reason you can't comprehend the answer.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

To be honest it sounds less like you have high standards for friends, and more that you just want a butler and mechanic for free. Like you're not offering them anything, you just want them to fix problems for you. There's supposed to be more to a relationship than just what you get from the other person.

If you read two sentences below there was the idea of reciprocity. That I would legitimately offer my services where possible, as well.

I know more than 1-2 people worthy of that consideration, however. People I honestly believe would do such a thing if able. Moreover it's stuff I would do for them if able, as well.

I can't promise I can bring a spare tyre on my motorbike ... but I'll meet someone with a tankbag full of tools and have a go with them inspecting their motor to see if we can get it running with whatever I can bring.

It's the idea of capability. Tyres are big, and my motorbike is the only form of personal transport I have. So it's not a reasonable request. If they're driving around a big 4WD, it's not a very sound proposition. Then again ... if they desperately needed it enough, I'd probably give it a shot despite my better judgment.

The idea was actually coaching it in real things you might desperately need from another that the average person might experience.

I think it's a fair mention that friends aren't just people you can have fun with. It's that person willing to sacrifice some of their possible happiness just to help you and vice versa. The moral metric isn't whether they're willing to do stuff for you ... the idea is whether they'd be willing to if you need it.

The whole idea of not having 'fair-weather friends'.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

To be honest it sounds less like you have high standards for friends, and more that you just want a butler and mechanic for free. Like you're not offering them anything, you just want them to fix problems for you. There's supposed to be more to a relationship than just what you get from the other person.

If you read two sentences below there was the idea of reciprocity. That I would legitimately offer my services where possible, as well.

I know more than 1-2 people worthy of that consideration, however. People I honestly believe would do such a thing if able. Moreover it's stuff I would do for them if able, as well.

I already described it as trading favors. To quote myself from just a few posts up "And if you're just basing friendship off of trading favors to one another, you're just business partners, not friends."

I can link you the definition of trading if you want.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I already described it as trading favors. To quote myself from just a few posts up "And if you're just basing friendship off of trading favors to one another, you're just business partners, not friends."

I can link you the definition of trading if you want.

I can also link you the definition of a 'fair-weather friend'.

It's not about trading favours ... it's about finding someone willing to trade favours. It's about having the knowledge someone will help if they can, and you sincerely wishing to reciprocate that good will.

Strangers can simply havefun hanging out together. We frequently go to parties and meet strangers. But I'd struggle calling some random chance encounter a 'friend' until I felt comfortable thinking I could rely on or trust them.

 

[Zarcez]

This got me thinking
While I do have several close friends IRL and people I get along with a the uni, they have both been through situations where the social part has been secondary. I have never been good at seeking out new company as I don't know how approch new people or groups unless I have another reason to be with them. Then it also doesn't help that I am bad at keeping contact with people.
So yeah, here I am writing on a dying site on which I been lurking on for years, never before could I find a good reason start posting.
So hello, I guess?

 

[Squilookle]

Good god Silentpony- just stop. You're embarrassing yourself. Addendum clearly implied that both his examples were just that- not the full extent of a friend's expectations, and that he would be willing to do the same for a friend. He got it, I got it, The Decapitated Centaur got it.

Just get it already.

 

[RaikuFA]

I've pretty much got one friend and a girlfriend. Would like more but they'll probably hurt me.

 

[Kolby Jack]

I don't have a lot of friends, but I've made some pretty strong friendships over the course of my life. Well, strong for me. I don't talk to them every day, and some of them I sometimes go months at a time without talking to, but I consider them pretty close friends that I can talk to about pretty much anything.

Also unusual (I think) is that one has been my friend since we were three years old (we're both 28 now). From what I understand, early childhood friendships usually peter off as friends grow apart, but even though my family moved across the country when I was 13, my friend and I have remained pretty close. We're very different in some ways but also still very similar, and now that I've moved back near our hometown, we get together with a mutual friend of ours and play board games almost once a week. It's pretty awesome.

Generally wherever I go, I like to have one good friend I do most of my limited socializing with. If I don't have a friend available, then I'll put myself out there and try to get one. Family doesn't count for me. I love my family but I have so little in common with any of them that socializing with them is pretty boring for me.

 

[Drathnoxis]

So yeah, here I am writing on a dying site on which I been lurking on for years, never before could I find a good reason start posting.
So hello, I guess?

Hi!

Hope you stick around to be a more frequent poster, we sure need them.

 

[Jamcie Kerbizz]

(...)
You made it a fucking example. I was critiquing the example.

How else do you want me to articulate my position?

For starters, stop foaming and control yourself. If this was your goal, you failed on both accounts the moment you started misrepresenting my position.
If you want to argue something do that without building a strawman. If you want to articulate your position when you don't comprehend or understand someone's position just ask for clarification first, or present your own position detached from things that are unclear to you. Then let the other side to refer to your position.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

(Complains about hay)

Your 1st post.

Bolded important part for you. You maybe meet 1-2 people in life, that are worth the name.
Ofcourse, you can also just go about and pretend like everyone else. Lower your standards and be a drone yourself. Then after next 30 years go to the shrink to reinforce that what you do is the way to be and these thoughts you are having is just your *BS excuse to not take critical views of life and take responsibility of the findings* not intelligent individual having a thoughtful assessment of surroundings

Either way don't let such things get you down mate. Start your own family maybe, if you have someone around to spend your life with?

My response;

Sounds like a 'you' problem, to be honest.

I mean, I don't have that very many friends ... but then again I know plenty of people I call 'associates', and a fair few number of them would be pretty good friends I imagine. I regularly get invited by workmates at uni to go to a barbecue, or to go to the pub with, or people I meet at my LGS wanting to have a late night meal with, or maybe a beach party, or random strangers I'll strike up a conversation about anything ... from sports, motorbikes, politics...

People are people, and your average person is perfectly affable, decent, has your average sorts of responsibilities, particularly as you get older in life.

If you're going to assume people in general are garbage, well maybe it's not them with the problem.

I don't consider it very 'drone-like' to not just assume I can't connect with people. That sounds pretty depressing to be honest. I mean, sure ... I've known people that seemingly want to hurt me when I came out to them. But then again, I've met heaps of people that don't care, either. The world is a pretty big place with a whole lot of people. You're kind of missing out not taking a gamble on other people being worth your time.

Besides, socializing has profound psychological benefits.

I literally addressed all your points, then you started screeching.

Also, not interested if this is your modus operandi.

I mean, this is how you responded to my first post...

Sounds like you have a problem. I never said it's a problem to me nor it is a problem of others nor to someone who shares my perspective.
If anything its about who exactly someone considers 'a friend'.
To me it would be someone (I put it deliberetly into extreme) I can go to and say We need to go now, I need money and we have to off few people. No time to explain. Friend answers ok, lets go. Building such trust and blood line like bonds and mutual understanding takes decades (rightfully so too) and there are very few people who will go the full way with you.

I consider drone like behaviour what social media done to people and their understanding of friendship and freinds and what sudo-specialists (shrinks without medical degree) do to people, reinforcing their social insecurities to a point i.e. at which my friend got into serious mental disorder before I tore her out of greedy little hands of one of these f-ks and her 'therapy sessions'.

And of course, to prove I wasn't actually strawmanning someone....

I'm pretty sure a real friend would stop you committing murder evidently for pay. I'm pretty sure people looking out for both your interests and has a basic sense of moral responsibility won't help you murder for money. Say, if I were in your "friend's" position I'd probably ask if you can wait a week while I loan you the money you evidently need so badly.

If your idea of a 'friend' is someone that is so morally flexible they'll kill for you, it doesn't sound like people I personally would want to spend time with. It doesn't seem like a very good metric by which to judge the validity of a person's character. I'm pretty sure if you're hanging out with people you're sure will murder for you, you're not hanging out with a specific sort of crowd most others could ever treat as, or consider, 'friends'.

You made it the basis of your argument, I went and explained why I thought that was a bad argument.

So pray tell, can you actually show me where the strawmanning is? I mean you fucking agreed with me a friend acking yopu to commit a crime is a betrayal of trust.

If you agree your example of a friend is pretty fucked up in any context, why are you saying I strawmanned you if I wrote the same thing?

 

[Jamcie Kerbizz]

(Complains about hay)

Your 1st post.

Bolded important part for you. You maybe meet 1-2 people in life, that are worth the name.
Ofcourse, you can also just go about and pretend like everyone else. Lower your standards and be a drone yourself. Then after next 30 years go to the shrink to reinforce that what you do is the way to be and these thoughts you are having is just your *BS excuse to not take critical views of life and take responsibility of the findings* not intelligent individual having a thoughtful assessment of surroundings

Either way don't let such things get you down mate. Start your own family maybe, if you have someone around to spend your life with?

My response;

Sounds like a 'you' problem, to be honest.

I mean, I don't have that very many friends ... but then again I know plenty of people I call 'associates', and a fair few number of them would be pretty good friends I imagine. I regularly get invited by workmates at uni to go to a barbecue, or to go to the pub with, or people I meet at my LGS wanting to have a late night meal with, or maybe a beach party, or random strangers I'll strike up a conversation about anything ... from sports, motorbikes, politics...

People are people, and your average person is perfectly affable, decent, has your average sorts of responsibilities, particularly as you get older in life.

If you're going to assume people in general are garbage, well maybe it's not them with the problem.

I don't consider it very 'drone-like' to not just assume I can't connect with people. That sounds pretty depressing to be honest. I mean, sure ... I've known people that seemingly want to hurt me when I came out to them. But then again, I've met heaps of people that don't care, either. The world is a pretty big place with a whole lot of people. You're kind of missing out not taking a gamble on other people being worth your time.

Besides, socializing has profound psychological benefits.

I literally addressed all your points, then you started screeching.

Also, not interested if this is your modus operandi.

I mean, this is how you responded to my first post...

Sounds like you have a problem. I never said it's a problem to me nor it is a problem of others nor to someone who shares my perspective.
If anything its about who exactly someone considers 'a friend'.
To me it would be someone (I put it deliberetly into extreme) I can go to and say We need to go now, I need money and we have to off few people. No time to explain. Friend answers ok, lets go. Building such trust and blood line like bonds and mutual understanding takes decades (rightfully so too) and there are very few people who will go the full way with you.

I consider drone like behaviour what social media done to people and their understanding of friendship and freinds and what sudo-specialists (shrinks without medical degree) do to people, reinforcing their social insecurities to a point i.e. at which my friend got into serious mental disorder before I tore her out of greedy little hands of one of these f-ks and her 'therapy sessions'.

And of course, to prove I wasn't actually strawmanning someone....

I'm pretty sure a real friend would stop you committing murder evidently for pay. I'm pretty sure people looking out for both your interests and has a basic sense of moral responsibility won't help you murder for money. Say, if I were in your "friend's" position I'd probably ask if you can wait a week while I loan you the money you evidently need so badly.

If your idea of a 'friend' is someone that is so morally flexible they'll kill for you, it doesn't sound like people I personally would want to spend time with. It doesn't seem like a very good metric by which to judge the validity of a person's character. I'm pretty sure if you're hanging out with people you're sure will murder for you, you're not hanging out with a specific sort of crowd most others could ever treat as, or consider, 'friends'.

You made it the basis of your argument, I went and explained why I thought that was a bad argument.

So pray tell, can you actually show me where the strawmanning is? I mean you fucking agreed with me a friend acking yopu to commit a crime is a betrayal of trust.

If you agree your example of a friend is pretty fucked up in any context, why are you saying I strawmanned you if I wrote the same thing?

You change meaning of the statement, then proceed to argue with yourself in the bubble you created. If you feel compelled to rephrase someone's position in order to be able to criticize it than you have no arguments worth showing. When you build your position in contrast to your own misrepresentation of ones position, which you blatantly do, you have no honest position of your own (since you did neither present your own arguments to back yours nor had any counterpoints to position presented - just keep on hitting on the strawman).

Single bolded snippet. You were told 3 times already this is not the case. Initial proposition was not phrased this way. It had a precaution included, that it is deliberate ad absurdum example to showcase the notion. You were given more detailes to understand it: mutual trust, mutual understanding which requires considerable ammount of time to be built and tested between people.
Yet you still keep on hiding behind the strawman you errected around it and argue with yourself like a madman.

As I said in initial reply just stop it. Or add something intellectually honest, if you have anything to say.

 

[McElroy]

I know what kind of a friend I don't have. A girlfriend. And I'm not open to everyone - I have standards. Also I can't be that guy who goes in the middle of a group of women to ask one of them out and then just leave or awkwardly stare at the others. Beside money and status, women are the main reason I went to Medical School! Disappointed!!

I don't have too much in common with my fellow med school students either (surprisingly, one might say), and so making friends might take a little time. I don't know how long I can take it, though. Being lonely bums me out. Sucks to be me. :^)

So yeah, uh, problems of a similar nature, I reckon.

 

[Poetic Nova]

My own best friend lives 3000 miles away (at the very least), in the US. The last irl friend I had screwed me over half a year ago, and a few months later put all the blame on me.

And my girlfriend doesn't exactly live next door either, but atleast I'm able to see her every once in awhile.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

You change meaning of the statement, then proceed to argue with yourself in the bubble you created. If you feel compelled to rephrase someone's position in order to be able to criticize it than you have no arguments worth showing. When you build your position in contrast to your own misrepresentation of ones position, which you blatantly do, you have no honest position of your own (since you did neither present your own arguments to back yours nor had any counterpoints to position presented - just keep on hitting on the strawman).

What did I change? Are these not your posts? Where did I strawman you?

Single bolded snippet. You were told 3 times already this is not the case. Initial proposition was not phrased this way. It had a precaution included, that it is deliberate ad absurdum example to showcase the notion. You were given more detailes to understand it: mutual trust, mutual understanding which requires considerable ammount of time to be built and tested between people.
Yet you still keep on hiding behind the strawman you errected around it and argue with yourself like a madman.

Where did I strawman you?

If you didn't want me to comment, why write such an example? What other examples did you give me to base your argument on? That is the only example of a friend, to you that you gave. You didn't even make it a vague idea of what a friend meand to you.

You said; "If anything its about who exactly someone considers 'a friend'.
To me it would be someone (I put it deliberetly into extreme) I can go to and say We need to go now, I need money and we have to off few people. No time to explain. Friend answers ok, lets go. Building such trust and blood line like bonds and mutual understanding takes decades (rightfully so too) and there are very few people who will go the full way with you."

How else are people supposed to assume what you meant? What part of my reply was strawmanning you? How else should people read that?

Because I had the insinuation you meant you could rely on someone going that far. So I addressed that point.

As I said in initial reply just stop it. Or add something intellectually honest, if you have anything to say.

How about outlying what you consider to be 'strawmanning', first? Like, show me where. Or are you going to keep pushing this angle that I somehow misquoted you? After all... so far I'm the only one in good faith to quote directly and query your actual words ... not just delete them and pretend like I did something wrong.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I have one person that I talk to regularly online, and I get to meet with this person about twice a year. That's enough for me.

 

[Jamcie Kerbizz]

You change meaning of the statement, then proceed to argue with yourself in the bubble you created. If you feel compelled to rephrase someone's position in order to be able to criticize it than you have no arguments worth showing. When you build your position in contrast to your own misrepresentation of ones position, which you blatantly do, you have no honest position of your own (since you did neither present your own arguments to back yours nor had any counterpoints to position presented - just keep on hitting on the strawman).

What did I change? Are these not your posts? Where did I strawman you?

Single bolded snippet. You were told 3 times already this is not the case. Initial proposition was not phrased this way. It had a precaution included, that it is deliberate ad absurdum example to showcase the notion. You were given more detailes to understand it: mutual trust, mutual understanding which requires considerable ammount of time to be built and tested between people.
Yet you still keep on hiding behind the strawman you errected around it and argue with yourself like a madman.

Where did I strawman you?

If you didn't want me to comment, why write such an example? What other examples did you give me to base your argument on? That is the only example of a friend, to you that you gave. You didn't even make it a vague idea of what a friend meand to you.

You said; "If anything its about who exactly someone considers 'a friend'.
To me it would be someone (I put it deliberetly into extreme) I can go to and say We need to go now, I need money and we have to off few people. No time to explain. Friend answers ok, lets go. Building such trust and blood line like bonds and mutual understanding takes decades (rightfully so too) and there are very few people who will go the full way with you."

How else are people supposed to assume what you meant? What part of my reply was strawmanning you? How else should people read that?

Because I had the insinuation you meant you could rely on someone going that far. So I addressed that point.

As I said in initial reply just stop it. Or add something intellectually honest, if you have anything to say.

How about outlying what you consider to be 'strawmanning', first? Like, show me where. Or are you going to keep pushing this angle that I somehow misquoted you? After all... so far I'm the only one in good faith to quote directly and query your actual words ... not just delete them and pretend like I did something wrong.

Quit being dishonest and paranoid. Just read everything, from start. I did not delete anything. I did clarify which parts you misrepresent. You just doubled down on that, so what's the point?
You fail to address anything, first you rephrase it, then you argue with it. At least at first you were using terms that indicated you have no idea and were guessing, which is why I let that slide initially. But you just went down to be all out obnoxious. If you can't make any valid honest argument, I'm done wasting my time with you.

 

[Squilookle]

I know what kind of a friend I don't have. A girlfriend. And I'm not open to everyone - I have standards. Also I can't be that guy who goes in the middle of a group of women to ask one of them out and then just leave or awkwardly stare at the others.

I think I can see the problem here: when you walk up to a group- you address the group, not just one person in it- that's rude and (as you point out) awkward. What message does it send a girl when you walk straight up and ask her out without knowing anything about her yet, and ignoring all her friends? Not good.

You just need to walk up and be friendly to all of them. Show you can talk/joke with a few at a time, then keep doing that while you flirt with the one you like. If you can show you can get along with her friends, you'll have a much higher chance of her having interest in you too.

You change meaning of the statement, then proceed to argue with yourself in the bubble you created. If you feel compelled to rephrase someone's position in order to be able to criticize it than you have no arguments worth showing. When you build your position in contrast to your own misrepresentation of ones position, which you blatantly do, you have no honest position of your own (since you did neither present your own arguments to back yours nor had any counterpoints to position presented - just keep on hitting on the strawman).

What did I change? Are these not your posts? Where did I strawman you?

Single bolded snippet. You were told 3 times already this is not the case. Initial proposition was not phrased this way. It had a precaution included, that it is deliberate ad absurdum example to showcase the notion. You were given more detailes to understand it: mutual trust, mutual understanding which requires considerable ammount of time to be built and tested between people.
Yet you still keep on hiding behind the strawman you errected around it and argue with yourself like a madman.

Where did I strawman you?

If you didn't want me to comment, why write such an example? What other examples did you give me to base your argument on? That is the only example of a friend, to you that you gave. You didn't even make it a vague idea of what a friend meand to you.

You said; "If anything its about who exactly someone considers 'a friend'.
To me it would be someone (I put it deliberetly into extreme) I can go to and say We need to go now, I need money and we have to off few people. No time to explain. Friend answers ok, lets go. Building such trust and blood line like bonds and mutual understanding takes decades (rightfully so too) and there are very few people who will go the full way with you."

How else are people supposed to assume what you meant? What part of my reply was strawmanning you? How else should people read that?

Because I had the insinuation you meant you could rely on someone going that far. So I addressed that point.

As I said in initial reply just stop it. Or add something intellectually honest, if you have anything to say.

How about outlying what you consider to be 'strawmanning', first? Like, show me where. Or are you going to keep pushing this angle that I somehow misquoted you? After all... so far I'm the only one in good faith to quote directly and query your actual words ... not just delete them and pretend like I did something wrong.

Quit being dishonest and paranoid. Just read everything, from start. I did not delete anything. I did clarify which parts you misrepresent. You just doubled down on that, so what's the point?
You fail to address anything, first you rephrase it, then you argue with it. At least at first you were using terms that indicated you have no idea and were guessing, which is why I let that slide initially. But you just went down to be all out obnoxious. If you can't make any valid honest argument, I'm done wasting my time with you.

I'm also starting to notice a distinct lack of pointing out where the strawman was. It's a simple request. Give him the 'I'm done wasting my time with you' line if you like. Just know that if you leave now- you lose the debate. Completely and utterly forever. I don't even care about this debate and even I can see that clear as day.

Just show him his strawman already.