Comments on Thondom Raughts: Economics of Friendships and Relationships

@jeevanism - http://www.google.com/support/blogger...

2009-07-20T03:04:05.671+05:30

@jeevanism - http://www.google.com/support/blogger/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=55373
If you need professional help you can contact Zyxware ;)

a technical doubt.. how can i merge the blogger bl...

2009-07-15T08:17:37.200+05:30

a technical doubt.. how can i merge the blogger blog with my own domain name .. just like u did .. any options in blogger??

@jeevanism - I was only cross examining you. Guess...

2009-07-04T00:35:03.267+05:30

@jeevanism - I was only cross examining you. Guess you are clear :-)

what is the cost of friendship?? i think u have to...

2009-07-03T17:54:23.839+05:30

what is the cost of friendship?? i think u have to change that question to what is the cost of relationship.?? friendships is one of relationships we make in our life and it is inevitable.. No one can live without friends and no one can live without relationships.

will i die for my friend?? its not a yes/no question...it only depends on the degree of relationship with me and my friend.. die for friendship is die for relationship..
will u die for ur friend ,parents, wwife, lover,children?? these all questions are sinusoidal to the situation and level of degree... i think i am clear..:)

@jeevanism - I didn't quite get that part about yo...

2009-07-03T01:03:12.128+05:30

@jeevanism - I didn't quite get that part about your life being the cost of friendship but not at the cost of survival. Does that mean that you will die for your friends or that you wont?

i dont count every one as my friend, if i count on...

2009-07-02T23:32:13.260+05:30

i dont count every one as my friend, if i count one as my friend , then yes my life is the cost for the friendship but not over riding the first rule of survival..

seems like we gotta make up theory of Friendhsip and Laws of friendfship :)

@ThePupil - I like your line of thought but I thin...

2009-07-01T01:26:27.502+05:30

@ThePupil - I like your line of thought but I think I will answer/debate your questions/points one by one.

1) I agree with you about the statement on absolute truth. My discussion above does not violate the RR theory you mentioned. By attributing reasons to the effects that we see I was not saying that it was the only reason but rather I was trying to establish a correlation with the factors

2) Yes I agree. But it must also be noted that it is not always the maximization of happiness that eventually happens. It is always restricted by restrictions imposed on self by self or by society. For example I know people who are excellent at writing and who enjoy doing that but ended up working in the IT industry. Why? Because they had to take care of their financial needs. On whether these financial needs are actually needs itself is a bigger question that will probably require another post :-).

3) I will contest this point. The rules and customs imposed by the society are more oriented towards establishing comfort/happiness/peace/harmony on average across the population. They may not necessarily mean maximization of individual happiness.

4) Even if you are not able to calculate an exact value, I would still say that you can establish correlations between the parameters. Absolute compartmentalization is not possible given our limited knowledge about human nature. And there will always be a limit on how much we can know about human nature.

@jeevanism - <quote>all kind of relationships we make in this life , are just used for our own individual survival</quote>. I think you cannot state it better than that. Although people would seldom agree to it, this might be the fundamental principle behind decisions and actions made by people.

About the cost of friendship being your life - think about it - does it apply to all of your friends?

Its an interesting issue u raised.. i have thought...

2009-06-30T18:18:40.328+05:30

Its an interesting issue u raised.. i have thought abt the same frequency so many times... Like u classified relations, i would like to classify the friendship itself.. may be there are 3 type of friends.. friend who i just know, just having walking distance in between .. then ,friend who i know very much, very deep and there is not even walking distance between us.. then third kinda friend who is just me, complete and perfect match( it just an utopian concept)..

Now let me fly over your questions..
Cost of friendship..hmm.. for me . i think, its my life..its so easy to make a rival or enemy , but so hard build up a good friendship..and about bearing the friend..a true friend wont be burden to me.( even though i do dig my friends deeply too:P) .. so the limit is just depends on them.. for me, i could bear my friend as long as i can stand upon my legs ..and i expect same from him too. but i wont go to that extend at any cost.

in a wide view, we all , are solitude creatures..all kind of relationship we made in this life , is just used for our own individual survival.. in that angle, every relationship has a limit depends upon the members taking part that relationship..

Some points: 1. There is nothing called absolute ...

2009-06-30T06:42:50.637+05:30

Some points:

1. There is nothing called absolute right. Everything is relative. Plato brought about this idea called "Truth" into formal thought channels. So even educated people tend to think there's one absolute truth. Conflicts happen because of this line of thought. If something as structured as Physics is influenced by relative reality, its only prudent to consider RR in attempts to define something as diverse as human behavior.

2. Every single organism evolves based on their environment. Every person strives for happiness. Everyone tries to get into situations that will make them happy. Their actions on selecting that subset of situations, is based on past experience (negative/positive experience in different situations).

3. Rules/customs in society are appealing only if it leads to those subset of situations that make one happy.

4. Attempts to classify relations into fixed discrete boxes are futile. Relations are essentially a set of emotions you associate with a person/group. Emotions work hand in hand with instincts. Not all emotions survive the test of time. The only question is whether the cumulative effect of all those emotions along the time axis lead to a "happy" situation.

(Aristotle put forth this idea of putting things into discrete boxes. The problem with this approach is that we try to fill in those aspects that arent there in the first place, so that we can satisfy the definition of that box. Logical people like "neat and tidy" elegant definitions. Real life is hardly that. Think about all those little bug fixes that makes a program less elegant but working in real life.)

Thanks Anoop for the post. I too have been thinking of these for some time now.