I learned this the hard way not too long ago when someone informed me that a number of people I'd worked with who I'd thought of as friends just really disliked me. It hit hard at first because I thought of them as friends- 'work friends' at the very least, and made me start questioning other people that I thought of as friends.<p>After letting my mind spin in a tight loop about it for a while I decided that really it doesn't matter that much, because I'm happier liking people, and I can like someone and be friendly even irrespective of if they like me or not. Of course I'm not going to push my company on people who are clear that they don't want it, but it doesn't really do any good to second guess who actually cares for me and who is being polite.
The article cites a study from a business management class of 84 people.<p>That seems like quite a small sample, and I wouldn't expect business management students to be representative of the population as a whole.<p>It might still be true, but it's probably a bit early to write off all of your perceived friends as shallow fakes.
> “There is a limited amount of time and emotional capital we can distribute, so we only have five slots for the most intense type of relationship,” Mr. Dunbar said. “People may say they have more than five but you can be pretty sure they are not high-quality friendships.”<p>This was the part I found most interesting. They describe people you're in touch with daily or weekly as being in the "close friends" category.<p>Personally, I'm fortunate to have deep, meaningful, long-term friendships with my wife and one other friend, and a few other friends and family members I consider close even if we talk something more like "every couple months" - when we do, it's about important stuff. We freely say that we love each other, we hug, and I feel more relaxed and happy around them.<p>I'm tempted by stuff like being liked on social media, but when I think about it, it's pretty meaningless compared to these few relationships. Given X hours for maintaining friendships, I'd rather have fewer and better.
The article refers to Carnegie's "How to Win Friends and Influence People" in conjunction with "strategic and propagandist" friendships. The book is often referenced in this manner but it's important to note that Carnegie emphasizes one's approach to friendship must be genuine -- anything less rings hollow and is easily spotted as fraud.
As I get older I find I care less and less about whether or not others like me.<p>Now, respect is another matter. If I had to choose, I'd rather be respected than loved.
> The study analyzed friendship ties among 84 subjects (ages 23 to 38) in a business management class<p>I guess we had better draw some general conclusions from such a robust sample then, shall we?
The article dances around, but doesn't really say that people define friendship differently and segment their lives differently.<p>I have professional colleagues whom I consider good friends where we've established level of mutual trust, but our "closeness" is defined by what/where we're going things -- we have a level of trust that is very meaningful, but we mutually "pop" up/down to a higher/lower levels of friendship.
Well according to this article, now that I've moved, all my friends will inevitably become acquaintances. Of course making new true friends is much harder when you're older. Wow, depressing.
This all finally makes sense.<p>So many times I've heard that you're the average of the 5 people you spend the most time with, but then if you suck and go hang out with 5 awesome people all the time, don't you bring down their average?<p>Unless there's some kind of friendship time ponzi scheme where you can spend little time but still be top 5...
I usually have the opposite problem: I'll consider myself a friend of a person, but that person thinks I <i>don't</i> like them. A common side effect of being factual/honest, unfortunately.
I'm old enough now to know what I do to annoy other people. I actively work on those things, so people who _are_ around me at least do not want to run away :)<p>I'm also old enough not to care if someone does not like me. Life is too short to be fake friendly, and some people just do not get along. I'm okay with that.
Perhaps social networking has changed how we define "friend", and some are adopting the new definition faster than others?<p>I have many connections, but very few real friends. I'm totally fulfilled by that though, and can't imagine having enough time (or the desire) to nurture more friendships. But when everyone has 500+ "friends" on Facebook, does 5 no longer seem like a large enough number to tell a researcher?<p>I also don't have any social networking accounts (besides LinkedIn), neither do my "real" friends. This could be because our anti-social(-network) temperaments are a part of what draws us together, but it could also mean that social(-network) butterflies are spreading themselves too thin to keep up with their expanded group of acquaintances.<p>Eh, anecdata, take it for what it is.
Do I Actually Care If My Friends Like Me?<p>I mean, there's plenty about my friends I actively dislike but we have more binding us together than tearing us apart.
Reposted from a different thread on this article:<p>Ugh, this headline asks a question that's not very fun to ponder. Especially considering Betteridge's law [1].<p>When it comes to male friends, I think part of the problem is that men—especially straight men—are bad at/afraid of expressing intimacy in platonic contexts, probably because of social conditioning and subconscious homophobia.<p>When I thought about the answer to the headline's question for my friends, the only "I don't know"s were men. My female friends have made it clear that they value my friendship; most of my male friends haven't, and I think I'm bad at expressing that to anyone of any gender.
Of course, maybe I'm just overgeneralizing my own experiences and/or my female friends are just better friends than my male friends.<p>Either way, good article. A lot of the not-news NYT stuff that gets posted on HN is crap, to be honest. This one really got me thinking and got me to churn out something <i>wayyy</i> more personal than I'd normally ever post here.<p>> Others point to a misunderstanding of the very notion of friendship in an age when “friend” is used as a verb, and social inclusion and exclusion are as easy as a swipe or a tap on a smartphone screen.<p>I realize it's just fluff for the intro of the article, but this is typical kids-today-and-their-loud-music-get-off-my-lawn garbage. Social media does in general make people more aware of more people's lives, but I doubt anyone actually believes that every single one of their Facebook friends is actually their friend.<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...</a>
Anyone I know, I usually refer to them as a "friend" in conversation, whether they are or not. The word "friend" does not mean much to me, considering I'm invariably stabbed in the back if someone becomes "good friends."
The size of the layers described in the article seems correct. The contact frequency as a measure of said friendship is not. My closest friend lives 1800 km away, we are in touch 5 times a year at most and still enjoy it very much, always looking forward to it.
This is a generalization. In Europe, people seem to try harder at friendships. They consider it almost duty to be a good friend to someone. In the US, people are more likely to consider only the "fun" aspect of friendship. If someone is having a tough time, they commensurately go down in the esteem meter.
Sounds like what actually happened was that you friend-zoned them. They loved you, but you didn't reciprocate. Then they hated you. Discovering that, they hurt you. However, you, in turn, just friend-zoned them even more. Savage.
<a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12243680" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12243680</a> posted it last night, good to see it caught some traction.