22 ms·

How to make a friend fast

• threepipeproblm 9y ago
  Hmm, I guess 'extrovert' is an acceptable spelling nowadays, even though it's the wrong Latin root.
  • amelius 9y ago
    What is the correct spelling?
    • threepipeproblm 9y ago
      Eventually the correct spelling is driven by usage, and 'extrovert' is currently listed in dictionaries so... it's correct. Historically the term was 'extravert' in psych literature. I feel like more technical usage probably still leans that way.
      • Bakary 9y ago
        The matching vowels make it a better spelling.
        • pbhjpbhj 9y ago
          Do you mean matching each other or matching pronounciation?
    • Fezzik 9y ago
      Extravert. Extra- meaning out of; outside.
      • tripa 9y ago
        As compared to "introvert"?
        • raattgift 9y ago
          Yes, intro- is a Latin prefix meaning "to the inside" while extra- means "to the outside". The "-vert" is from the Latin verb "vertere", meaning "to turn". Adding Latin prefixes to "vertere" leads to such words as "to avert" (a- from Latin "ab-", meaning "from"), "to evert" (from "ex-" which means "out"; compare "extra-" above), "to invert" (from "in-" meaning "into"; compare "intro-" above); "reverse" (an adjective meaning 'opposite' from "re-" meaning "back"); "transverse" (an adjective meaning 'crosswise' from "trans-" meaning "across"); and so forth. It's useful to compare "in-" vs "intro-" and "ex-" vs "extra-". The "-tra-" and "-tro-" infixes are essentially the same, but Latin writers and speakers inflected them historically. English inherited this in such words as "introduction", "extradition", "introspection", "extraordinary", and "extravagant". Finally in modern biological and medicinal jargon it is common to use "intra-" (with an "a") as "within": "intracellular" (within cells; compare with "intercellular", "between cells"), "intradural" (within the dura mater in the spinal cord), "intramolecular" (e.g. internal forces holding together the shape of a molecule, or the atoms a molecule comprises), and so forth. Outside those technical settings, "intra-" is exceedingly rare. One example is "intramural" ("within the walls", usually used to describe a competition between different teams of students at a single school, however the word has use in medicine as well, the walls being those of a cell, blood vessel, or other hollow organ, and the medical use likely came first).
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  • pepve 9y ago
    Both "extrovert" and "extravert" are correct. Contemporary language use does not always care about latin, however sorry I am for that. But the author of this post goes even further, and uses both spellings in the same sentence! In extravert-introvert pairs, extroverts report on greater closeness than introverts That can't be right...
    • threepipeproblm 9y ago
      Okay I did some digging Google n-grams isn't all that sympathetic to my account, in showing a long history for 'extrovert' and suggests 'extravert' is actively dying out. But the history may not go back far enough: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-difference-between-extraversion-and-extroversion/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/beautiful-minds/the-dif... 'Folklore has it that when Carl Jung was once asked which was the correct spelling—ExtrAvert or ExtrOvert—Jung's secretary wrote back something like, "Dr. Jung says it's ExtrAverted, because ExtrOverted is just bad latin."' [...] 'According to the Oxford English Dictionary, "The original spelling 'Extravert' is now rare in general use but is found in technical use in psychology." That's correct. If you look at scientific journal articles, virtually every paper uses the spelling ExtrAvert.'
    • jaggederest 9y ago
      I believe in this case spelling is mimicking pronunciation. In my accent, at least, I pronounce the phrase 'extr_vert-introvert' with an open A, contrasting to the pursed O of introvert. But if I say the word 'extr_verts', by itself, I pronounce it with an O, identical to 'introvert'. It's difficult because for me, at least, in my accent, both are degrading to an unstressed vowel anyway, so it's a fine gradation.
    • 35bge57dtjku 9y ago
      Is intravert correct? I have to know if it's that symmetrical.
      • threepipeproblm 9y ago
        No, 'intravert' is not correct AFAIK
  • mmmpop 9y ago
    In English, spelling is so seemingly arbitrary at times that I just gave up and quit caring so much. Judgment? Judgement? Who cares?! I won't budge on my thoughts on the importance of proper grammar though.
    • collyw 9y ago
      Grammar pedants are the worst. It generally isn't very important if people understand what is being said. There are a few edge cases, but in general its pretty obvious.
      • qb45 9y ago
        it's
        • collyw 9y ago
          my point exactly
          • qb45 9y ago
            Dunno, when you make egregious errors like that we can't help understanding not only what you meant but also some things you likely didn't mean.
            • mmmpop 9y ago
              It's been pointed out to me lately that "prescriptive grammar" is apparently classist/racist, which is strange considering I grew up dirt poor in Appalachia but still bothered to learn the difference in "who" and "whom". In languages like French it's a crucial understanding but English got lazy and for whatever reason, direct object pronouns are a tripping point for many students of a foreign language. Astounding.
              • qb45 9y ago
                You must be new to this planet. It surely is. Caring about language (caring about anything, really) is an honest signal of status, whether you like it or not. Inevitably, some people will try to slave-moralize it away. If some social/ethnic/sex/... minority with inferiority complexes jumps on this bandwagon, suddenly you may find yourself caring about a thing whose ignorance some social scientists somewhere have found to be correlated with holy cows. Proposed solution: stop caring about everything besides making all people feel good about themselves.
• MoeSattler 9y ago
  I wonder how things will play out once AI picks up on these kind of algorithms.
• enraged_camel 9y ago
  After a two year period of watching my boss interact with people, I can confirm that this method works extremely well. He is a "natural", in the sense that he can form close bonds with people incredibly quickly. At first I thought he was using some sort of secret strategy, but after a while I noticed that he was simply sharing personal details about himself (which the article refers to as "self-disclosure") without being prompted, which encourages, and in fact compels, the other side to reciprocate. Here is an example conference call conversation from two weeks ago, in fact, in which we were chatting with a potential client to schedule a meeting. Bob is my boss: -- Bob: Okay. Let's have an in-person meeting next week. What day works best for you? Client: How about Thursday at 2? Bob: Sounds great. You know, I'm glad you didn't say Wednesday because I have to be with my two little girls that day, and I definitely could not miss that. They mean the world to me. Client: Oh yeah, I understand. In fact I can relate... I have a daughter myself! -- And then when we actually met in person this past Thursday, the topic of their daughters was a natural conversation point. In contrast, I tend to be fairly reserved when it comes to sharing personal info. I like to stay on topic and dislike what I perceive as derails. The above conversation for me would have gone like this: -- Me: Okay. Let's have an in-person meeting next week. What day works best for you? Client: How about Thursday? Me: Sounds great. See you on Thursday at 2 PM. -- Similar, but also very different.
  • mettamage 9y ago
    After having read about self-disclosure I started doing this and never looked back. Also I forgot that I had it from reading a psychology experiment. I've learned that it mostly works. In some cases though people see you as someone who doesn't always say something relevant. What also works (more specifically) is: you share a certain secret about you, and if that person has a similar secret you get to hear it as well. At one night, I was with a traveler and we were both in a country we both didn't live in. We self-disclosed quite a bit and then agreed to tell each other every juicy detail of our lives without ever seeing each other again. We poured our hearts out to each other and we told each other all kinds of secrets that we told no one else. I learned a lot about life that night :) Self-disclosure is awesome. You give people the opportunity to relate back. And people, in general, are nice.
• pasbesoin 9y ago
  Here's the paper cited in the lower left corner of the graphic (and in the text above, I now see): https://psychodramaaustralia.edu.au/sites/default/files/falling_in_love-aron.pdf https://psychodramaaustralia.edu.au/sites/default/files/fall... which only caught my eye because of the "A. Aron" author. I'm almost certain this is the husband of Elaine Aron, who launched the identification, qualifier, and description of the "Highly Sensitive Person" (HSP). http://hsperson.com/ http://hsperson.com/ Arthur's paper is dated 1997, while Elaine's first book on the HSP type was published in 1996. Which I find to be an interesting correlation in time. More recently, Elaine has (in my limited knowledge) been focusing on the concept of "ranking and [or, versus] linking". https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/attending-the-undervalued-self/201001/ranking-and-linking-better-and-worse https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/attending-the-undervalu... The OP topic here reminds me somewhat of her perspective on linking.
  • pravda 9y ago
    > http://hsperson.com/ http://hsperson.com/ So I went there, and read the 8 bullet points under "Is this you?" and then I thought, well yeah, that applies to everyone! Here's one: "Do you get rattled when you have a lot to do in a short amount of time?" That's a "Barnum Statement" [1] [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect#.22Barnum_statements.22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect#.22Barnum_statem...
• Aron 9y ago
  I can't help but note that A. Aron was the lead writer. You done messed up!
  • wenc 9y ago
    Good one. Not many people are going to get this joke, Key and Peele fan. :)
    • Aron 9y ago
      yes, and I suppose it should be mentioned I have no relation to the author. Thanks weeantsy!
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    • throwanem 9y ago
      All of us named Aaron will, though. For those who aren't, or are and somehow haven't yet had this pointed out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd7FixvoKBw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd7FixvoKBw
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  • rdiddly 9y ago
    I am for real. I am for real.
    • mjklin 9y ago
      Insubordinate. And churlish.
• Animats 9y ago
  That reads like the instructions on pick-up artist forums.
  • teirce 9y ago
    Really? Does it? "Find a person, learn about each other's personal lives, gradually escalate," sounds like some 'the red-pill' nonsense to you?
    • kristofferR 9y ago
      The parent comment said nothing about neither the red pill or nonsense.
    • fragmede 9y ago
      That phrase is easily modified to take on a darker tone: "find a person, learn about each other's personal lives, gradually escalate to sleeping with them" makes me cautious. The very notion that it's possible for one person to engineer closeness has echoes within the pickup artist community, so it's worth unpacking the differences. If one person has zero interest in the other person past as a means to a very specific end (sex), and is wholly untruthful about that, then it veers away from scientific study of friendship and closeness. Taking it a step further: "find a person, learn about their personal life, exploit their weaknesses, escalate to sleeping with them" is definitely red-pill territory, and while it might be unfair to judge the original phrase after being modified, the only difference is the knowledge and intentions of one party within an unchanged process. "Learning about each other's personal lives" has a strong assumption that the stories themselves are truthful and without pretense past a socially-acceptable normal level as human beings.
      • pensast 9y ago
        Interest depends on context. Just because someone isn't interested in someone at first, doesn't mean they won't be after meeting them again. Would you say the same thing about introducing people to food? I have a friend that hates steak because every time he had it, it was cooked well done. It wasn't until I took to to a good steak place that he completely changed his mind. Did I manipulate him? Or just show him another way?
• divbit_m 9y ago
  Added to my daily flash cards
  • harry8 9y ago
    Interesting. How are you using flash cards in this sense, can you provide some more details please?
    • divbit_m 9y ago
      The main point is to not let myself be basically formed by (just) whatever I see on internet / tv / reddit / hackernews / etc. but also what I personally find valuable to increase / decrease myself on that.
  • hliyan 9y ago
    Could you mention your flash card app/service?
    • divbit_m 9y ago
      I did have my own software that I wrote, but due to wanting to have time to do other things, rather than make a flashcard software, I've just been using anki
• donretag 9y ago
  "Low ego-identity makes same-sex pairs closer, high ego-identity makes cross-sex pairs closer" Perhaps this statement is true, but is the end goal for both parties the same? For some reason, I find myself befriending mainly females (I am male). Yes, I have a high ego. However, I can never tell if the other person is interested in a friendship or something more. I always want to put them in the friend zone, but I have awkward situations in the recent past where these friends have either made subtle and not-so subtle advances. I am not interested in anything more than friendship. I do not want to lead anyone on. So yes, perhaps that pairing works well, but is friendship the goal? In addition, males tend to bond during "experiences", so what I have been seeking as of late is more male friendships. Other males are more inclined to go on multi-day backpacking adventures. According to this study, males with low-ego are likely to become friends, but I seek high ego/high energy friends.
  • fl0wenol 9y ago
    Don't bother. You aren't going to enjoy yourself as much long term by surrounding yourself with high-ego people; there'll be too much needless conflict and it won't be worth the emotional effort after the fact. Instead, go for high energy but less ego. At the start deflate your own for their benefit, let your guard down; essentially "putting yourself out". Come down to their level for the first few outings. Once you have their trust you can back off (slowly) so you don't seem fake or patronizing; if they say something or notice a change in their behavior be honest with them: explain how it's been difficult to make friends with shared interests. Hopefully they will trust you enough to look past any perceived slight and continue the friendship. You may still need to be conscious of your ego or energy level if there's a big group disparity, you don't want to be singled out because they perceive you as difficult and them have the rest bond over that.
    • LoSboccacc 9y ago
      > being difficult and have the group bond over that. or, the sociopath way, which is even faster: identify the group difficult subject and join the pileup on it without adding new opinions but just reflecting and circulating those of others in the group.
• yjlim5 9y ago
  Interesting how this psychology paper showed up in the context of "making a friend." I had only known of this study as a way of creating romantic relationship, through a NYT Modern Love piece "To Fall in Love With Anyone, Do this." The method is hardly fast though - it requires two people to set aside a good chunk of time in a quiet setting to fully experience the gradual escalation of self-disclosure. When trying out this method in real life, what about the fact that you chose that one person to try this with? The reasons behind that choice would contribute much a successful result of this method but still left unexplained.
  • jackvalentine 9y ago
    > The method is hardly fast though A common misconception. The root of the phrase "fast friends" is actually steadfast friends. Meaning friends with a strong bond and sense of duty towards each other. I too had only heard of this study in terms of the romantic partner thing... I guess it makes sense to apply to any friendship. Edit: The above is all lies! Well, except the meaning. The phoney etymology is lies. See below.
    • jacobolus 9y ago
      I don’t think it was ever common for people to literally use the phrase “steadfast friends”. The word “fast” by itself meant (and still means sometimes) something like steady or firmly stuck. So “fast friends” per se was always a perfectly fine phrase. It hasn’t been shortened from some other form. People trying to explain the origin of the phrase “fast friends” point to the word “steadfast” as an example of where this sense of fast persists. You might also notice the same meaning in our words fasten, colorfast, etc.
      • jackvalentine 9y ago
        So, my argument was it was a root, not a commonly used word. I was wrong anyway so it's irrelevant. Having actually looked in to this now with a bit more detail than "google it to check your understanding and look at the first result": It appears you're right, and "fast" is derived from faest while steadfast is a combination of steade and... fast. Fast friends is a perfectly cromulent phrase :)
• phaed 9y ago
  I think I might have permanently damaged my vision with that #FFF on #000 color scheme. I still see text floating in the air.
  • niclupien 9y ago
    I use Materialistic HN reader for Android and I just turn on readability.
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  • maxerickson 9y ago
    Try relaxing.
    • flycaliguy 9y ago
      Still a poor colour combo
  • thesmallestcat 9y ago
    Did you never use the internet in the 90s?
  • coldpie 9y ago
    What, really? I'm relieved it's not the #EEE on #FFF combo that seems so popular these days.
    • phaed 9y ago
      Give me #CCC on #222 any day.
  • dhp1161 9y ago
    fuck that color scheme holy
  • dhp1161 9y ago
    fuck that color scheme holy
• jodrellblank 9y ago
  Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality ( http://www.hpmor.com http://www.hpmor.com ), Chapter 7: """Draco giggled. "Yeah, right. Anyway... to answer what you asked..." Draco took a deep breath, and his face turned serious. "Father once missed a Wizengamot vote for me. I was on a broom and I fell off and broke a lot of ribs. It really hurt. I'd never hurt that much before and I thought I was going to die. So Father missed this really important vote, because he was there by my bed at St. Mungo's, holding my hands and promising me that I was going to be okay." Harry glanced away uncomfortably, then, with an effort, forced himself to look back at Draco. "Why are you telling me that? It seems sort of... private..." Draco gave Harry a serious look. "One of my tutors once said that people form close friendships by knowing private things about each other, and the reason most people don't make close friends is because they're too embarrassed to share anything really important about themselves." Draco turned his palms out invitingly. "Your turn?""""
  • rasz 9y ago
    First thing that came to my head! Got linked this fanfic on hackaday ~5 days ago and could not stop reading despite not being a Potter fan.
• mcguire 9y ago
  "These manipulative geniuses chose a handful of university-level psychology classes early in the semester, divided the student volunteers (who didn't know each other) in pairs, and asked them to engage in an exercise designed to increase their closeness." Psychology is the study of the psychology of psychology undergraduates. "Those with dismissive-avoidant personalities didn't get as close "The dismissive-avoidant is one of the attachment types in the study of social attachment in adults. It pertains to people who feel more comfortable without close social relationships, highly value their independence, they suppress and hide their feelings, and deal with rejection by distancing themselves from its source. The other personality types in adult attachments include secure, and two other insecure types: anxious-preoccupied and fearful-avoidant. These three personality types all reported on a higher (and similar) level of closeness achieved than the dismissive-avoidants." Well, that lets me out, then.
  • Xcelerate 9y ago
    > The dismissive-avoidant is one of the attachment types in the study of social attachment in adults. I've always wondered whether attachment style is not so much a function of the individual, but a function of the interaction between two individuals, where each party plays a role. I can think of many people that I am "secure" with, and others who I am "avoidant" with.
  • deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
• SaintGhurka 9y ago
  You can see this played out every day in designated smoking areas. I've observed smokers tend to become friends quickly. As smoking is increasingly frowned upon, everybody who shows up in the smoking area is sort of opening up and sharing a weakness with the other smokers just by being there.
  • RhysU 9y ago
    It existed before the non-smokers called it a weakness. It's called assuming you have something in common with your fellow man, and being willing to make small talk under only that pretense. Source: two weeks into quitting.
    • tucaz 9y ago
      I'm 78 days and 3 hours into it. There's not a day where I don't miss it, but there are no more cravings at this point. Just the good memories :P Stay strong!
      • rapind 9y ago
        Almost 7 years. You won't think about it unless you smell it... then you miss it a bit, but just a bit. You might put on a few pounds too as you start to actually taste food.
        • fattire 9y ago
          >You might put on a few pounds too as you start to actually taste food. TL;DR How to Make a Friend Fast -- (1) smoke with them, so when they quit and need to drop a few pounds (2) they'll start fasting.
        • Fuzzwah 9y ago
          > unless you smell it... then you miss it a bit I had the opposite response, a while after I quit I found the smell of smoking absolutely repellent.
    • Yhippa 9y ago
• kharms 9y ago
  Does anyone know what is meant by "high ego identities" and "low ego identities?"
  • abstractbeliefs 9y ago
    The important bit is the bit in between, in parentheses: "ego affects comfort level". Are you feeling big and developed enough to talk to someone of the opposite sex? While ideally it would make no difference, it's certainly the truth that many of us are happier to engage socially with those of the same sex than those who aren't.
    • shmerl 9y ago
      I think they mix up ego with confidence, Those aren't the same thing at all.
  • Danihan 9y ago
    I was wondering this too. I'm pretty sure I have both. For instance, I fundamentally think I'm pretty great when compared to any "average person." And even most "high-functioning" people. However, I realize that talent is essentially meaningless in the grand scheme of things without tons of social proof you're always perceived as a nobody, so I still work my ass off and try not to let my own aptitude go to my head. Is that high-ego or low-ego?
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
  • sideshowb 9y ago
    This question has bothered me for a long time! As far as I can tell there are a whole bunch of different things people mean by 'ego' and without an agreed upon way to measure it, it's hard to know whether any two people are really talking about the same thing.
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
• Mz 9y ago
  Does that mean that some close, naturally-forming relationships don't get nurtured as lovingly as was achieved in a 45-minute conversation? As one more random data point: I am a chatty extravert. Sometimes people imagine they are close to me when they are not.
  • slackingoff2017 9y ago
    > Sometimes people imagine they are close to me when they are not. Ah yes, my greatest fear interacting with people confirmed.
    • Mz 9y ago
      You fear people will imagine you are close? Or you fear people won't feel close to you when you feel close?
      • mistermann 9y ago
        Being unable to tell the difference between someone that likes you versus someone who is just being polite, and if you consider them a "friend" and act "accordingly" they would consider you a socially incompetent weirdo.
        • xapata 9y ago
          > consider you ... weirdo Unlikely. After all, they'd expect you to act the same way as them -- friendly despite not being a friend.
          • icebraining 9y ago
            I think the idea is that you consider that friendly conversation as a start of a friendship whereas the other person doesn't, so it might be awkward when you call them up for a beer or something.
            • 9y ago
• CiPHPerCoder 9y ago
  The flowchart in the beginning is very heteronormative. :(
  • mmmpop 9y ago
    Yeah I'm not sure that's the best way to go about it. Gender plays little-to-no role in being friends with someone. I'm too old to let sexual whatever get in the way (and too committed to the one person that seems to love me just as I am).
    • pbhjpbhj 9y ago
      Sex [noun] absolutely plays a role in friendship. The intimacy of sexual relationship is a pertinent difference to a relationship the possibility of which changes the way people interact across the sexes. It may not be (as) pertinent to those who're bisexual/asexual/whatever. You appear to intimate that if you were younger and unattached sex would pay a role, but that at odds with your 2nd sentence. Perhaps you could expand on your reasoning?
• cs2818 9y ago
  Maybe it's because I find this research area intriguing, but I did not think that this summary adequately captured the efforts of the original paper [0]. I think it was unfortunate that this piece did not begin by conveying that the original study's authors specifically state their goal "was to develop a temporary feeling of closeness, not an actual ongoing relationship". Additionally, like many social psychology studies the nuances of the design and methodology are extremely valuable, yet this piece deems them as "dry" and mostly "devoid of enthusiasm". Anyone who has contributed to the design of substantial social psychology studies can tell you just how carefully each of these details is considered in design, implementation, and analysis. The original article [0] is full of detail, context, and discussion, and is definitely worth a read. [0] https://psychodramaaustralia.edu.au/sites/default/files/falling_in_love-aron.pdf https://psychodramaaustralia.edu.au/sites/default/files/fall...
  • trevyn 9y ago
    Thanks for the link. I was wondering what was going on with the ego/gender split: "This pattern is consistent with Erikson's idea that low ego-identity individuals fear cross-sex intimacy in which they might lose their identity and thus get close only if they feel they can protect themselves from too much intimacy. For the same-sex pairings in the 45-min classroom version, the opposite interaction was found -- consistent with Erikson's idea that same-sex friendships for those who have not developed ego identity serve as identity supports, but for those who have developed an identity, they serve as sources of undesired conformity that threatens one's individuated identity."
  • edraferi 9y ago
    > this piece did not begin by conveying that the original study's authors specifically state their goal "was to develop a temporary feeling of closeness, not an actual ongoing relationship". The post does say this in the second paragraph: Strangers... [report] a substantial amount of closeness in their relationship after a guided 45-minute conversation. But it's a far stretch to say that such an accomplishment truly creates reliably long-lasting relationships, regardless of the immense immediate effect.
  • neuroticfish 9y ago
• flyGuyOnTheSly 9y ago
  Makes enough sense to me... If you don't know anything about anybody... like the homeless man rummaging through my recycling bin right now looking for bottles... It's easy to look down on them or just write them off. But if a neighbour told me anything about that same man... perhaps that he lost his job last year and thus just tries to supplement his income by picking up bottles in his spare time... I would feel immense sorrow even just looking at that man (who is still a stranger to me). Enough so that I would probably offer him some extra cash and a bite to eat if I had it. I witnessed a man break into my neighbor's house the other day... which enraged me at first (what if it were my house?!) but when I saw the man who did it... I immediately felt sorry for him. This was a desperate, dirty, homeless man with a smile on his face as the police dragged him away. He was probably just looking for some shelter to sleep that night. The house that he "broke into" did admittedly look abandoned. And I found myself trying to justify the reasons that he might have tried to break into the house, rather than hating him silently. All because I got a look at him.
  • jondubois 9y ago
    Lack of resources can make the kindest, most altruistic person behave in extremely ugly, selfish ways. You don't know who someone is until you see them go through poverty. Also, you don't know who you are yourself until you experience that terrible feeling of scarcity. For me, greed is the worst human attribute. When I see rich people being greedy, I find it hard to imagine how much worse they would be as human beings if they were poor.
    • coldtea 9y ago
      >You don't know who someone is until you see them go through poverty. The inverse is also true: you don't know who someone is until a) they get rich and/or powerful (and change), b) you go to poverty (and e.g. they prove to be only "fair weather friends"). And I would just more harshly someone who reveals themselves to do bad things or be a bad friend when they get rich or when you get poor, than someone doing bad stuff when THEY get poor. Because desperation can force one to do things they don't want or like (like borrow money and not give it back or even steal), but the others don't have that excuse.
• tejasv 9y ago
  lock them up and dont give them any food
• krick 9y ago
  That would be absolutely unreadable if not for firefox "Reader View" feature. Picture is still unreadable, of course.
• suneilp 9y ago
  This is fascinating. I have for a long time been the introverted socially incompetent and weird (partially) one. A lot of that has changed for me recently. Going to Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu for a year now and doing more yoga has really helped me to figure out a lot of traumatic issues from the past, especially with racism during childhood. It's really reduced my fear of socializing with people. I'm now somewhere in between extrovert and introvert and I've noticed that self-disclosure happens a lot more and interactions have improved with strangers. Even small talk happens now and then. I've always hated small talk. I don't like the extrovert/introvert/attachment type labelling though. Reading on them or discussing them with others has some kind of effect of boxing you in to self-limiting thought patterns. It can be a good starting point to figure things out, but I implore people to not think you're stuck in your ways.
  • nikofeyn 9y ago
    i just want to point out the danger of associating introversion with social incompetence because the association is a poorly realized stereotype. it is entirely possible and not uncommon for an introvert to be highly socially competent. introversion and extroversion are more descriptors of how one handles mental energy than ratings of social competence and degrees of shyness. for example, i can be very social and outgoing at parties, but they completely exhaust me, and i don't like them. i am introverted because i prefer to direct my mental energy in a more inward, reflective way, and any process that impedes that (e.g., a party) can be very exhausting. it has little to do with how well i can handle myself socially.
    • icebraining 9y ago
      A good example is Audrey Hepburn. Movie star, UNICEF Ambassador, yet she said, “I have to be alone very often. I'd be quite happy if I spent from Saturday night until Monday morning alone in my apartment. That's how I refuel."
  • themodelplumber 9y ago
    The current thinking among Jungian type professionals is that I/E labels can be misleading because everyone has access to, and opportunities to develop, both introverted and extraverted aspects. However this kind of change comes at the cost of some mental unrest, and because "home base" consists of two paired E&I attitudes each in one of four functions, we are advised to leverage those two first. Introversion is my dominant attitude, but I can pair a strong extraverted thinking function (my #2) with that to overcome problems that may require an extensive, as opposed to intensive, approach. So Jung might call me an I, but I'm well-advised not to imbalance myself by resting all my weight on it. Also, extraverted thinking has relatively little association with sociality even though it is extraverted, but it can sure help me research ways to develop healthy relationships. HN is also in general a highly attractive source of information for those who naturally value extraverted thinking, or "facts concerning externalities". It makes sense that we'd eventually work around to blind spots like relationships here. :-)
• iosDrone 9y ago
  Things like this are why people laugh at Silicon Valley, this is a very aspie/robotic approach to this topic.
  • Bakary 9y ago
    What's interesting to note is that no matter how you dress it up, human beings are indeed biological machines and respond in surprisingly predictable ways. The companies which specialize in data gathering and analysis are increasingly able to corroborate this observation with concrete examples and algorithms. It's of course a tautology, but "normal" social interactions are just that: a set of arbitrary norms. Normal people are just as robotic as aspies in the sense that they mechanically respond to stimulus, except that we've collectively agreed on a delineation between what is considered robotic and what isn't. It sounds abstract but you can immediately understand the idea simply by describing human behavior in literal terms and focus on the feeling of unease you experience from doing so. Besides, if people manage to build strong connections with the scientific method, is that really so bad?
    • dropit_sphere 9y ago
      The thing that freaks us out about statements like "Normal human behavior is surprisingly robotic" is that they carry with them the idea that human behavior can be hacked. But that's just a question of competence. I mean, are we talking Roomba-robotic, or HK-47 robotic(without the bloodlust)? Practically, as soon as someone starts "hacking" social norms---most often with either sales or scams in mind---then the norms adjust. That's why city folk are more standoffish than country folk, why your inbox is full and mostly unread, and why women at bars are closed-off. I mean, OK, we're robots. But we're pretty good robots.
    • seppin 9y ago
      > What's interesting to note is that no matter how you dress it up, human beings are indeed biological machines and respond in surprisingly predictable ways. Is that why people that use a process to try and explain what people will do are nearly always wrong? Economics, politics, etc. People do respond to basic triggers of biology, but we have very little understanding of these trigger and where they originate from.
• k__ 9y ago
  "Low ego-identity makes same-sex pairs closer, high ego-identity makes cross-sex pairs closer" Can confirm. Over the years I minimised the amount of same sex friends in my life dramatically.
• theprop 9y ago
  What were the gradually escalating intimate questions asked?
• markatkinson 9y ago
  I read this as how to convince a friend to start intermittent fasting.
• zumu 9y ago
  Are there really 'high-ego'/'low-ego' individuals? Is it not a spectrum over time? Is it not controllable to some degree? How is this different than toning down the ego a notch when trying to make platonic friends, while trying to be confident when looking to make romantic partners?
  • coldtea 9y ago
    >Are there really 'high-ego'/'low-ego' individuals? Is it not a spectrum over time? Is it not controllable to some degree? Obviously it's a kind of a spectrum, but at the same time, there definitely also are low ego and high ego individuals, whose ego, even if their fluctuates, it remains high or low relative to the average person.
• Steeeve 9y ago
  Oh come on. It's not like anyone needs a lesson in these kinds of things. <bookmarks page>
• Cephlin 9y ago
  Does this person write their n's and m's upside down? I can barely read their handwriting, it's really odd... Does it say freud? I assume it's meant to say friend... Does it say watters? I'm assuming it's trying to say matters? It took me about a minute or two to deduce these meanings though...
• hannob 9y ago
  Word of warning: This is a social psychology study from 1997. There's been a lot of evidence lately that social psychology the way it's been done in the past is a huge mess and calling it pseudoscience isn't that far off. The field is only at the beginning of cleaning up that mess. Any study that old that hasn't been replicated with rigorous scientific standards is about as valuable as a magazine horoscope.
  • perseusprime11 9y ago
    +1. Social Psychology is also completely different than 1997. Internet and Mobile have made people less social and hard to friend.
  • gaspoda 9y ago
    Hi, can you point us to some up to date research ?
• anon_chrstian 9y ago
  Visit your baptist church, meet faithful people.
• rodrigosetti 9y ago
  I clicked thinking this was about making a friend go without eating
  • colecut 9y ago
    same!
• howfun 9y ago
  What software was used to make this nice diagram?
• DustinOfDenver 9y ago
  White letters on black background... my eyes are still seeing those letters. Is it just me?
• megamindbrian 9y ago
  This reminds me of that scene in Silicon Valley where Bertram tells Dinesh he can make a friend just as good as his friend. Someone told me a while ago if you want to have a personal connection you have to be personable yourself and tell someone something honest and truthful. I've had much better luck since then. The middle box on this diagram is good advice.
• turc1656 9y ago
  Not sure I agree that "agreement on important issues" should be on the "things that don't matter" section. I know that stuff in particular matters big time to me, even just for friends. My closest friends tend to see the world very similarly to me than people I am much less close with. In fact, more often than not I end up pruning out the people that think drastically differently than I do. Most of the time this just happens naturally because I tend to be more wary about what I say and talk about once I know someone is extremely different than me. My spidey sense puts me on high alert and I basically enter a super-PC, "what every word that comes out of your mouth" mode. Occasionally, I deliberately reduce interactions and they go from being a close friend to being just a casual friend or acquaintance.
  • BenJahman 9y ago
    It seems you didn't wait social networks to live in a bubble ;)
    • aperrien 9y ago
      Or living a life with interpersonal conflicts over topics is not something that they enjoy?
• nthcolumn 9y ago
  Steal his lunch?
  • nthcolumn 9y ago
    sic 'How to make a friend quickly'.
  • pbhjpbhj 9y ago
    I know you're being humorous but it might work - creates a situation in which you can console them, then offer help. Maybe from the CIA playbook of "creating a quick connection"?
• Dove 9y ago
  Personally, I find the recipe of kindness, honesty, laughter, generosity, loyalty, plus a bit of magic to be both practically effective and somewhat philosophically profound.
• colecut 9y ago
  I have seen so much information on the benefits of intermittent fasting lately, I interpreted this headline as "How to stop a friend from eating" =)
• senthil_rajasek 9y ago
  Let me hazard a guess, study done mostly with American subjects and majority of them being white. I would love to see a qualifier like "How to make a friend fast in America?"
  • frebord 9y ago
    Go get butt hurt somewhere else. You have no idea whether that is true so why can't you leave your mouth shut and enjoy the potential implications of the study.
    • senthil_rajasek 9y ago
      The implications of the study are useful only in certain contexts, it is not universal. You can't talk about your intimate feelings to a stranger of the opposite sex in Saudi Arabia, for example.
• adrianveidt 9y ago
  I'd add one more question under Closeness-Generating Procedure: “What important truth do very few people agree with you on?”
• highprofit 9y ago
  the author fails to mention that certain many things need to be in place first before you even have the first interaction that leads to potential close friendship...first impression elements such as streotype, prejudice, culture, assumptions, expectations, attraction, etc are all split second decisions we make that can affect how the interaction will go or if there is ever going to be interaction to begin with...the article completely ignores these aspects which are important specially in diverse multi cultural envrionments