4 ms·

He didn't realize it would be a problem in the beginning. After that I think he was just afraid to move away from the people he knew. I've thought a lot about

by tsotha 14y ago

He didn't realize it would be a problem in the beginning. After that I think he was just afraid to move away from the people he knew. I've thought a lot about what I would do in that position, and came to the same conclusion you did. The right thing to do probably would have been to move far away, live simply, and take up a hobby so he could meet people on an equal footing. Of course, it's easy to decide how other people can fix their lives :)

adrianbye 14y ago
do you think he had aspergers?
- tsotha 14y ago
  No idea.
- gcr 14y ago
  I'm curious why you ask this question. What would either answer imply? It's going to be hard to fairly tease the effects of having Asperger's syndrome on making friends apart from the effects of wealth, fame, and power.
larrys 14y ago
"move far away, live simply, and take up a hobby" Why not just live among people and make friends with people in the same income bracket or assets or higher?
- glhaynes 14y ago
  I don't suspect the earlier poster meant that the person should move to the wilderness, just far enough away to "make a new start."
- csomar 14y ago
  That's what he said, you simply didn't read to the end so he could meet people on an equal footing.
  - larrys 14y ago
    "you simply didn't read to the end" I did. He said: "The right thing to do probably would have been to move far away, live simply, and take up a hobby so he could meet people on an equal footing." The fact that the above sentence says "live simply" and "take up a hobby" seems to contradict the notion that he should try to take up with people who are equal in wealth which was the issue being discussed. I said "live among people" which is not the same as "move far away" and "live simply" is not the same as "make friends with people in the same income bracket or assets or higher"
    - glhaynes 14y ago
      It's the taking up that's being done on an equal footing (i.e. the friendships are free from the wealth-disparity baggage); it's not that the people have the same amount of wealth.
- tsotha 14y ago
  That's a possibility too. I was thinking it would be more difficult, since he might have run into the whole new rich/old rich thing. He would have been perfectly happy living in a suburban tract home, and that's the type of person he grew up with, so I was thinking that would be the easiest. Besides, you have fewer choices if your pool of potential friends is rich people.
  - larrys 14y ago
    "you have fewer choices if your pool of potential friends is rich people" How many friends does someone need? I don't see any evidence that wealthy people or upper middle class have any problems friend wise. Not only that but nothing prevents them from mingling with anyone even a lower "status" if you want to call it that.
    - zerostar07 14y ago
      How many friends does someone need? About 150: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbars_number http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbars_number But they don't all have to be real friends. The interesting thing about Dunbar's number is that it also suggests that people strive to make these 150 relationships even when there are not enough people around (i.e. that's why some people care for celebrities and forge online relationships when real life friends are not enough)
      - gcr 14y ago
        Dunbar's number is an upper limit. What's the lower limit?
        theorique 14y ago
        From zero to one is a quantum leap - you go from "alone, no one to talk to" to "can talk honestly and frankly with someone". That's the biggest step. Beyond that, of course it enriches your life, but the first friend is the most important.
      - 14y ago
zerostar07 14y ago
Or get a normal day job, even if you don't need it. It provides social comfort. It works.

by tsotha 14y ago

adrianbye 14y ago

do you think he had aspergers?

tsotha 14y ago
No idea.
gcr 14y ago
I'm curious why you ask this question. What would either answer imply? It's going to be hard to fairly tease the effects of having Asperger's syndrome on making friends apart from the effects of wealth, fame, and power.

larrys 14y ago

"move far away, live simply, and take up a hobby" Why not just live among people and make friends with people in the same income bracket or assets or higher?

glhaynes 14y ago
I don't suspect the earlier poster meant that the person should move to the wilderness, just far enough away to "make a new start."
csomar 14y ago
That's what he said, you simply didn't read to the end so he could meet people on an equal footing.
- larrys 14y ago
  "you simply didn't read to the end" I did. He said: "The right thing to do probably would have been to move far away, live simply, and take up a hobby so he could meet people on an equal footing." The fact that the above sentence says "live simply" and "take up a hobby" seems to contradict the notion that he should try to take up with people who are equal in wealth which was the issue being discussed. I said "live among people" which is not the same as "move far away" and "live simply" is not the same as "make friends with people in the same income bracket or assets or higher"
  - glhaynes 14y ago
    It's the taking up that's being done on an equal footing (i.e. the friendships are free from the wealth-disparity baggage); it's not that the people have the same amount of wealth.
tsotha 14y ago
That's a possibility too. I was thinking it would be more difficult, since he might have run into the whole new rich/old rich thing. He would have been perfectly happy living in a suburban tract home, and that's the type of person he grew up with, so I was thinking that would be the easiest. Besides, you have fewer choices if your pool of potential friends is rich people.
- larrys 14y ago
  "you have fewer choices if your pool of potential friends is rich people" How many friends does someone need? I don't see any evidence that wealthy people or upper middle class have any problems friend wise. Not only that but nothing prevents them from mingling with anyone even a lower "status" if you want to call it that.
  - zerostar07 14y ago
    How many friends does someone need? About 150: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbars_number http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbars_number But they don't all have to be real friends. The interesting thing about Dunbar's number is that it also suggests that people strive to make these 150 relationships even when there are not enough people around (i.e. that's why some people care for celebrities and forge online relationships when real life friends are not enough)
    - gcr 14y ago
      Dunbar's number is an upper limit. What's the lower limit?
      - theorique 14y ago
        From zero to one is a quantum leap - you go from "alone, no one to talk to" to "can talk honestly and frankly with someone". That's the biggest step. Beyond that, of course it enriches your life, but the first friend is the most important.
    - 14y ago

zerostar07 14y ago

Or get a normal day job, even if you don't need it. It provides social comfort. It works.