You should consider (though of course you may already have considered, and in any case you may well reject) the possibility that your principle of associating with “cool people” and avoiding “sucky people” means in practice that (1) you avoid making friends with people who might sometimes be difficult, even if on balance their friendship would be a big net positive, and that (2) if someone is going through the kind of difficult time that might make them grumpy or unreliable or otherwise “sucky” then you will drop them if they were formerly friends, and certainly not befriend them if they weren’t.
(The alternativ is that you’ve just been incredibly lucky and neither you nor any of your friends has ever had such difficulties.)
Anyway, #1 seems like a substantial potential utility loss for you and #2 seems like a big potential utility loss for your (actual or possible-future) friends. And if you’re going to start throwing around suggestions that anyone’s notion of friendship is “not the real thing” and #2 is anywhere near the truth then I think we may disagree on what “the real thing” is.
you avoid making friends with people who might sometimes be difficult, even if on balance their friendship would be a big net positive
We’re all difficult. (My friends, and I as well.) One learns to be less difficult, in the ways which really matter to friendship, and which hinge on respect for one’s friends. And if not—then the friendship is not a net positive.
if someone is going through the kind of difficult time that might make them grumpy or unreliable or otherwise “sucky” then you will drop them if they were formerly friends,
As I consider personal loyalty to be among the highest virtues—perhaps even the highest virtue—my threshold for this is very high. Not unreachably so; but much higher than (from what I gather) those of most people. So no, I would certainly not ever “drop” a friend just because they were going through a tough time. The notion leaves me aghast, to be quite honest.
In fact, the idea that being simply “grumpy” or—what? depressed? otherwise ill? busy?—is what qualifies a person as “sucky” is, also, alien to me.
and certainly not befriend them if they weren’t.
If you’re a sucky person, and later grow / mature / change / fix your issues to the point where you’re awesome, why, I’d possibly be happy to be your friend!
Here is the truth: none of the close friends I have now, were perfectly well-adjusted, fully emotionally balanced, or generally-content people when I met them. (Nor was I; indeed I think I have met very few such people in general, and perhaps none at all whom I’d consider interesting.) But they were—and are—definitely, definitely awesome and cool and amazing and possessed of other superlative traits besides.
Anyway, #1 seems like a substantial potential utility loss for you and #2 seems like a big potential utility loss for your (actual or possible-future) friends. And if you’re going to start throwing around suggestions that anyone’s notion of friendship is “not the real thing” and #2 is anywhere near the truth then I think we may disagree on what “the real thing” is.
But #2 is not anywhere near the truth, as you see. Which means, I take it, that we agree after all…? :)
You should consider (though of course you may already have considered, and in any case you may well reject) the possibility that your principle of associating with “cool people” and avoiding “sucky people” means in practice that (1) you avoid making friends with people who might sometimes be difficult, even if on balance their friendship would be a big net positive, and that (2) if someone is going through the kind of difficult time that might make them grumpy or unreliable or otherwise “sucky” then you will drop them if they were formerly friends, and certainly not befriend them if they weren’t.
(The alternativ is that you’ve just been incredibly lucky and neither you nor any of your friends has ever had such difficulties.)
Anyway, #1 seems like a substantial potential utility loss for you and #2 seems like a big potential utility loss for your (actual or possible-future) friends. And if you’re going to start throwing around suggestions that anyone’s notion of friendship is “not the real thing” and #2 is anywhere near the truth then I think we may disagree on what “the real thing” is.
We’re all difficult. (My friends, and I as well.) One learns to be less difficult, in the ways which really matter to friendship, and which hinge on respect for one’s friends. And if not—then the friendship is not a net positive.
As I consider personal loyalty to be among the highest virtues—perhaps even the highest virtue—my threshold for this is very high. Not unreachably so; but much higher than (from what I gather) those of most people. So no, I would certainly not ever “drop” a friend just because they were going through a tough time. The notion leaves me aghast, to be quite honest.
In fact, the idea that being simply “grumpy” or—what? depressed? otherwise ill? busy?—is what qualifies a person as “sucky” is, also, alien to me.
If you’re a sucky person, and later grow / mature / change / fix your issues to the point where you’re awesome, why, I’d possibly be happy to be your friend!
Here is the truth: none of the close friends I have now, were perfectly well-adjusted, fully emotionally balanced, or generally-content people when I met them. (Nor was I; indeed I think I have met very few such people in general, and perhaps none at all whom I’d consider interesting.) But they were—and are—definitely, definitely awesome and cool and amazing and possessed of other superlative traits besides.
But #2 is not anywhere near the truth, as you see. Which means, I take it, that we agree after all…? :)