Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Limits of Friendship

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 59 posts

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#31

Post by tokenadult »

I'm glad that this article points out that the Dunbar number is a RANGE. (That's what you should expect about most numerical statements about typical human beings. The number you hear in a news story is just the central tendency of a number that varies among different individuals.)

The article reports, "On the flipside, groups can extend to five hundred, the acquaintance level," and that would suggest that my group of Facebook friends (a bit more than 700, the great majority of whom I have actually, factually met in person) is a group of acquaintances. And I'm okay with that, as they are FRIENDLY acquaintances, and they interact with one another (in many combinations of individuals who have never face-met even once) in delightful and thought-provoking ways.

I feel a lot of empathy for the younger people commenting in this thread that they feel they have few friends and few channels for meeting any new friends. That may change over time. There have been times in my life when I was much more isolated than I am now, when it would have been unbelievable that I would ever have an online network of 700-some "friends." Of course like a lot of married men, I've invested most in my relationship with my wife, and she is by far my best friend, and also a connection to other friends. I do think the article makes a good point that it's wise for each of us to enjoy some of the in-person aspects of friendship (hearing someone's voice, maybe tapping someone on the shoulder or hugging or whatever as is appropriate for the friendship) to build a connection with people that just can't be built by keystrokes sent over the Internet.

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#32

Post by burial »

shostack wrote: post #29

What I'd love to know is how people carve out time and energy for learning/self-driven education, hobbies and such in addition to friends, particularly if introverted. My wife seems to be quite good at making friends, because she invests a large % of her time and energy in socializing, and I feel like it is slightly less awkward for a female to invite female coworkers out to do something than it is for male coworkers…

I usually spend time with friends on the weekend, then spend the week doing hobbies and work. Maybe I'll use Snapchat or texting to talk to the odd friend during the week but I mostly stick to myself. Then on weekends it isn't the whole time, maybe I'll spend Friday evening and Saturday morning doing one of my hobbies then meet up in the afternoon and socialise.

At the end of the day I think it's socialising with those close to you, your 15 or so friends when you can and then the extended friends are those that are either spending time with you because their friends of a friend or something along the line, thus your spending time with them as well.

Another interesting point would be spending time with friends doing hobbies, for example I'll plan a hike and go with my friend because we both share that hobby, then on top of that is the option to bring my camera because it's a hobby I enjoy. But for less social hobbies I figure their better to be done during the week or when you don't have any plans for your spare time.

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#33

Post by debaserab2 »

shostack wrote: post #29

What I'd love to know is how people carve out time and energy for learning/self-driven education, hobbies and such in addition to friends, particularly if introverted. My wife seems to be quite good at making friends, because she invests a large % of her time and energy in socializing, and I feel like it is slightly less awkward for a female to invite female coworkers out to do something than it is for male coworkers…

I used to use words like "introvert" and "extrovert" to explain why someone eases into social graces so much better than myself. At some point in my life I realized that socializing, while maybe more intuitive to some, is a _skill_ you get better at with time and energy. Just like any other skill, it's extremely draining and takes a while to reach your goals. You can chock it to being an introvert, or you can invest the time it takes to become skilled at socializing so that discomfort is removed.

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#34

Post by mrfusion »

alecdbrooks wrote: post #28
_qjmt wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish I would have. Sad thing is, the ease of developing new friendships seems to be a function of the number of existing ones. Once you reach zero, like I have, you're pretty much stuck there.

Stuck's pessimistic, but my experiences lead me to agree. I find it difficult to take the initiative with new people, so many of the people I know I met through a mutual friend. I don't have a perfect solution, but I've found a few tricks. I've found that clubs and volunteer events tend to be full of friendly people who will introduce themselves. It also helps me socialize with new people when no one else knows each…

What kind of volunteer events?

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#35

Post by benesy »

brd wrote: post #20

Reading the comments, I'd say many members of HN should probably invest more time fostering friendships. Its not that difficult to maintain relationships but it is shockingly easy to let them dissipate. Every so often I set out to "make the rounds" and see my friends who are spread across the country. I'm a bit of a nomad and yet its often my return that triggers close friends to see each other when they live minutes…

Maybe if people drift apart it's because they're supposed to?

Why can't we just let things happen naturally? Why does there have to be a formulaic approach to everything? Why do you need to be an outlier? Why can't people just be normal?

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#36

Post by [deleted] »

benesy wrote: post #35
brd wrote: post #20

Reading the comments, I'd say many members of HN should probably invest more time fostering friendships. Its not that difficult to maintain relationships but it is shockingly easy to let them dissipate. Every so often I set out to "make the rounds" and see my friends who are spread across the country. I'm a bit of a nomad and yet its often my return that triggers close friends to see each other when they live minutes…

Maybe if people drift apart it's because they're supposed to? Why can't we just let things happen naturally? Why does there have to be a formulaic approach to everything? Why do you need to be an outlier? Why can't people just be normal?

[deleted]

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#37

Post by ZenoArrow »

The article makes sense to me, but one point I'd make is that we didn't start becoming more socially distant from each other in the Internet age, from what I see it's an extension of what we experienced in the TV age... Yes, you might be in the same room as other people watching the same TV show, but the level of interaction is minimal, and the content you get from TV is often far removed from your reality so it doesn't really offer much in the way of insight in navigating your current world.

I'll put it like this... I watched a lot of TV growing up, and it has clearly shaped my imagination. If we ever had some catastrophic event after which civilised society broke down, I would have a better idea of how to navigate that world than the one we have now, which I find it easy to be disconnected from. Of course I don't want to live in a dystopia, but it's a reflection on how we connect to what we consume.

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#38

Post by ufmace »

placebo wrote: post #17

Seems like either Dunbar's number is from some alternate reality or many of the commenters (including myself) are the alternate reality...

I think it's an average over a large number of people. Online communities, like HN, tend to fill with Introverts, which I think are on the lower side. There are also lots of extroverts out there who genuinely enjoy maintaining huge numbers of friendships, but I don't think they spend much time posting on message boards. Especially ones that tend to be a bit on the pedantic and humorless side, like HN.

Don't get me wrong, HN, I love you the way that you are, even if every now and then I think you could stand to lighten up a bit. But I will confess to a need to visit Reddit for some jokes and pun chains sometimes.

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#39

Post by ufmace »

I read a more basic article on this a while back on Cracked[0], that you might find interesting if you liked this.

I find there to be a lot of truth to the basic idea of this. But I think there is also a lot of individual variation. As I have gotten older and developed better social skills, I recognize that I am an Introvert at my core, and only care to maintain a small number of close relationships. Despite this, I am capable of being social, chatty, and sometimes even charming during social events, when I'm at my best, but I usually have no desire to maintain most of those relationships.

At the core, you have to figure out what is right for you, not what other people or society think you should want, and work towards maintaining that.

[0] http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html

Re: The Limits of Friendship

#40

Post by msandford »

So we know that Dunbar's number is really, REALLY important when it comes to human interaction.

But nearly everything in the near past has to do with flouting it, creating huge institutions which absolutely, positively make Dunbar's number look like a joke.

Perhaps that is why there's a lot of trust eroding in the big institutions. When size >> Dunbar's number people have the anonymity they need to start doing less great things and get away with it.

Post reply on HN