@ponderable saidWell, you said it to me and you made yourself look silly in my eyes. Why do you want other people to know what you think of the thumbs on this thread?
I directed that to the people who gave the thumbs not to you.
@fmf saidThere is a theory out; that every person has a central value, which supersedes all other values the person has if it comes to a conflict.
And yet, a close friendship can make one tolerant of clashing values and even immune to breaches of trust. I wonder whether some personal bonds have a chicken-or-the-egg question at their very core.
Maybe the point in friendship is even if one or a few values are not aligned, it can be sustained if the central values coincide?
@ponderable saidI am not sure. I think shared experiences or overlapping lives can sometimes make people close even if core values are not aligned.
There is a theory out; that every person has a central value, which supersedes all other values the person has if it comes to a conflict.
Maybe the point in friendship is even if one or a few values are not aligned, it can be sustained if the central values coincide?
I also think there can sometimes be a literally inexplicable love at the core of a friendship that can withstand clashing values.
@fmf saidIt's not clear to me what the term 'three' refers to. Less than four but nevertheless more than two? Or two solidly friendly friends and two acquaintances who together add up to one solid friendly friend. I think we should be told.
It's not clear to me what the term "buddy" refers to. Close friends? Less-than-close-but-nevertheless-solidly-friendly friends? Friendly acquaintances?
1 edit
@fmf saidValues, social background, trust and tolerance of ones' differences, I would say. My longest friendship is a woman I know since childhood. We don't share any interests now and if we met today for the first time, we wouldn't connect. But we bonded when very young and that stays.
And yet, a close friendship can make one tolerant of clashing values and even immune to breaches of trust. I wonder whether some personal bonds have a chicken-or-the-egg question at their very core.
@the-gravedigger saidBe that it as it may, in your case, but I don't think the word "three" causes me to ponder its meaning as much as the word "buddy" does.
It's not clear to me what the term 'three' refers to. Less than four but nevertheless more than two? Or two solidly friendly friends and two acquaintances who together add up to one solid friendly friend. I think we should be told.
@fmf saidI agree that it doesn't have the ambiguity but I thought I would throw it into the pot.
Be that it as it may, in your case, but I don't think the word "three" causes me to ponder its meaning as much as the word "buddy" does.
@the-gravedigger saidYou have used the word "it" TWICE in the same sentence; do they refer to different things?
I agree that it doesn't have the ambiguity but I thought I would throw it into the pot.
@the-gravedigger saidWhat exactly does it mean when YOU say that you "presumed" something? Are you merely using the word to soften the admission that you might have been mistaken?
Your post that I replied to used the words 'it' and 'its' so I presumed you were familiar with its (sic) meaning.
@the-gravedigger saidits (sic) meaning
I presumed you were familiar with its (sic) meaning.
Does "sic" here refer to an error by you or an error by me?
@fmf saidUsed to show that the word may appear wrong but it is what I intended.
its (sic) meaning
Does "sic" here refer to an error by you or an error by me?
@the-gravedigger saidIn this particular instance, how do you define "wrong"?
Used to show that the word may appear wrong but it is what I intended.