Friend/associate theory

I should preface this by saying I don't always use this way of thinking. It's fairly realistic but also takes a rather naturalistic, Nietzsche-esque view of human nature, which I don't always like. Anyways, what am I talking about? Oh yeah, the promised "friend" vs. "associate" theory.

I first heard this from a psychologist, but it sounded more like something he learned through his own experience than the ideas of philosophers or scientists. He told me that with very few exceptions, people do things for other people, even in a warm relationship, in hopes of gaining something in return. Only the likes of parents and spouses will be so committed that they will show kindness in spite of no physical, social or emotional reward. And that means absolutely no reward.

He gave the example of a woman who bought a pair of pants for her grandson. The grandson was somewhat of a delinquent, being at a ranch for troubled teens, and he threw away the less-than-stylish pants. When the woman came to visit, she naturally asked about the pants; the boy cooked up some story about how they got stolen--fairly believable at this ranch.

What is the problem with this example? First, the grandson is controlled by his fear of disappointing his grandmother so much that he doesn't care about being honest with her. But another rather obscure problem is the motive for the woman giving him the pants in the first place. Is it love, going by the "thought of no reward" definition? If it is, why did the woman care whether he wore it? She wanted validation from the child, and supposed she'd get it by buying something for him. She isn't his "friend," so to speak, but rather they are "associates."

I thought of this as rather interesting to say the least. I was halfway killing myself trying to bust myself up to "friend" level with every last person. Invariably, I'd fail on my end and feel guilty about not being selfless and loving enough. Also invariably, people would ignore me or do something not "friend"-like* and shatter my expectations into a lifeless blob. (I'm not sure how expectations, being brittle, would turn into a blob, but they do.) Once I realized the true nature of my relationships with "associates," though, things became much easier. I hate to say it, but lowering my expectations works really good!

Anyways, my point is not that people are jerks (though they are, if you ask me or famed hair metal musician David Coverdale of the 80s band Whitesnake). It's okay to be only associates with most people. We should be thoughtful, nice, giving, and charitable, but maybe we should show true devotion to a select few.

So this all begs the question: which of you are my true "friends," and which of you are mere "associates?" I won't lie to you: Every last one of you are "friends." *wink*

*The words "not 'friend'-like" and "unfriendly" are different. Very different!