Do you remember the last time you exchanged heartfelt feelings with your close friends?
Perhaps, you who close your heart with "social fear" as a reason, have unconsciously become accustomed to loneliness, despite the company of family and friends. In the past two months, the British "Guardian" has successively launched a series of column articles on the theme of "friendship". Many authors believe that "learned loneliness" has become a group psychology that cannot be ignored in modern society. Correspondingly, "friendship", an emotion that has been cherished since ancient times, is in danger.
In fact, as a social phenomenon, the term "friendship recession" has entered the lexicon. According to the Friendship Research Report published by YouGov, one in eight Britons said they only had one friend who could be called a "close friend", 7% claimed they had no friends and 51% said they found it difficult to make new friends. In the United States, people are spending less and less time with friends: Ten years ago, they spent six and a half hours a week with friends, but now it's down to two hours and forty-five minutes.
The disappearance of friendship is not an experience unique to Europeans and Americans. In China, we also frequently hear complaints about "social phobia". Many people wish they could be tainted with a little bit of the attributes of a "social cow" – even if some of the behaviors attributed to the "social cow" are often ironic. At the same time, friendship is no longer taken for granted: buzzwords such as "the boat of friendship turns over" and "get rid of toxic friends" mean that friendship is an object of vigilance in a certain context, and people fear that they will be hijacked by friendship.
Why do more and more modern people fall into "learned loneliness"? How is friendship put at risk? What does successful friendship mean in the modern experience of life, and how can it be maintained? These topics are both the focus of the relevant column articles and have implications for everyone to run their own daily lives. Therefore, this issue will reflect on the above issues.
Written by | Xie Tingyu
"Classical" friendship and its disappearance
To understand the current situation of friendship, you first need to understand what friendship really means. For Europeans and Americans, Aristotle's definition of "friendship" is perhaps the most widely known classic definition. The Guardian also quotes Aristotle's statement of "friendship" based on certain simplifications. In his view, friendship can be divided into three categories:
Pursue practical friendships (e.g., neighbors willing to pick up your son from school);
Friendships that pursue happiness (such as friends who can talk and laugh with you and make you happy);
The highest level is the pursuit of virtuous friendship.
The so-called "friendship in pursuit of virtue" needs to be premised on being in the same moral community. The contemporary Aristotelian virtue ethicist McIntyre is a good illustration of the significance of such friendship: in the same moral community, people share the same set of values and acquire the necessary virtues according to this set of values to pursue their own perfection. And in the process of acquiring virtue, communication with others is essential. On the one hand, people need to understand what virtue is from the behavior of others, and take the "virtuous person" as their own example; On the other hand, people also need friends to point out in time what they are lacking in order to calibrate their behavior. In short, in a moral community, friendship means that people practice common values and shape better selves in their dealings with each other.
Plato and Aristotle, from Raphael Sanci's The Athenian Academy (partial).
In fact, classical Chinese thought's discourse on "friendship" is similar to Aristotle's. "Friendship" is one of the "five Lun" (that is, the five vital relationships), and friends are united by their aspirations, and because "zhi" connotates "youlun", the fellowship of friends actually contains moral ideals, and is by no means "purposeless" interaction. It is not difficult to see that such a "friendship" requires a series of prerequisites: friends need to be able to maintain a constant and stable relationship - only then is mutual learning and supervision possible. More importantly, friends need to share a common set of moral pursuits and values.
The "classical" definition of friendship still resonates in contemporary psychological research. The Guardian, for example, cites research by Oxford psychologist Robin Dunbar, who defines the "seven pillars of friendship" as the most important factor in making people easily attracted to each other and become friends. The "Seven Pillars" include: common language, proximity to the region, similar educational experiences, similar interests, moral and value alignment, similar political positions, and a sense of humor and musical taste. Proximity to language and geography ensures constant contact between friends, while shared educational experiences, morals, and political stances ensure a fit of values.
However, it is in the same article that the author points out that these "seven pillars" have become more and more accessible in the process of modernity. The movement of people "leveled" the space, so that geographical divisions no longer became a key factor in shaping self-identity, and the unity of writing and language weakened the cultural recognition of language to a certain extent, and transformed it into a simple communication tool. At the same time, in a society where values are becoming more and more "private," it is not easy to imagine a value system that is sufficiently solid and shared by members of society, and moral "rational pluralism" has gradually become an irreversible trend. Undoubtedly, all of the above means the dissolution of the "moral community", and only "hobbies" and "humor and musical taste" can stabilize friendship. In most cases, however, the two underpin only a "pleasure-seeking friendship," which means that a "friend" has changed from an existence essential for self-improvement to a partner in common pleasure.
Admittedly, even in such cases, there are still attempts to practice a "classical" friendship. The Guardian, for example, recounts the practice of friendship by the French philosopher Geoffroy de Lagasnerie. He and his other two friends make sure to eat together every night, chat several times a day, say goodmorning and good night to each other, and sync their schedules to ensure that "friendship" is a priority in their lives (even more important than family and romantic relationships). Lagasneri even suggested that the government set up a "friendship ministry" to institutionally support people to live a "life organized around friendship." ”
Although he himself claims that his claims are "radical," it is not difficult to find that his substantive initiatives fit well with the classical ideal of friendship. Although he insists that his dealings with friends are generally "envied". But there is no denying that very few people can actually live this way, and the "classical" vision of friendship can hardly be strongly appealed.
Solitude (1917) by Giorgio de Chirico.
Social experience in the context of "modernity"
While the "classical" vision of friendship is dispelled, modern urban life has made even "socializing" a problem itself. The experience of modernity brought about by urban life has been seen by many thinkers. Cultural studies scholar Raymond Williams has quoted Wordsworth's poem to illustrate how urban life differs from the "ritual society" of pre-modern times—if in the latter people are confronted with vivid and familiar "faces", in the former, people are confronted with anonymous "crowds". Wordsworth writes:
I walked through the crowd and said to myself, "The face of everyone who passes by me is a mystery!" ”...... Until the shapes before my eyes become/Beyond the sight of queues, like gliding / Through silent mountains, or as appearing in a dream / All the pressures of familiar life / Present, and past; hope, fear; All are stagnant / All the laws of those who act, think, speak / pass before me, neither knowing me nor knowing me. ”
Faced with a "crowd" with a sense of oppression like mountains, people will have different reactions. One is "shock" and "horror," as Benjamin identified—"fear, disgust and terror" are natural emotions in the face of the crowds of people that fill the streets of cities and are woven by a large and nameless mass. Every encounter with a crowd stimulates people's nerves, which in turn produces mental exhaustion and exertion: "Passing through such passing vehicles and pedestrians involves the individual in a series of panic and collisions. In the dangerous crossing, nervous stimuli pass through the body one after another, like energy in a battery. It is not difficult to find that Benjamin's description is a portrait of a "social terrorist" crowd for whom "socializing" is no longer a "leisure" that makes them feel relaxed and enjoyable. On the contrary, because "socializing" means being in a situation where you are constantly "colliding" with unfamiliar faces, it brings additional burdens.
Another type of reaction is characterized in Zimel. Zimel also believes that modern people face a living world full of "fluidity, perishability and uncertainty", but in his view, when people's nerves are numb and tired by constant stimulation, "indifference" becomes a natural reaction and even a worthy goal. For Zimel, out of the need for "indifference," interpersonal communication "is functional, superficial, and impersonal." In a sense, the rise of the concept of "boundary sense" in contemporary discourse may be related to this—a sense of boundary that aims to limit social interaction to a "shallow taste" that allows people to maintain a polite distance from each other in order to maintain a state of calm and avoid the "shock" and "panic" that may result from each other's "collisions".
Modernity, by Wang Min'an, Nanjing University Press, 2020.
It is worth noting that the "social cow" may also be traced back to the "indifference" identified by Zimel. If "boundary" also means keeping one's distance from the "crowd" under control, then when people are further "numbed" by stimuli, they may progress to not caring about unfamiliar people, and thus do not need to keep their distance. As we have seen, the "social cows" can openly sing and dance in the bustling business district or campus playground, and can also interact enthusiastically with the clerks and even "counter-kill" the latter in a shop that is very unfriendly to "social terror" such as Haidilao... All this seems to mean that the crowd that once "frightened" Benjamin no longer seems to be able to stir up the slightest wave in the hearts of the cows, so that they can make themselves fish in water without maintaining boundaries. To some, this is a very useful quality for modern sex life, but for others it threatens "boundaries" and resembles a sensational act of "social terrorist."
If both "sense of boundaries" and "social cattle" begin with a defense against the "shock" of the crowd, the last response seeks to "control" the otherwise uncontrollable crowd in a positive way, which is what McIntyre calls a "manipulative" attitude. Manipulative attitudes aim to "express one's own emotions or attitudes and thereby transform the emotions and attitudes of others." "If the transformation and manipulation of the emotions of others is possible, then the otherwise elusive and boundless pressure of others will no longer be terrible. In fact, the Guardian has insight into this attitude. In the opinion of its author, Carnegie's masterpiece "How to Win Friends and Influence Others" fully reflects this. The title of the book states: "Friends are not made but 'won', and the sole purpose of making friends is to allow oneself to do whatever you want." ”
It was with the emergence of this concept that "toxic friendships" began to be wary of people. In "toxic friendships," your friends "don't listen to your problems, don't understand your emotions, always want to talk about themselves, aren't happy about your success..." Obviously, this represents a typical "manipulative" attitude. In this relationship, "you" are simply the object of being influenced and "won" by the other person.
In short, most social experiences in the modern context begin with the "shock" of an anonymous crowd – a feeling closely linked to the "social fear" mentality. In order to face the "shock", "sense of boundary" and "social cow" may seem to take opposite approaches, but they are actually two sides of the same coin - they both aim to maintain an attitude of indifference to the crowd, so as not to burn out in the stimulus. The "manipulative" attitude, on the other hand, actively intervenes in the crowd and tries to "win" and "influence" one's friends. However, it is this attitude that makes friendship dubious. In fact, there is a common undertone behind these common experiences—the so-called "learned loneliness"—and people's relationship with the "crowd" is either incompatible or external, which makes the social interaction dominated by modern experiences problematic.
Edward Hope's Automat (1927).
Reinventing friendship from "learned loneliness."
Although the term "learned loneliness" seems to indicate that people have become "accustomed to the state of loneliness". But to a large extent, this is still just a helpless "compromise" rather than a sincere "desire". For example, only a very small percentage of the 51 percent of people who "think it's hard to make new friends" revealed by YouGov are truly satisfied with the situation, and most still want to grasp the ability to make friends in some way. In fact, a significant portion of the Guardian's articles are devoted to attempts to reinvent friendship in the modern context – a friendship that is still worth pursuing, although in many ways differs from the "classical" vision represented by Aristotle.
One notable difference is that most of these modern efforts to rebuild friendships are not as ambitious as Aristotle—no longer focused on the great cause of self-improvement, but began with moments of mutual support in each other's "vulnerability." Most of the friendships documented by The Guardian refer to the difficult moments that friends have spent together, and consider them the most important experience of the friendship: there is a pair of friends, both of whose husbands died within weeks, and others who are particularly grateful for their support in their illness: "There is nothing more troublesome than caring for me in my illness, but he always gives his time, and I think this is the best thing I can do as a friend." Another recalled: "My friend and I have experienced death, relationship problems, fertility anxiety, illness, adversity that lasts a lifetime." ”
Van Gogh's Bedroom at Arles (1890).
As a result, friendships are no longer premised on some shared ultimate value, which, as mentioned earlier, is often encountered in modern society. Instead, the friendships of the moment often stem from an acknowledgement of vulnerability and dependence in human nature.
At the same time, the "retreat" of shared value means that disagreements and tensions persist even between best friends. As a result, the virtues of "tolerance" and the ability to "manage differences" began to be seen as the key to maintaining a friendship. For example, a pair of friends interviewed by The Guardian had different political positions, one was a Marxist leftist, the other was biased towards "moderate liberalism"; Another pair of friends took a different position on Brexit. But in their view, this does not prevent each other from being wise and interesting, nor does it prevent them from supporting each other: "We are comfortable with each other's differences, and my advice is not to dwell on these things – let it be." In other words, people began to consciously base friendships on a more "thin" overlapping consensus.
Eventually, people began to become more comfortable with the uncertainty that friendships might encounter. "One advantage of friendship is that people expect friendship differently than they expect from romantic relationships." For the latter, the relationship is often expected to last forever and never deteriorate, but the former does not have such a burden. In short, people still take a series of measures to build and maintain friendships – such as maintaining regular contact, recalling common experiences, establishing tacit understanding and "rituals" between each other, regularly participating in activities of organizations to reach out to others... But if unavoidable factors dilute friendship, people can mostly remain comfortable with it. As a result, friendship is still cherished as a relationship that is more open and "open" to uncertainty.
In fact, as psychologist Dunbar points out: "Friendship is extremely beneficial to your mental health and even your physical condition, and if you look at the data, you will see that friendship has an even more significant effect than a psychologist." That's my advice to the NHS – find a friend or two for everyone. ”
In short, through the above discussion, we may be able to partially understand the difficulty and fragility of rebuilding friendship in the modern world. Modern people have forever lost the solid reliance of the "civility society" and the "moral community", leaving only an awareness of their own vulnerability and loneliness. In this way, modern friendship is like sailing on an endless sea, which can only slowly unfold in the uncertainty of the world around us.