From the author: I have already written a couple of times on the Internet on this topic, so those who read my notes will probably remember this, but I hope they will not be offended by me for a repeat, especially since this is an improved and expanded version. If a friend suddenly turns out to be Neither a friend nor an enemy, but just like this... If you can’t tell right away whether he’s bad or good... Pull a guy into the mountains - take a risk, Don’t leave alone him, Let him be in a relationship with you - Then you will understand who he is.... (Vladimir Vysotsky) Working as a psychologist, I have to observe that people often have problems due to a false understanding of friendship. The fact is that many are brought up according to the principle “if you are friends, then you should do everything to help your friend.” And this is a very correct principle. But the devil, as always, is in the details. And here the word “if” is such a detail. Well, or we can say that the problem lies in the fact that when teaching the main principle of friendship (see above), parents do not teach children how to recognize when, in fact, there are those relationships in which people can rightfully call themselves friends. The point is that if we are not at enmity with someone, that is, we are not enemies or foes, then our relationship with them is not necessarily friendship. What parents most often do not teach their children (as schools and universities do not teach), is that if there are no hostile relationships, then relationships with people, and accordingly the people with whom we come into contact, are divided into the following categories: 1. Unknown2. Acquaintances3. Good friends4. Buddies5. Friends6. Best friends This classification applies to all areas of life - it doesn’t matter whether we communicate at work, within business relationships, solving our daily life tasks, or if we arrange joint gatherings and other entertainment. I’ll immediately stipulate that parents, brothers and sisters, and other close relatives, as well as love relationships (husband - wife, lover - mistress) do not fall into this classification and other psychological laws and rules apply to them. Why this classification “From unknown to best friends” should be kept in mind - why Should we always understand who this or that person really is? Firstly, because the vast majority of manipulators use the mask of a “friend”, although in fact they are at best “buddies”, and most often nothing more than "familiar" or even "unknown". Having such a classification and clearly understanding where this or that person is located in it, we exclude the possibility of being manipulated by those who like to put on the mask of a “friend” in order to take advantage of us. And in general, with such a classification, we understand exactly for whom we are ready to do everything, and for whom, only something. Secondly, because then we can decide to whom and how much to devote our time. Obviously, someone who is our "best friend" deserves more of our time than, for example, someone who is nothing more than a "buddy." If a person does not have such a classification in his head, then in practice it often happens that he spends an unreasonably large amount of time on, say, “good acquaintances,” and in the end he has no time left for “friends.” Classification clarifies thinking and allows you to meaningfully decide which of the people in your social circle should be given more of your time, and who should be given less. Thirdly, because having understood exactly who this or that person is for us, we can apply certain efforts to try to move relationships such as "buddies" into the category of "friends". Not everything here depends on us, since “it takes two palms to clap,” but you can always try. So how can we understand who is who among the people with whom we communicate? Based on my experience as a psychologist, I propose the following criteria (sympathy a person may be present starting from the “unknown” category, this is completely normal, but is not a criterion for classification): 1. Unknown - we know virtually nothing about this person. We see himprobably for the first time in my life. Well, or we communicate with him periodically, but we know absolutely nothing about him. Maybe we don’t even know his name: after all, constantly shopping in some store and seeing the same saleswoman, smiling at her and saying hello to her, we may not even know her name. We may interact with such a person at work and know his name, but that’s basically it.2. Familiar - we know this person's name. We know from his words some details about his life or family. We can even participate in some fun activities together. But that’s all, actually. 3. A good friend. In fact, this is a person “well known” to you. That is, you know much more about him than just an “acquaintance”. There is already much more communication here. Both he and you have basic information about each other’s personal lives: marital status, presence of children, who the parents are, what hobbies they like, what they like and don’t like, perhaps political and religious preferences, and so on. We can “say hello to his family,” even though we’ve never seen them in person. We exchange various news from our personal lives with such a person. We can arrange some kind of entertainment together, and sometimes even as families. That is, you are more comfortable with him than with just an “acquaintance,” and you communicate a little more than “just friends.”4. Buddy. Here the level of our awareness of each other and the intensity of communication is even higher. But the most important thing is that we enjoy being together: we enjoy working together, we enjoy having fun together, we generally enjoy spending time together. It is this “nice to be together” that makes a person our friend. We can communicate either strictly with each other, or even with families - the main thing is that we enjoy being together. Whether such a person will help you in difficult circumstances is not at all a significant criterion here. Firstly, because even people completely unknown to you can help you in trouble (as, for example, complete strangers regularly transfer some funds to help other people completely unknown to them who have suffered from natural or man-made disasters). Secondly, neither an “unknown person”, nor an “acquaintance”, nor a “good friend”, nor a “friend” are obliged to help you if you have problems. It is important to understand this in order not to make meaningless claims to people and not to poison your own life. That is, it is completely normal to realize, for example, that although you enjoy joint trips to barbecues or, say, leisurely activities together preference games, you cannot count on this person’s help if you have problems: since this is a friend, not a friend. But this does not interfere with your enjoyment of communication (and should not interfere). Can a friend be the one who will help you in trouble? Yes, maybe, and such a friend should probably be valued much higher than those friends who will not help you in trouble, since the friend who will help you in trouble is already much closer to the one whom you can call your friend.5 . Friend. It must be said that a friend has all the qualities of a friend, that is, a friend is someone with whom it is pleasant to spend time, but in addition to this, there are three more important circumstances: 1. A friend is someone who will sincerely sympathize with our problems and will always help us in trouble to the best of his ability (it is important to understand that even from friends one cannot demand the impossible).2. A friend is someone who will always sincerely rejoice at your success. Friends don't envy (this is very important to understand). If you are a more successful person than your friend, then the one who really is your friend will only be happy for you and happy that everything is fine with you. “A toad will not strangle” when he sees your success in love, family or business only the one who is actually your friend. A friend, by the way, may well be strangled by a toad at the sight of your greater success than his. Well, that’s okay: it’s just a friend, and not a friend at all. Joy, not compassion, createsfriend. (Friedrich Nietzsche)3. A friend is a person who will never betray you. This means that you can be as frank as possible with this person. No, it’s clear that the requirement to tolerate any of your 100% frankness is a neurotic infantilism that no one can ever live up to, but at the same time, a friend is someone with whom you can be as frank as possible, since he will not give you away. A friend is a person in whose presence you can think out loud. (Ralph Waldo Emerson) That is, in fact, only someone who meets all the following criteria is your friend: 1. You enjoy spending time with him.2. He will always help you in trouble.3. He will always sincerely rejoice at your success.4. You can be as frank as possible with him, knowing that he will not betray you. There is no compliance with at least one criterion - it means that this is not a friend, but a “buddy” or a “good acquaintance”, or someone else. By the way, it’s always a good idea to ask yourself the question: This person is my friend, since he meets all the criteria for a friend, but who am I to him? Do I myself, in my attitude towards him, meet these criteria?6. Best friend. One who falls into this category has all the qualities of a friend. But at the same time, he has something much, much bigger and more significant. Namely, of all your friends, only your best friend is ready to sacrifice his life for you, if necessary, in order to save you. And only this criterion makes a “best friend” out of a friend. A friend can do a lot for you and may be willing to endure significant suffering for your sake. But only your best friend is capable of sacrificing his own life for you. And accordingly, of all the listed categories, only the best friend is the one who will never betray you. Well, that’s all, actually. We can only add that the category “childhood friends” is not a separate category and can fall into any of the above from “acquaintance to best friend.” I would also say that a very good exercise is “inventory of friends.” The essence of this exercise is as follows: You make a list of all the people you consider to be your friends and try to understand which category from “good acquaintance to best friend” they actually fall into. This can be a very difficult psychological exercise, because sometimes it turns out that with a large number of those whom a person calls “friends”, sometimes it turns out that in fact, among all of them there is not a single one who meets all the criteria for a “friend” . But this exercise always perfectly clears your brain, and most importantly, it often allows you to get rid of the leeching manipulators in the mask of a “friend” who have attached themselves to you. The second part of the same exercise is to try to remember how much time you actually spend communicating with people who are on your list. It may turn out that most of your time is consumed by those who do not even fall into the category of “friends,” but for some reason you have no time left for the one who is your best friend. And if this turns out to be the case, is it right? The last thing to say in this note is the following: Don’t be afraid to call people your “friends” and say “we are friends” even about relationships with friends and good acquaintances. There is no hypocrisy in this. After all, we say “hello” even to people who are completely familiar to us, and even to those who are unpleasant to us. But our “hello” is neither more nor less, but a wish for health (“I wish you good health” - “I wish you to be healthy”) to the one to whom we say this. Social norms and rules require us to be friendly towards other people, say hello to them, and call many people with whom we have good relationships our friends. However, to clearly understand for yourself who this or that person you like really is (friend? buddy? good acquaintance? best friend? just acquaintance?), this is a very useful skill from a psychological point of view. Moreover, calling a person his)