|
Post by Elizabeth on Jul 28, 2019 19:27:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by karl on Jul 28, 2019 19:32:19 GMT
"people can only maintain 150 stable social relationships"
150? I couldn't maintain 15 friendships.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Jul 28, 2019 19:43:03 GMT
"people can only maintain 150 stable social relationships" 150? I couldn't maintain 15 friendships. Yup, even 150 is too much.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,697
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Jul 28, 2019 20:45:19 GMT
All my friends on facebook are family, and some family I don't even let in.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Jul 30, 2019 12:39:47 GMT
This - is - right - only - if - time - is - not - relevant
A pair of arguments:
People cannot have friends, they might speak with somebody or to do something with them. There's no 'friendship'. "Friendship" is an abstract thing. Today I have one friend, and tonight - another one. Change your friends as quickly as possible, and you will necessary reach more than 150 000 friends!
Instagram, Telegram, Facebook, and Arktos prove that it's no truth! Count how many friends Ronaldo have! You'll be surprised!
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Jul 30, 2019 23:39:07 GMT
Problem of identity. Change the variable of "friend" and results change. The problem is how friend is defined, as that is the grounding axiom of the argument. Change how friend is defined and you may have one or two or 150,000 like Eugene claims.
I hate these statistical arguments because they are pure assumptions because of there premises.
|
|
|
Post by Lone Wanderer on Jul 31, 2019 4:36:59 GMT
150 is the limit of real friends on social media arktos.boards.net/thread/3506/limit-real-friends-social-mediaDunbar's numberDunbar's number is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships—relationships in which an individual knows who each person is and how each person relates to every other person.[1][2] This number was first proposed in the 1990s by British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, who found a correlation between primate brain size and average social group size.[3] By using the average human brain size and extrapolating from the results of primates, he proposed that humans can comfortably maintain 150 stable relationships.[4] Dunbar explained it informally as "the number of people you would not feel embarrassed about joining uninvited for a drink if you happened to bump into them in a bar".[5] Proponents assert that numbers larger than this generally require more restrictive rules, laws, and enforced norms to maintain a stable, cohesive group. It has been proposed to lie between 100 and 250, with a commonly used value of 150.[6][7] Dunbar's number states the number of people one knows and keeps social contact with, and it does not include the number of people known personally with a ceased social relationship, nor people just generally known with a lack of persistent social relationship, a number which might be much higher and likely depends on long-term memory size. Dunbar theorised that "this limit is a direct function of relative neocortex size, and that this in turn limits group size [...] the limit imposed by neocortical processing capacity is simply on the number of individuals with whom a stable inter-personal relationship can be maintained". On the periphery, the number also includes past colleagues, such as high school friends, with whom a person would want to reacquaint himself or herself if they met again.[8] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number
|
|
|
Post by Lone Wanderer on Jul 31, 2019 4:48:05 GMT
A scientific study characterizes our circles of friendshipswww.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/07/180723155716.htmOn average, there are three to five people in our lives with whom we have a very close relationship (close friends and/or family), around ten with whom we have close friendships, a larger group of about 30-35 people with whom we frequently interact and around one hundred acquaintances we come into contact with every now and then in our daily lives. In other words, we interact on a regular basis with about 150 people. This number is known as the "Dunbar number" and it indicates the amount of friends that our brain can handle, according to the theory formulated in the 1990's by Robin Dunbar, a professor of anthropology at Oxford University, who also participates in this new scientific study. Something similar happens in reverse, according to the researchers. "It is impossible to have relationships with 150 people and for them all to be intimate. Therefore, if one has a large number of relationships, it must mean that they are almost all superficial," says another of the authors of the study, Ignacio Tamarit, from UC3M's Interdisciplinary Group of Complex Systems, who is preparing his doctoral thesis on this subject.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,697
Likes: 1,757
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Aug 1, 2019 5:01:19 GMT
It seems that I posted without reading the article. Anyways, If you have 150 friends, I doubt that most of them can be truthfully be called friends but acquaintances. I have no idea how you are supposed to have a close connection with 150 people at the same time.
|
|