Sunday, April 15, 2012

Does the knowledge of a definition of a thing change the nature of that same thing (in essence does knowing something change it)?i realize that this is a complex question which seems irrelevant, however this is most applicable in the definition of relationships. The question then becomes by me terming a relationship something does that change the nature of the relationship, or when i term a relationship something does the relationship remain the same as it was before i could pinpoint a precise definition? This begs the question, is the nature of a relationship dependent on our perception of it? While most would argue that it does, my point is that the nature of the relationship is inherent in your definition, when you change your term for the relationship, that change was inherent in the previous relationship. This is also used to explain the lack of relationships, both Platonic and romantic, why is there a need to term you relationship as friends if that is what you already are, unless (which i disagree with) your putting a term on our interactions inherently changes those same actions.
Slightly confusing and to all appearances irrelevant, this are the questions i waste my time contemplating


  1. Maybe changing the title of a relationship signifies that the partners have mutual recognition of the change in nature of the relationship... For example, a couple becomes "just friends" after they realize that they are no longer romantically attached.

  2. Going off of Sarah, terming a relationship is generally more for the party that is 'mis'terming the relationship. Or just isn't quite sure what the other person perceives the relationship to be. I do think that too many times this is used to ward off unwanted pursuers. When I say "we're just friends," it is more of me saying "you don't have a chance in hell, but I don't want to make a scene." I know that this in some small way may make me a coward, but personally I take the coward's way out when it comes to something like this...