How to win friends ...

[mwb]

I've suggested this book on this forum a few times. It is outstanding.

It's more a book about networking & getting to know people first. Then if two people find some common ground, a friendship will develop.

DC discusses many of the doubts like those expressed on this thread in the book. In one part, he reminds readers that we should be kind to one another even if the other person does nothing for us in return. It's really a lifestyle change, not just finding new ways to use people.

In a way, it's hard to believe a book has to be written on the topic. But people are so busy & distracted & self centered & cautious that we rarely take the time to thank someone or compliment someone or say something nice to brighten another person's day.

 

[intricatic]

At least one post before my post talked about not having many friends and not having much of a social life; hence my response about developing the relationships that one finds oneself in rather than trying to manufacture relationships.

Either a person is my friend or he/she is not my friend. Nothing I can do can change that. Therefore, it does not make sense to me for anybody--the author of a popular book or otherwise--to be giving "advise" about expanding the friendships in one's life. It seems clear to me that the most that any of us can do with respect to friendships is develop the friendships that we have. If the book is talking about friends getting from being strangers to knowing each other as intimately as possible, that makes sense. Or if the book is talking about developing all relationships, friendships or otherwise, that makes sense. But if the book is talking about getting a person from being one's non-friend to being one's friend, well, that is asking people to spin their wheels.

People need to be clear about what they have in mind when they are evaluating and recommending the book.

That's not what this books is about, imho.

Like I said, it's more addressing the attitude that people have in inter-personal relationships as having two contexts, give and take [in simplistic terms], and advocating that giving in a relationship is better than taking if the focus is on expanding and making the relationship more pleasant, be it with a romantic partner or a casual acquaintance.

The people who have "no social life, and no friends", as is implied, oftentimes are trying the reverse method - of taking rather than giving. Although in today's society, it seems to be more important to want to take all that you can and not be concerned with other people, so we may be at a shifting of a contextual nexus in regards to culture.

 

[intricatic]

I've suggested this book on this forum a few times. It is outstanding.

It's more a book about networking & getting to know people first. Then if two people find some common ground, a friendship will develop.

DC discusses many of the doubts like those expressed on this thread in the book. In one part, he reminds readers that we should be kind to one another even if the other person does nothing for us in return. It's really a lifestyle change, not just finding new ways to use people.

In a way, it's hard to believe a book has to be written on the topic. But people are so busy & distracted & self centered & cautious that we rarely take the time to thank someone or compliment someone or say something nice to brighten another person's day.

Exactly, and that attitude is oftentimes so deeply rooted in subconscious routines that people don't notice, and in fact get offended when one challenges it.

 

[silentpoet]

We all could be better at influencing others. I think it is wise to increase your skills in this area. It will help you win others for Christ if you practice what the book says.

 

[silentpoet]

PS, the Buffalo Bills lost 4 super bowls in a row. The only team to make it to 4 in a row and they did not win one. They came pretty close in the first one and then it went downhill from there.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

That's not what this books is about, imho.

Like I said, it's more addressing the attitude that people have in inter-personal relationships as having two contexts, give and take [in simplistic terms], and advocating that giving in a relationship is better than taking if the focus is on expanding and making the relationship more pleasant, be it with a romantic partner or a casual acquaintance.

The people who have "no social life, and no friends", as is implied, oftentimes are trying the reverse method - of taking rather than giving. Although in today's society, it seems to be more important to want to take all that you can and not be concerned with other people, so we may be at a shifting of a contextual nexus in regards to culture.

What I have said many times before probably takes care of a lot of those issues: It is not give and take, it is give and receive.

Maybe there was a time when I was looking to "take" from relationships, but it is too distant a memory for me to recall. I consciously look to receive.

I could probably write a book on the difference between taking and receiving.

If a book is "required reading", does that mean that it trumps all other ideas? I have plenty of my own ideas about how to develop relationships and influence people. And one's own intuition and inspirations are probably the best source of ideas about how to influence others. If the book brings out, brings to consciousness and/or affirms--develops and encourages--the ideas that are already in people, then it deserves praise. But if the book projects onto people some set of "required" ideas that are independent of people, then I don't have much motivation to read it. The treatment of the book in this thread suggests that the latter is the case.

 

[mwb]

I think you should read the book. The revised edition is less than $10 & the first nine chapters are less than 200 pages. It is available at bookstores.

You are reading way too much into the book. Carnegie was not a psychologist. He was a regular guy who stumbled on this idea. His book is filled with examples from regular people like us & their experiences. Since it was written in 1936, it is a reflection of the time when life was simple & people were polite towards one another. Interestingly enough, DC felt back then this book had to be written.

The best accolade I can give it is it has stood the test of time. It is just as relevant today as it was 70 years ago.

 

[intricatic]

I think you should read the book. The revised edition is less than $10 & the first nine chapters are less than 200 pages. It is available at bookstores.

You are reading way too much into the book. Carnegie was not a psychologist. He was a regular guy who stumbled on this idea. His book is filled with examples from regular people like us & their experiences. Since it was written in 1936, it is a reflection of the time when life was simple & people were polite towards one another. Interestingly enough, DC felt back then this book had to be written.

The best accolade I can give it is it has stood the test of time. It is just as relevant today as it was 70 years ago.

I'd be willing to wager that the message of the book is not only still pertinent today, but more pertinent today than it was when it was writen.

If you don't believe me, go drive down a busy street during rush hour or lunchtime.

 

[silentpoet]

BTW it has been updated in those 70 years with different examples. So it does not feel totally archaic.

 

[OhhJim]

Personally, what I have mixed feelings about is not the advice so much as people who do it insincerely.

I think sincerity is a touch over-rated. If I give to the poor, but am not sincere, do the poor receive less money? If I cook a meal insincerely, is the nutrition devalued? If I balance my employer's bank account, but am insincere, does he not get value for my services? If he doesn't care what my salary is, does my paycheck become devalued?

Obviously, there is a whole range of friendships, from the David/Jonathan type to two people nodding to each other as they pass on the street every day. I think the book is helpful if someone wants friends and doesn't know how to go about getting them, or is not good at it. The sincerity, or lack thereof, is up to the individual, it has nothing to do with the book.

 

[JPPT1974]

I think sincerity is a touch over-rated. If I give to the poor, but am not sincere, do the poor receive less money? If I cook a meal insincerely, is the nutrition devalued? If I balance my employer's bank account, but am insincere, does he not get value for my services? If he doesn't care what my salary is, does my paycheck become devalued?

Obviously, there is a whole range of friendships, from the David/Jonathan type to two people nodding to each other as they pass on the street every day. I think the book is helpful if someone wants friends and doesn't know how to go about getting them, or is not good at it. The sincerity, or lack thereof, is up to the individual, it has nothing to do with the book.

Well what matters is that we shouldn't take credit
But we should give all of the credit to the Lord
And that our worth and vaule isn't important on the earth as it is in heaven
We all want good friends but we have to earn that type of good friendship
If you know what I mean!

 

[Jenster]

I think sincerity is a touch over-rated. If I give to the poor, but am not sincere, do the poor receive less money? If I cook a meal insincerely, is the nutrition devalued? If I balance my employer's bank account, but am insincere, does he not get value for my services? If he doesn't care what my salary is, does my paycheck become devalued?

That seems like an apples and oranges comparison. Everything described above is a task, like mowing the lawn or paying taxes. When dealing with human beings, sincerity matters, which was my point. If I teach but don't care about my students, my teaching is less valuable. Certainly less inspiring and effective. If I manage but don't care about my employees, their work will probably be less than it could be if I cared. If I say I want your business at my store, but once you come in I am not sincere about giving you great customer service, you bet you're going to notice.

Eh, I'm not disputing the value of the "How to Win Friends..." book or the need to develop social skills. Yes, people need social skills and a book like this is a tremendous help. But I do think the book assumes an underlying sincerity on the part of the person developing the skills. To me, sincerity is a key character trait I look for in a friend. Skills without sincerity are hollow, imho.

 

[LOVEthroughINTELLECT]

That seems like an apples and oranges comparison. Everything described above is a task, like mowing the lawn or paying taxes. When dealing with human beings, sincerity matters, which was my point. If I teach but don't care about my students, my teaching is less valuable. Certainly less inspiring and effective. If I manage but don't care about my employees, their work will probably be less than it could be if I cared. If I say I want your business at my store, but once you come in I am not sincere about giving you great customer service, you bet you're going to notice.

Eh, I'm not disputing the value of the "How to Win Friends..." book or the need to develop social skills. Yes, people need social skills and a book like this is a tremendous help. But I do think the book assumes an underlying sincerity on the part of the person developing the skills. To me, sincerity is a key character trait I look for in a friend. Skills without sincerity are hollow, imho.

It sounds like you are saying that 100% sincerity/honesty with no social skills > any amount of social skills + less than 100% sincerity/honesty.

If that is what you are saying, then .

 

[mina]

The only difference between you now and you five years from now are the people you meet and the books you read. I think we should all read influenial books, b/c even if you don't agree with everything in the book- it makes you think. People who read are people who learn more about themselves and more about others.

 

[Jenster]

It sounds like you are saying that 100% sincerity/honesty with no social skills > any amount of social skills + less than 100% sincerity/honesty.

If that is what you are saying, then .

LEt's just put it this way: To care about someone requires both skill and intent (sincerity). If it is a person's aim to fulfill the Great Commandment, then both qualities are required. Those people who excel in skills would do well to improve in the area of genuine caring. Those whom God has blessed with sincerity would do well to develop their skills.

I'm not out to put anybody down or say some people are better than others. It's not my position to judge, and to do so would be pointless anyway.

 

[Jenster]

The only difference between you now and you five years from now are the people you meet and the books you read. I think we should all read influenial books, b/c even if you don't agree with everything in the book- it makes you think. People who read are people who learn more about themselves and more about others.

Reps to Mina!

 

[OhhJim]

To me, sincerity is a key character trait I look for in a friend. Skills without sincerity are hollow, imho.

There are many levels of friendship. I think we all want sincerity from our very bestest friends, but I suggest that the book is only intended to bring a wider range of people into the very basic, initial level of your friends. After that, it's more up to each person who they get more intimate with.

I don't require intimacy to grab a drink with someone, or talk to them at church, for example. Unfortunately, there are people who aren't good at initiating a friendship process, and the book is for them, mostly.

 

[mwb]

I think books like these are great. Brian Tracy is another excellent motivational author. I was checking out one of his books today. Sometimes the advice is repetitive but it's still worthwhile.

Just about everyone needs at least a little motivation in life. I believe that we are all influenced more by the negative events & comments towards us than the positive events & comments. It probably doesn't help that the negative stuff occurs more frequently.

 

[Jenster]

There are many levels of friendship. I think we all want sincerity from our very bestest friends, but I suggest that the book is only intended to bring a wider range of people into the very basic, initial level of your friends. After that, it's more up to each person who they get more intimate with.

I don't require intimacy to grab a drink with someone, or talk to them at church, for example. Unfortunately, there are people who aren't good at initiating a friendship process, and the book is for them, mostly.

I can buy that, OhhJim.

Just about everyone needs at least a little motivation in life. I believe that we are all influenced more by the negative events & comments towards us than the positive events & comments. It probably doesn't help that the negative stuff occurs more frequently.

So true, mwb. Negative things also re-open unhealed wounds, I think, which only serve to keep some of us in a tailspin. I was flipping through one of my journals today and came across a page of affirmations I wrote to myself awhile back. It was great to re-read. And it was a reminder that it actually takes energy and intentionality to stay positive a lot of the time.