Are friends really that necessary in college?

[Majjestic]

<p>From my observations, certain users in this thread seem to be so extreme with their opinion that “friends are a necessity” that I would not be surprised if they would be in favor for a law that forces everyone to have at least one friend. I truly cannot fathom why people feel so strongly to attack and talk down on others that would rather prefer not to have friends, as if it is some sort of crime.</p>

[Mojo91]

<p>you dont make friends by yelling at them</p>

[AGKCHS]

<p>Here is one source, If you search something like “The effects of friendship on life,” more can be found.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.webmd.com/healthy-aging/guide/20061101/strong-friendships-may-help-you-live-longer[/URL]”>What is Emotional Health and How Does it Affect You?;

[Majjestic]

<p>

Here is one source, If you search something like “The effects of friendship on life,” more can be found.

This is a very interesting study. I’ll cede that there may, as quoting from the study, health benefits in friendships such as prolonged lifespan. However, are there any studies that explicitly show that people who are friendless suffer from psychological problems, compromised mental health issues, psychotic behavior as many of the others posters on here were implying earlier? These are the type of studies I am looking for, and I cannot find any that have been conducted. </p>

<p>As a counter example: Red whine has health benefits according to some studies. Would this imply that drinkers are more healthier than non-drinkers?</p>

[kindaslick89]

<p>I really don’t know why anyone would turn down possible friendships and choose to be alone. I am not saying that those people are “weird,” I am just saying that it is a decision that I don’t comprehend. Apparently those people are out there, and a large majority say that they are “happy” so owell.</p>

[Wiscongene]

<p>Who’s the idiot who said people have “evolved” to be social, and if you’re not “social,” you’re not “evolved”? I couldn’t help but laugh. That not only shows an ignorance on the part of understanding introverts, but also on the part of understanding evolutionary theory. </p>

<p>No, sadly, we are all equally evolved, along with every living thing that exists on the planet at this moment in time. However, feel free to revel in your genetic superiority because you have more friends. “Oh, Josef Mengele!.. It would seem you have a new group of 21st century supporters ready to champion your cause!”</p>

<p>Here, read it and weep: <a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/opinion/sunday/26shyness.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/opinion/sunday/26shyness.html?_r=1&pagewanted=1&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>tl;dr for you fellas:</p>

<p>

Yet shy and introverted people have been part of our species for a very long time, often in leadership positions. We find them in the Bible (“Who am I, that I should go unto Pharaoh?" asked Moses, whom the Book of Numbers describes as “very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth.”) We find them in recent history, in figures like Charles Darwin, Marcel Proust and Albert Einstein, and, in contemporary times: think of Google’s Larry Page, or Harry Potter’s creator, J. K. Rowling.”

</p>

<p>and</p>

<p>

IN an illustrative experiment, David Sloan Wilson, a Binghamton evolutionary biologist, dropped metal traps into a pond of pumpkinseed sunfish. The “rover” fish couldn’t help but investigate — and were immediately caught. But the “sitter” fish stayed back, making it impossible for Professor Wilson to capture them. Had Professor Wilson’s traps posed a real threat, only the sitters would have survived. But had the sitters taken Zoloft and become more like bold rovers, the entire family of pumpkinseed sunfish would have been wiped out. “Anxiety” about the trap saved the fishes’ lives.</p>

<p>Next, Professor Wilson used fishing nets to catch both types of fish; when he carried them back to his lab, he noted that the rovers quickly acclimated to their new environment and started eating a full five days earlier than their sitter brethren. In this situation, the rovers were the likely survivors. “There is no single best … [animal] personality,” Professor Wilson concludes in his book, “Evolution for Everyone,” “but rather a diversity of personalities maintained by natural selection.”</p>

<p>The same might be said of humans, 15 percent to 20 percent of whom are also born with sitter-like temperaments that predispose them to shyness and introversion. (The overall incidence of shyness and introversion is higher — 40 percent of the population for shyness, according to the psychology professor Jonathan Cheek, and 50 percent for introversion. Conversely, some born sitters never become shy or introverted at all.)</p>

<p>Once you know about sitters and rovers, you see them everywhere, especially among young children. Drop in on your local Mommy and Me music class: there are the sitters, intently watching the action from their mothers’ laps, while the rovers march around the room banging their drums and shaking their maracas.</p>

<p>Relaxed and exploratory, the rovers have fun, make friends and will take risks, both rewarding and dangerous ones, as they grow. According to Daniel Nettle, a Newcastle University evolutionary psychologist, extroverts are more likely than introverts to be hospitalized as a result of an injury, have affairs (men) and change relationships (women). One study of bus drivers even found that accidents are more likely to occur when extroverts are at the wheel.

</p>

<p>and, finally:</p>

<p>

THE psychologist Gregory Feist found that many of the most creative people in a range of fields are introverts who are comfortable working in solitary conditions in which they can focus attention inward. Steve Wozniak, the engineer who founded Apple with Steve Jobs, is a prime example: Mr. Wozniak describes his creative process as an exercise in solitude. “Most inventors and engineers I’ve met are like me,” he writes in “iWoz,” his autobiography. “They’re shy and they live in their heads. They’re almost like artists. In fact, the very best of them are artists. And artists work best alone … Not on a committee. Not on a team.”

</p>

[enfieldacademy]

<p>woscongene - </p>

<p>humans did evolve to be social; that is fair statement. over the course of our evolution the way we interacted with each other got more complex, sophisticated, etc.</p>

<p>Shyness isn’t the opposite of sociality, and neither is introversion. While shyness may work in opposition to social aims, it is not selected for because it is antisocial. Actually it is the opposite. Fear of rejection in the right dose actually promotes inclusion, which means getting along, and all the hallmarks of social behavior. </p>

<p>At extreme levels shyness is inhibitory, just like not fearing rejection at all could be inhibitory by not filtering reckless actions that would likely get you expelled from the group. (The assumption here is that the humans in the group survive more than the humans not in a group.)</p>

<p>people are genetically superior - that is ,they have genes that give them higher probabilities of being happy and being successful in all the ways that we measure it in life.</p>

<p>Having a lot of friends is probably one indicator (albeit probably not a good once) of genetic superiority. Others would be like SAT scores, etc.</p>

[Coolbrezze]

<p>Friends are not necessary but because of the college environment it would be a plus. For many it is good to be able to have people around them that they are familier with at a friendship level and can trust.</p>

[Wiscongene]

<p>I’m not even going to get deep into the genetics issue with you. I only hope it is enough to say that the number of friends someone isn’t genetic. There’s no genetically “superior” or “inferior” if we’re being objective. Anything that can survive being culled by natural selection is “good enough.” The fact that friendless people exist at all is a testament to their ability to survive and reproduce. </p>

<p>Seriously read the last quote I gave concerning the Apple co-founder, someone who “lives within his own mind” but obviously possess the social skills to cofound a large company. I also implore you to read the article in it’s entirety, which deals more directly with labeling things like “friendlessness” as problematic. </p>

<p>That said, I am in favor of closing this thread. It’s basically become a shouting match between the same 3-4 people. Both sides have said their piece and the OP is no longer around.</p>

[DrewCollins]

<p>^I’m sure the OP wasn’t around when this got bumped anyways…</p>

[uwrobi]

<p>Sometimes being without friends and being okay with that fact can drift into symptoms of schizoid personality disorder. Most people with SPD end up alright, if that’s any help.</p>