the
I think many people are aware of this formula in human relations as "take - give". Or "take - to".
that's interesting, but is there any difference in these formulations, in fact?
They're like about the same thing?
Or still not quite?
what do you think, friends?
I'll share my thoughts, and you might want to share? In the comments after the article? It will be interesting and I would appreciate it:)
I would Start with the fact that a mutual exchange in a relationship is always present.
We do something in relationship with other people join?
That is something we want from them, right?
And other people want something from us.
This is not necessarily something tangible. Although it can be material too.
for Example, we may want kind words, friendly smiles from a friend. We then mood improves. And, probably, it is natural to respond in the same way - with kind words and a smile.
As they say, a trifle, but nice:)
And next time when meeting us, probably, wants to say a kind word and smile to this person.
Waiting for (maybe subconsciously, but still - waiting) that he gave us something too good say with smile.
And everyone is happy:)
Well, if we told him friendly words, warm smiles, and he nods stiffly back at us, that feeling we most likely will experience unpleasant. Because we gave him more than he got.
Well, it is, of course, conditional - for example. But for this simple example, clear - about the notorious balance as he runs.
when we give something of life to another, and he gives us in response, a great many. It's just that usually we have them at this angle will not be considered. But the interchange is constant.
And it is this balance, in actual fact, is the very explanation why one relationship is created, preserved and developed, while others wither and waste away.
But essentially it does not change - relationship depends on balance.
And if relationships fall apart, it's likely that we gave not what was needed, or he gave not that, in fact, need us.
And if all apparent absurdity of the relationship is stored, then most likely, the people in them get exactly what need. Get important for yourself.
the significance of this interchange is probably more than what they do not like on the surface.
Well, for example, absolutely scandalous situation in the family where the husband is an alcoholic, and the wife of the victim.
That's kind of bad, not diverge. Although we suffer, and complain to each other.
But if do not differ, then there's a reason?
of Course, it may be different, but as an option, the alcoholic has a home, a life and care possible sex good periods and some other bonuses.
And the victim - status of married women in society, male assistance on the farm in moments of sobriety, sympathy (and even admiration) and the support of others.
That is, each party gets something important for you.
it is Clear that there in each case should be dealt separately and individually, but once the relationship is stored, that the balance is satisfied. Even though he's in such an ugly form.
And Yes, of course, we are not always able to understand that we give. Because what we give, and what someone else needs may, in fact, strongly differ.
That is, we give something consciously and the other gets it. But do I need it? Or does he need it?
Because he can take it is not what we think what he needs!
in the opposite direction this would also work.
for Example, a partner is trying hard to please us, and gave us coffee in bed, and we generally it is absolutely not necessary and, moreover, even annoying, because you have sleepy something to drink, what do not want)) and even try to cast a big kick out of this - to please the partner of their gratitude))
And in fact, the partner receives pleasure from what we "joyfully" this coffee drink, and from that drinking coffee thrown at him)) And we get pleasure from hug))
And here it is - balance!:)
Although it was possible without coffee to do))
In General, I think it is clear that in the balance and we give and we give.
But take or get? Is there a difference?
it seems to Me that there is a difference.
Because to take is the active position.
And the get - passive.
Taking - interested that he is given.
And the receiver waiting, that will give him what he wants.
That is the taker makes a step towards the desired and, may be, and initiative - holds out his hand.
receiving the same, figuratively speaking, posture standing on the spot with an open palm up hand.
In General, can be different, but the most important thing is balance.
Well, of course, that's a very simplistic description, but in fact? And as you think, friends? Look like?
do Not claim to truth in the last instance, my dear readers, and share, "thinking out loud":)
Thank you for your attention!
Galina V.
I think many people are aware of this formula in human relations as "take - give". Or "take - to".
that's interesting, but is there any difference in these formulations, in fact?
They're like about the same thing?
Or still not quite?
what do you think, friends?
I'll share my thoughts, and you might want to share? In the comments after the article? It will be interesting and I would appreciate it:)
I would Start with the fact that a mutual exchange in a relationship is always present.
We do something in relationship with other people join?
That is something we want from them, right?
And other people want something from us.
This is not necessarily something tangible. Although it can be material too.
for Example, we may want kind words, friendly smiles from a friend. We then mood improves. And, probably, it is natural to respond in the same way - with kind words and a smile.
As they say, a trifle, but nice:)
And next time when meeting us, probably, wants to say a kind word and smile to this person.
Waiting for (maybe subconsciously, but still - waiting) that he gave us something too good say with smile.
And everyone is happy:)
Well, if we told him friendly words, warm smiles, and he nods stiffly back at us, that feeling we most likely will experience unpleasant. Because we gave him more than he got.
Well, it is, of course, conditional - for example. But for this simple example, clear - about the notorious balance as he runs.
when we give something of life to another, and he gives us in response, a great many. It's just that usually we have them at this angle will not be considered. But the interchange is constant.
And it is this balance, in actual fact, is the very explanation why one relationship is created, preserved and developed, while others wither and waste away.
That's just in violation of the balance and should look for the cause.
of Course, what we give to another, and what he gives to us, sometimes may not be aware of fully.But essentially it does not change - relationship depends on balance.
And if relationships fall apart, it's likely that we gave not what was needed, or he gave not that, in fact, need us.
And if all apparent absurdity of the relationship is stored, then most likely, the people in them get exactly what need. Get important for yourself.
the significance of this interchange is probably more than what they do not like on the surface.
Well, for example, absolutely scandalous situation in the family where the husband is an alcoholic, and the wife of the victim.
That's kind of bad, not diverge. Although we suffer, and complain to each other.
But if do not differ, then there's a reason?
of Course, it may be different, but as an option, the alcoholic has a home, a life and care possible sex good periods and some other bonuses.
And the victim - status of married women in society, male assistance on the farm in moments of sobriety, sympathy (and even admiration) and the support of others.
That is, each party gets something important for you.
it is Clear that there in each case should be dealt separately and individually, but once the relationship is stored, that the balance is satisfied. Even though he's in such an ugly form.
And Yes, of course, we are not always able to understand that we give. Because what we give, and what someone else needs may, in fact, strongly differ.
That is, we give something consciously and the other gets it. But do I need it? Or does he need it?
Because he can take it is not what we think what he needs!
in the opposite direction this would also work.
for Example, a partner is trying hard to please us, and gave us coffee in bed, and we generally it is absolutely not necessary and, moreover, even annoying, because you have sleepy something to drink, what do not want)) and even try to cast a big kick out of this - to please the partner of their gratitude))
And in fact, the partner receives pleasure from what we "joyfully" this coffee drink, and from that drinking coffee thrown at him)) And we get pleasure from hug))
And here it is - balance!:)
Although it was possible without coffee to do))
In General, I think it is clear that in the balance and we give and we give.
But take or get? Is there a difference?
it seems to Me that there is a difference.
Because to take is the active position.
And the get - passive.
Taking - interested that he is given.
And the receiver waiting, that will give him what he wants.
That is the taker makes a step towards the desired and, may be, and initiative - holds out his hand.
receiving the same, figuratively speaking, posture standing on the spot with an open palm up hand.
In General, can be different, but the most important thing is balance.
Well, of course, that's a very simplistic description, but in fact? And as you think, friends? Look like?
do Not claim to truth in the last instance, my dear readers, and share, "thinking out loud":)
Thank you for your attention!
I'm ready professionally to help you to understand how the balance in your relationship or how it can be corrected.
the psychologist's office in Moscow or by Skype, or in consultation here on the website - your choice. All contacts from the link below.
for an appointment http://www.b17.ru/balakhonskaya/#consultation
Register on the website b17.ru and get access to interesting information on practical psychology