My post introducing the “The “SIT Model” for the Virtual Triangle of Bonding” raised so interesting discussions.
Two different schools of thought emerged from these discussions.
A completely different perception of friendship by KEYA GHOSE ELI-MP Mindset Coach. In a comment, she wrote. “I personally live in hopelessness…the concept of friendship does not exist for me…because it is dwelling on needs and we all are complete by ourselves…” KEYA explained her thoughts “We have our own paths and we get few people for few times in life then they go back to their journeys… so it is just a “fellow traveler” for me”.
The above thoughts reminded me of sand grains. Each sand grain is strong but sand grains do not bond to each other.
Clay particles are weak individually, but they bond to each other.
This raises the question that I open for discussion. Does feeling individuality so strongly preclude bonding to others?
I find one of the great merits of exposing vulnerability is that it allows us to bond strongly with others. This is because showing vulnerability brings trust and trust is the glue that keeps people close together.
The other school of thought believed in virtual bonding. John Moore wrote, “What I like about this model (SIT Model) is that it shows what can happen when people seek out other people to strengthen their weaknesses. The group becomes stronger as they add more people like rope when more strands are added. However, like a clock, the cogs have to complement each other. If the group is all strengths or all weaknesses, it will not work.”
This comment reminded me again of two adjacent groceries. One of them is full of customers. The other one has very few customers. New customers tend to flock to the crowded grocery shop. This is the effect of the majority. People tend to think that people choose the crowded shop for a good reason.
We do the same, as we tend to affiliate with a thought that has a majority. We think again that this is for a good reason. Affiliation with the majority is a human tendency.
AHSAN NAQVI shared pertinent views in his comments. He wrote, “This SIT model illustrates how social identity processes shape group cohesion and intergroup dynamics.”
He wrote later. “…the (SIT) Model highlights the intricate interplay between individual identities and group affiliations. As you rightly pointed out, understanding group dynamics is pivotal in comprehending the mechanisms behind various social phenomena, including bullying. By delving deeper into these dynamics, we can uncover the underlying factors that contribute to both positive and negative outcomes within group settings.”
The value of connections is not in conforming but in learning and growing. It is not the connections; it is their real value as growth promoters.
To what extent do you believe in virtual bonding and its strength? Which school of thought do you find more acceptable?