Current location - Music Encyclopedia - Dating - Please explain interpersonal relationship from a philosophical point of view? How to deal with interpersonal relationships?
Please explain interpersonal relationship from a philosophical point of view? How to deal with interpersonal relationships?
interpersonal relationship from a philosophical perspective?

In China, it is actually Confucius' philosophy of joining the WTO.

The central idea of Confucius' philosophy of joining the WTO is of course the golden mean.

it can be summed up in five words: "benevolence, righteousness, courtesy, ambition and faith", which is probably the philosophy of most Chinese people and a standard. If you can do "benevolence, righteousness, courtesy, ambition and trust" to others in interpersonal relationships.

you can basically be called a true gentleman. I won't elaborate on it one by one, but I'll tell you another philosophy of life later.

Zhou Guoping's theory of communication.

all communication has an insurmountable final boundary. Between two people, this boundary is not clear, but it is certain. All troubles and conflicts begin with an unintentional attempt to break through this boundary. However, once this boundary is clearly identifiable and strictly observed, all the charm of communication will be lost, and emotion will leave and reason will maintain order.

people don't think their time, energy and mood are valuable, so they squander them carelessly. On the contrary, a person who cherishes life will definitely prefer to create in loneliness and then dedicate the best fruits to the world. Sound interpersonal relationships and social order depend on respect, not love. The reason is simple: you can only love a few people, but you must respect all people. Love your enemy-it's too melodramatic. Respect your enemies-it can be done. Confucius knew this truth very well. He opposed good for evil and advocated straight for evil.

Society is a field that complicates human nature. Of course, no one can live completely out of society. However, no one has to give up his spiritual life for the sake of society. For those with strong spiritual instinct, it is natural to control social communication and simplify social relations. Because of this, they can cross the social barriers and move towards great spiritual goals.

if you are too close to a gentleman, anyone may be accustomed to or forced to be rude. Therefore, all communication, whether it is love, marriage or close friendship, should keep a proper distance. Society is a field that complicates human nature. Of course, no one can live completely out of society. However, no one has to give up his spiritual life for the sake of society. For those with strong spiritual instinct, it is natural to control social communication and simplify social relations. Because of this, they can cross the social barriers and move towards great spiritual goals. People often mistakenly believe that those who are enthusiastic about socializing are generous people. Tagore put it well, they are just squandering, not giving, and spenders often lack real generosity. So, what is the difference between profligacy and generosity? I think so: profligacy is to take out what you don't cherish, and generosity is to take out what you cherish. This is the case with enthusiastic people in social fields. People often mistakenly think that those who are enthusiastic about social activities are generous people. Tagore put it well, they are just squandering, not giving, and spenders often lack real generosity.

So, what's the difference between profligacy and generosity? I think so: profligacy is to take out what you don't cherish, and generosity is to take out what you cherish. Enthusiasts on the social field are just like this. They don't think their time, energy and mood are valuable, so they squander them without care. On the contrary, a person who cherishes life will definitely prefer to create in loneliness and then dedicate the best fruits to the world.

children don't think their time, energy and mood are valuable, so they squander them carelessly. On the contrary, a person who cherishes life will definitely prefer to create in loneliness and then dedicate the best fruits to the world. Sound interpersonal relationships and social order depend on respect, not love. The reason is simple: you can only love a few people, but you must respect all people. Love your enemy-it's too melodramatic. Respect your enemies-it can be done. Confucius knew this truth very well. He opposed good for evil and advocated straight for evil.

A sound interpersonal relationship and social order depend on respect, not love. The reason is simple: you can only love a few people, but you must respect all people.

Chinese and foreign sages have taught us: "Don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you." This is for us to take care of each other and not impose what we regard as evil, pain or disaster on others. Doing what you don't want to do to others, harming others and benefiting yourself, and building your own happiness on the suffering of others, is of course a serious violation of others. However, this is only one aspect of the matter.

On the other hand, what you consider good, happy and happy can be imposed on others? If others don't think they are good, happy and happy like you, isn't this a serious violation of others? In real life, more disputes really start from forcing others to accept their own interests, opinions, positions and so on. On the issue of faith, he tried to unify the world with a certain doctrine he believed in, even at the expense of waging war for it. As small as the way of thinking, living habits, artistic appreciation and literary criticism, it is easy for people to take what they do and reject what others do. Even within a family, the struggle between husband and wife to transform each other's tastes is not uncommon.

it is good, for helping others, saving lives and benefiting people. Little did they know that in human history, the world conquerors who claimed to be saviors caused far more suffering than ordinary gangsters. We should remember that what we want is not necessarily what people want, nor can we do it to others. If "don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you" is the basic moral character of a civilized person, it opposes intentional injury to others and advocates that you should live by yourself and let others live, then "don't do to others what you want" is the advanced cultivation of a civilized person, which respects the independent personality and spiritual freedom of others, and then advocates living in your own way and letting others live in others' way. There are two diametrically opposite understandings of how to be considerate of others. In a person's view, this means respecting the individuality of others, not imposing one's own wishes on others, not disturbing others at will, and not embarrassing others. In the eyes of another person, this means being ready to help others, showing concern to others frequently, and being unusually warm-hearted. The difference between them stems from the difference in personality and concept, and what they ask of others is also different. Understanding each other as interpersonal relationship is rooted in not knowing the mystery of human spiritual life. According to this line of thinking, on the one hand, people attach great importance to whether others understand themselves or not, and even openly ask for understanding. At least in sex, this aspect of asking for

things is often ignored. People seem to think that it is an obvious evil to do to others what you don't want to do to others. The starting point is to harm others, but the motive of doing to others what you want is good, to help others, save lives and benefit others. Little did they know that in human history, the world conquerors who claimed to be saviors caused far more suffering than ordinary gangsters. We should remember that what we want is not necessarily what people want, nor can we do it to others. If "don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you" is the basic moral character of a civilized person, it opposes intentional injury to others and advocates that you should live by yourself and let others live, then "don't do to others what you want" is the advanced cultivation of a civilized person, which respects the independent personality and spiritual freedom of others, and then advocates living in your own way and letting others live in others' way.

As for interpersonal relationships, I have gradually summed up a principle that is most in line with my temperament, that is, mutual respect and affinity. I believe that all good friendships are formed naturally, not deliberately. I also believe that even a good friend should have a distance, and too lively friendship is often empty.

what makes a communication valuable is not the communication itself, but the respective values of the participants. High-quality friendship always happens between two excellent independent personalities, and its essence is mutual sincere appreciation and respect. Therefore, it is important to make yourself truly valuable and worthy of being a high-quality friend, which is the primary contribution a person can make to friendship.

among friends, the most important thing is respect.

Your friend confided in you, so you should keep it a secret and don't tell anyone. Maybe your friend has revealed this secret to others, but you still have to treat it as if you are the only one who knows it, and don't let the secret spread from you.

when your friends need you most, you must show up. However, this cannot be a reason to think that you have the right to appear in front of him at any time. Even for your best friend, you have no right.

old clothes that must not be changed. Of course, you can wear new clothes, but you don't know whether you can become friends or not until you wear old ones. People who change friends frequently have no real friends. Friendship is tolerant. Because of this, once friends turn against each other, they are often irretrievable, which shows that their differences must be very serious and have reached the point of intolerance. It is only possible to break up between good friends. The deeper the past communication, the more difficult it is to repair the rift now, and it is too unnatural to maintain a casual acquaintance. As for people who are just casual acquaintances, it is ambiguous to pay or not to pay, so it is far from breaking up. Extroverts tend to get many friends, but they always have few real friends. Introverts are lonely, and once they get friends, it is often true. I always feel funny when I see that bookstores sell best-selling books such as teaching communicative success. It is natural for a person to have a good impression on someone, make friends with him or her, or be interested in something and try his best to make it successful. If you don't memorize the main points, you can't make friends, and if you don't beg for the secrets, you can't do your career. This shows how much you lack true feelings and interests. However, without true feelings, how can there be true friends? Without real interest, how can there be a real career? In that case, why bother to communicate and succeed? Of course, there are obvious utilitarian motives for doing this, but it is still superficial. The deeper reason is spiritual emptiness, so I am eager to find a shortcut to hide in people and affairs. I don't know the effect, but I know that if such a communicator comes near me, I will feel more lonely, and if such a successful person stands in front of me, I will feel more bored. Reading is like making friends, with at least one exception, that is, reading books that teach making friends. Making friends thrives, but true friends die. In the name of friendship, there is no friendship that does not break down. In the end, they accuse each other of not being friends enough and express their indignation at the fragility of friendship. In fact, what does friendship have to do with it? The so-called friendship is false from the beginning, but it is just a mask and tool for interests. Today's people give it a proper

When your friend is in great happiness or great sorrow, you should know how to be silent and not disturb him, which is also a kind of respect and education.

When you get along with people, if you feel particularly relaxed and really learn from it, I'm sure you must have met your kind, even if you are engaged in completely different occupations.

I always feel funny when I see that bookstores sell best-selling books such as teaching communicative success. It is natural for a person to have a good impression on someone, make friends with him or her, or be interested in something and try his best to make it successful. If you don't memorize the main points, you can't make friends, and if you don't beg for the secrets, you can't do your career. This shows how much you lack true feelings and interests. However, without true feelings, how can there be true friends? Without real interest, how can there be a real career? In that case, why bother to communicate and succeed? Of course, there are obvious utilitarian motives for doing this, but it is still superficial. The deeper reason is spiritual emptiness, so I am eager to find a shortcut to hide in people and affairs. I don't know the effect, but I know that if such a communicator comes near me, I will feel more lonely, and if such a successful person stands in front of me, I will feel more bored.

In dealing with people, Confucius emphasized the word "faithfulness" most, which I think is correct. Whether people are honest or not can best reflect whether a person's character is aboveboard. Even if a person has friends all over the world, as long as he is treacherous to one of his friends, we have every reason to doubt whether he really loves his friends, because once he thinks it necessary, he will also betray other friends. "Make friends without believing" can only succeed in a moment's selfish desires, but it is a great failure of being a man.