Thursday, October 6, 2011

Friend - Brittany Fernandes

Simple Definition:
A friend is a human being who(m) another human being is well acquainted with

Qualifiers:
-through a lengthy time known
-common interests
-an ability to assist the other in a multitude of problems (none of which are sexual)

19 comments:

  1. are you saying if people partake in sexual activities they can't be friends? that doesn't seem right haha but i think thats good for your paper but just consider that as an argument

    ReplyDelete
  2. Explain what defines "lenghty" because this is not a specific amount of time and varies from person to person. Also, what is considered "well-acquainted"--does this mean they have known each other for years, talked or spent time together? You have some good qualifiers, though.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree with the above. You should talk about what do you mean by common interests and what they are.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great start! I think that friends can be well aquatinted even if they don't share common interests so your topic builds a good argument.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I know it's an odd type of friendship, but what if the friends don;t have any common interest but are really close friends? That's how my friend and I are.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Explain the types of problems a friend can help with. Also think about age and what a friend is not. Good topic.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Friends can have different interests...a thought to keep in mind! So if you have a fight with your "friend", is he/she still considered as your "friend"? Friends can have fights but know when to stop and apologize.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Do they have to be human to human? What about "a dog is a man's best friend" kinda thing. Also do friends have to be known for a long time? What if you just met and hit it off and got along really well. Common interests isn't always necessary either is it? But I agree with the sexual part because then it'd be "friend with benefit" :p

    ReplyDelete
  9. I like your subtle hint that friends with benefits aren't really friends. haha Im guessing that you just typed this up quickly, but you may want to change "lengthy" into a specific time about either measured in actual time or perhaps moments shared or something. Otherwise I think this is a really good topic.
    An argument that may arise is something along the lines of when do you go from acquaintance to friend...

    ReplyDelete
  10. You could also talk about what type of maturity both friends will or will not have. Like you can be friends with a 10 year old but you can't do so much with them because they are 10 years old so there truly going to have a mind of a 10 year old but we ( as college students ) have a different mentality or something along those lines.

    ReplyDelete
  11. it's "whom". Anyway I like your def. You remind me my friends in Vietnam. We did know each other for a long time, we have same interests, but since I moved here, we no longer are able to assist each other in problems. But I know they're always there for me. You might think about true friends or just social friends. I mean how can I call a person friend?

    ReplyDelete
  12. There are many stages of friendship, like "just friends" "Best friends" "life long friends" I like how you defined your version of the definition, and you are very on point with you definition. I also do like you qualifiers and it does support you definition.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I like you qualifers I would only argue that a friendship involves favors, not solely but being able to ask for something of a friend and having peace of mind that it will get done.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anticipate the argument that friends can be made quickly, rather than having to know each other for a long period of time!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I like that your definition draws all these lines on what the word actually stands for. It is definitly arguable, I somewhat agree with Kenny in the idea that some people may think that you can hook up and still be friends... but other may also disagree. I feel like this owuld be a quality back and forth argument with yourself in your paper as James said in class. Good job

    ReplyDelete
  16. This looks good to me. As for the qualifier that consists of the ability to assist the other in a multitude of problems you don’t have to justify that it is not meant sexually.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I think it is good but I think I might take out the non sexual part but i guess that is up to you and if you leave it in then you will definitely have people arguing against it.

    ReplyDelete
  18. good definition it is arguable and can get readers to question that. your last qualifier I am not sure about maybe not sexual

    ReplyDelete
  19. Very arguable definition. Good job on your qualifiers-they are very fitting.

    ReplyDelete