|
↖ Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?'
What is a good partner?
Before reading this question, read the question 'What is a good friend?'
Indeed, a good partner is almost the same thing. The relationship therefore has the same fundamental characteristics of respect for the other, trust in the other, solidarity, and shared projects or common interests.
However, at the level of a partner, solidarity must be more important, because one can have several friends, but only one partner.
Moreover, the shared project must be broader since it concerns a global life project.
Finally, a relationship with a partner implies a minimum physical attraction.
The risk of being in a couple
One may live for years without realizing that in the other person, respect and solidarity are only superficial, that the other person wore a mask even in the intimacy of the couple, thus making trust an illusion in essence. Often, it is only the hardships of life that lead to discovering the true intentions of the other.
This is to be distinguished from betrayal, for example infidelity, which can be the result of a passing impulse.
The limits of communication
Communication is in fashion. Indeed, couple therapists tend to reduce all problems to communication issues. However, couples' problems have two very different kinds of causes.
The first cause is that one lacks the courage to address the issue, or is overwhelmed by emotions when expressing it. In this case, it is indeed a communication problem... and even more so, it is often a lack of mastery in the technique for solving problems (identifying the problem, exploring the causes, finding a partial solution, and implementing it).
Conversely, the second cause is that the issue is repeatedly brought up, yet no change occurs. In this case, it is a fundamental problem within one or both members of the couple, and communication will not change it. Worse, if it concerns a lack of respect by one partner towards the other, reducing it to a communication problem shifts part of the responsibility from the aggressor to the victim 'who did not communicate well enough'. See the questions 'Why is it important to master one's ego?', 'What must one do to be a good person?' and 'Is fidelity necessary in a couple?'.
Break up or not?
When the union (marriage or an alternative form) is not satisfying, the question of breaking up arises. At this stage, it is important to go beyond the simple 'I no longer get along with him / her' before seriously considering separation. A better starting question is: Is it still possible to find a constructive way of living with the person we initially chose?
Such a rephrasing has two advantages:
•
|
It rules out pessimism where couple life becomes a path of crosses.
|
•
|
It sets a very strong requirement: not to have passively accepted that 'things were no longer working' or 'he or she betrayed me', but to have also tried everything reasonably feasible to put the relationship back on constructive foundations.
|
Next, answering this question requires working on two levels:
•
|
The possibility of making the couple satisfying, that is to say, restoring the four qualities of friendship at the level of the couple (respect for the other, trust in the other, solidarity, shared projects and common interests). From what has been said above, we can conclude that this requires both partners to adopt a 'successful life' approach, which is quite unlikely if one of them had a clear orientation towards 'success in life'.
|
•
|
Assessing external reasons for the couple that could justify continuing the relationship, even if its functioning is not fully satisfactory. For example, protecting the children. Once the external reasons are identified, if the stakes related to them are major, the question can possibly be transformed into: What am I, as an individual, capable of reasonably enduring?
More detailed explanation: Remember that friendship and love are measured by how much one is willing to be wronged in the relationship with the other in order to preserve that relationship. In the current case, it can be formulated as how much one is willing to be wronged in the relationship to protect the external reasons, for example, the children. Ultimately, it is a matter of finding the right balance between 'I don't want to be wronged at all', and 'I accept to be wronged beyond my capacity, or beyond the stakes related to the external reasons'.
|
The couple as a realization of an ideal
Our confrontation with our fellow human beings shows us every day that few people are able to go beyond the instinct of social ambition, and the major cognitive dissonance that results from it over time. Thus, the larger a group is, the lower the probability that it will achieve the ideal of functioning based on kindness, sincerity, and problem solving. Therefore, the couple can be seen as the least improbable configuration to achieve this ideal. This can be found implicitly expressed in an author like Zola (series The Three Cities).
Go deeper
See the question 'Tell me how you make decisions and I will tell you who you are' which proposes a typology of the individual.
Regarding the problem-solving technique, refer to the question 'What are the conditions to meet in order to produce a serious reasoning?' as well as the book From Capital to Reason chapter 9 'The Problem Journal'. The problem-solving technique is described in the 'Functioning' paragraph. This method, designed for the professional world, might seem strange and rigid in the private sphere, but knowing how to assist each other in reasoning when facing a problem is a basic skill that is fully useful in the private sphere. It is better to have reasoning guided in a somewhat rigid way than to have reasoning that is smooth but omits one of the steps.
|