Why don't people thank

Gratitude is directly related to the feeling of shame, or, to put it another way, those for whom we ourselves have done something good are considered good in the typical sense.

This determines the difference in attitude towards the given and received “gifts” even regardless of their form, that is, it forms and determines the attitude towards the corresponding events and the individuals participating in them.

The typical modern person has a mixed personality structure, where various radicals (behavior-determining factors of influence) are intricately intertwined with each other.

This is the relative difficulty of correctly diagnosing any assessments – they are all subjective.

If we talk about professional and specific assessments based on scientific methodology, it is appropriate to determine (predictability of behavioral reactions) personality by psychotype based on the predominant radical that is most significant for a specific personality.

Therefore, there are different possible explanations for this or that behavioral reaction of gratitude, says psychologist Andrei Kashkarov .

Let's look at two examples.

Example of Leo Tolstoy

In the literary legacy of Leo Tolstoy there is a phrase: “It always seems that we are loved because we are so good. But we do not realize that we are loved because those who love us are good”; this is not a play on words, of course.

Gratitude and love are not the same thing, however, the root of the manifestation of such feelings is the same. And the reasons for the destruction of love and the refusal of gratitude are the same.

Namely, the loss of the feeling of a gift, the loss of the perception of oneself as gifted by someone's grace. Here, of course, we are not only talking about material gifts, it is just that they are the most convenient examples to show for understanding.

Mercy can also be unconditional – both in divine meaning and theological praxis.

Thus, a person who has given us something deserves a reward - gratitude at the very least. However, it happens that the giver does not show the proper (as it seems to us) feelings when giving or afterwards, that is, he is conditionally inconsistent (he gave - "like a bone thrown" and forgot, or even worse - got carried away by someone else) - in the options of actions he showed his disdain or inattention.

Then we do not feel obligated to thank, because we believe that the giver is not worthy of it.

Moreover, in some cases similar to the one considered, depending on one’s own imperfect character traits, experience and thoughts, it may seem to the recipient (oh, the paranoid horror…) that the gift is a mockery and/or that the donor used the recipient for some of his own purposes, about which no one really knows.

And it’s unknown because the donor (the bastard) skillfully hid it.

There is nothing special to comment on here, except for elements of paranoid thinking and habit; we do not assume or confirm diagnoses, but such an example of the situation is not so exceptional in practice.

In another situation, when the giver preserves our own significance and elevates it even higher (maintains the relationship, gives more and more), we are imbued with confidence in our own “irresistibility” and significance, which is very flattering, of course, to any consciousness, because in our dreams we are such (we consider ourselves the most exceptional, outstanding and intelligent, but we do not admit it openly out of false modesty) - then, having found confirmation of our significance and value, we thank, as it seems to us, sincerely the giver and wish for the continuation of the relationship.

Including ourselves becoming a necessary value for the giver's ego, that is, we give gifts to him too. This is where the myth of strengthening relationships comes from.

Misperception and Myth

Myth – because the basis for the manifestation of such feelings and behavioral reactions is not fundamental, unstable and dependent on many conditions and subsequent situations.

If this were not the case, then some friends, even those with many years of relationship, would never leave us, and we would never leave them.

Thus, the reasons for the destruction of even once "strong friendships", among other things, include this: the loss of one's own significance in the eyes of another (partner, donor, etc.). In such a situation, and even more complicated by the systematic nature of the phenomenon, a person's consciousness feels uncomfortable.

It is in a state of cognitive dissonance - with dissatisfaction between the expected and desired - and the real.

That is why gifts in general and expressions of feelings in particular should be treated very responsibly. You can give and make a person happy with this event.

But if, once you have done it, you stop the consistent policy, and especially if in a quarrel or otherwise demand the gift back, then you will cause significant psychological trauma to the other, and its consequences depend (including for you) on the moral and business qualities of the gifted person.

The most stupid thing in this situation is to test or try another (often this behavioral pattern can be observed in the fair half of humanity) - in the manner of “now I will give him (her), and then we will see, check how he (she) will react and what he (she) will give in return.”

They are looking for confirmation or refutation – is he/she greedy, stingy or emotionally poor. Neither one, nor the other, nor the third can be confirmed by such a single test; all these are extremely simplified models and attempts to test and manipulate another.

For any gift - by its definition - has an unconditional (selfless) value. It cannot be demanded in return. But what do people do?

While formally agreeing with this (because this is required by certain conventional moral norms), they – and this is the main thing – do not agree consciously, that is, they expect that in response the other will show himself by giving them a gift.

And so the hidden, unmanifested expectation of a return gift (in any form), if it contradicts reality, leads to a cooling of relations and a desire to thank. The imperfect and not yesterday discovered principle of "you to me - I to you" works.

Those who live according to such patterns are conditionally emotionally poor, although they may own a large amount of real estate or significant material assets.

This position (typical among modern people) spoils many things. But people do not understand what the matter is, and with this article we have tried to explain it. Make a person significant, - taught Dale Brakhage Carnegie, - this is the highest desire of another.

And the most valuable trick (and not just the material gift) is the conditional drug that forms an addiction, which makes you yourself indispensable to the other.

Therefore, the value of a gift (in various forms, including attention to us) is determined by us subjectively by how much the giver has made and, most importantly, continues to make us significant, or “happy,” as they say in common parlance.

In this sense, understanding L. N. Tolstoy’s quote explains everything.

Benjamin Franklin was right

On the same topic, the “Benjamin Franklin effect” is known for understanding the behavioral patterns of the donor and the recipient.

The learned man with his story allowed to perceive the effect of cognitive dissonance in a variable way. The effect of B. Franklin's story is that "we feel sympathy for those whom we have helped, and disdain for those who have helped us."

A person under the influence of contradictory thoughts brings them into line with the easiest, safest version of perception for themselves. They force us to bring them into line, and then what is described in this article occurs.

Consciousness is confronted with negatively colored emotions when other people help or proactively do something good for us.

When a feeling of shame arises at a subconscious level, the defensive mental reaction devalues the object of help.

It is unpleasant to realize that it is the "I" who is bad only because I did not respond adequately, for example, with an equivalent gift for a gift. But it is impossible to admit that you are "bad". Therefore, these are typical human reactions.

Practical example

An interesting interpretation of the same effect can be found in personal relationships. A young man gives flowers.

Well, what can he do, nothing better? He gives because he feels the gift is desirable: by giving a girl flowers, the giver's own value in her eyes increases. In addition, there are other reasons for the act, but let's focus on the main motive: he wants to get what he wants.

And there can be several desires. Can they be called a narcissistic manifestation - of course.

The girl's favor is not yet guaranteed, but the chances for the young man are increasing. The fair sex actively uses this, especially when the suitor has already shown himself - has shown personal interest, his further actions are predictable and conditionally known.

And here's why. Flowers are not something super important, but when you value a woman slightly better than she (yourself), an irrational escalation occurs for the giver, which leads him to develop a dependence on the object of the gift.

Moreover, if you think about why “ungrateful” people responded to “kindness” with indifference or even took revenge, think about whether it was really “kindness”, because subjective understanding, like attitude, can be different, but a catch is always felt, even intuitively.

Or remember the Benjamin Franklin effect.
It is important to do something that cannot be reduced to a product. Then the reward manifests itself as vital energy.

Earlier we talked about the 3 characteristics of an ideal man .