Somebody used the word cathexis a while back. I didn't know what it meant, so I asked my dictionary. The dictionary said:

2 definitions found

From The Collaborative International Dictionary of English [gcide]:

Cathexis \Cath*ex"is\, n. [Gr. ka`qexis, keeping.]
1. (Psychiatry) the process of investing mental, emotional, or libidinal energy or significance in an object, person, or idea.
[PJC]

2. (Psychiatry) the emotional or libidinal energy invested in an object, person, or idea.
[PJC]

From WordNet (r) 1.6 [wn]:

cathexis
n : (psychoanalysis) the libidinal energy invested in some idea or person or object; "Freud thought of cathexis as a psychic analog of an electrical charge" [syn: {charge}]

So I thought about this. As a concept, it comes close to meeting some of the stuff I've made up for myself because I didn't know the words in the English language for it. Stuff like bonding (although that's a two-way thing with some other oddities attached). Like the way I love my friends. Like the ways I try and describe what friendship means to me, and the things I have to try and explain when people don't get what being friends means to me. And... friendship's pretty important.

So, once I thought I understood the word, I tried to (in my head) explain or describe a situation where someone didn't use or have any cathexis. That's a process I sometimes use in order to sift my own thinking while I'm learning a concept. I ended up coming up with three real-life examples, from three different friends.

The first one is simple to describe (although our friendship is of sufficient depth and strength to definitely not be simple to describe). Cathexis generally doesn't appear to occur in his dealings with people, or with most of his dealings with objects, either. If you were to ask him the right questions and get honest answers, he'd most likely say that it was because he was too lazy to actually get involved. Nothing is worth having effort or energy put into it. I have occasionally wondered if our friendship continues as it is because it would be too much effort to change things.

The second one is odd. He genuinely appears to have little emotion, to respond to pretty much all situations with neutrality. As a general rule, this appears in his behaviour as a lack of connection with anything, the true socially-challenged geek who while quite friendly and social, has mastered few social skills and remains completely unaware of this fact, or that there is anything to learn. His friends (and I count myself among them) simply laugh his mishaps off as just being him. There's nothing else you can do, because speaking to him about it carries no weight. And it's not an easy thing to explain to someone who is oblivious to social nuance. Like telling a blind man about the many shades of the colour green, and the differences between them.

Then there's the third, someone I love deeply. Yes, I guess that means to a certain extent I've invested cathexis of my own in him (is that how you say it?), but that's another story. I find him interesting to watch. His empathy toward people appears to be excellent, and his powers of perception equally good, combined with the intelligence to make sense of this. At the best of times, this appears as respect and compassion and silent understanding of the many factors influencing an situation/person/event. At the worst of times, this shows as a biting cynicism that penetrates deep to the heart of just what is wrong with something. But in all cases, there's a distancing of self that goes with it, a refusal to acknowledge the event as part of oneself or of great importance to oneself. This allows an approach of humour, allows the existence of a genuine delight in the turns that life takes, and provides a certain amount of resilience to both change and obstacle. It's also a self-containment that seems so absolute it's impenetrable. I know it's not. But it took me a while to be convinced of this. The only way to penetrate it appears to be that in turn, you release any need, any possessiveness, any form of force or control or pressure. Anything that might show itself as a sign of imposing cathexis. And then you genuinely return the respect, the compassion, the awareness, with humour, understanding and honesty. And slowly, through appreciation, you create cathexis. It seems backwards writing it this way - that you give up creating cathexis between you in order to be allowed to create cathexis between you - but at the same time, it makes very good sense.

And, I guess what I've described in that last example is what I try and explain to people about friendship - that what I value is a genuine sharing, albeit laced with large amounts of affection. Not forced in any way, but simply grown out of respect and understanding. Not aimed to fill a need or to be used, but just there. I find that that kind of friendship is what most allows me to in honesty love someone, without doubt or disbelief. To value someone's importance, and treasure their presence, and feel the delight that comes with being around someone you genuinely like and are liked by. And, in the end, it's the situation in which (if this is how you say it) I invest the most cathexis in someone.