Neutrality

On many occasions neutrality in conflicts is the most reasonable and safest stand. The best example is Canada, who she has virtually no enemies at all. However, when such thing takes place between friends, it became a quite complicated matter. To solve this issue, we have to split the conflict into several categories. First, if the conflict takes place between your friend and a stranger, there is no doubt on which side you should stand. Of course, that is to say the stands are controversial or reasonable on both sides. Then there is conflict between two equally close friends. In this case, neutrality prevents great damage to both friendships, but do note that it does have a little negative impact on both. Now there is the tricky one, when there are two friends arguing, and one is closer than the other. Of course, it seems simple as to treat this case as case 2. However, that will severely damage the friendship and trust of the closer friend. It can be that friendship still remain, but here is the psychology of the closer friend. If you stay neutral to both of us, you see us as equals. However, if I treat you this well and equal treatment with the other, why should i bother? I can do less! That is the mental process of the closer friend. So, I believe a person should either pretend NOT to know about the conflict or stand on the closer friend's side. Either neutrality or supporting the less closer friend is a detestable idea.