Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics

Aristotle once said, “Friendship is a single soul dwelling in two bodies.” There are many things that go into the process of friendship. Some people deal with friendship one way while others deal with it in another way. Cicero had a lot to say about the different aspects of friendship in his time, but how would he view modern friendship? Some friendships Cicero may not be proud of; like the common relationships that are forced on in a classroom or work place and the lack of allowing nature to take control and make the friendships that are meant to happen. However, Cicero would be happy with the way the higher level friendships have developed in virtue

Friendship, according to Aristotle there are 3 definitions of friendship. Friendship of Utility, “thus friends whose affection is based on utility do not love each other in themselves, but in so far as some benefit accrues to them from each other.” Friendship of Pleasure, “And similarly with those whose friendship is based on pleasure: for instance, we enjoy the society of witty people not because of what they are in themselves, but because they are agreeable to us.” Friendship of the Good. “The perfect form of friendship is that between the good, and those who resemble each other in virtue. For these friends wish each alike the other’s good in respect of their goodness, and they are good in themselves; but it is those who wish the good of their friends for their friends’ sake who are friends in the fullest sense, since they love each other for themselves and not accidentally. Hence the

Saul’s son Jonathan found great favor in David. Jonathan grew to love David, and helped protect him from Saul’s wrath. The friendship of David and Jonathan was the effect of divine grace, which produces in true believers one heart and one soul, and causes them to love each other (Henry, 2000). It is possible to love other people even if a parent has hatred in their hearts towards them. When Jonathan could not stop Saul’s march toward evil, he could warn the intended victim, thus averting a tragedy (Fackler, 2006). Christians in today’s world can learn a valuable lesson of loving others even if there are issues that are impending on the situation that could cause anger to occur. Jonathan was loyal to David causing a positive reflection on his covenant and commitment to his friendship with David. “And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul” (KJV, 1 Samuel 18:1). Jonathan vowed to help David and stood by his word. Those who love Christ as their own souls will be willing to join themselves to him in an everlasting covenant (Henry, 2001). I was unaware that David and Jonathan had such a special bond; and made me think about my own life and my commitment to my friends. There can be strength found in God’s word if you put him first as David did in his own battles.

We are social creatures. We surround ourselves with other human beings, our friends. It is in our nature. We are constantly trying to broaden the circumference of our circle of friends. Aristotle understood the importance of friendship, books VIII and IX of the Nicomachean Ethics deal solely with this topic. A modern day definition of a friend can be defined as “one joined to another in intimacy and mutual benevolence independently of sexual or family love”. (Oxford English Dictionary). Aristotle’s view on friendship is much broader than this. His arguments are certainly not flawless. In this essay I will outline what Aristotle said about friendship in the Nichomachaen Ethics and highlight possible

In his time, Aristotle wrote many works on different topics. In arguably one of his most popular works, Nicomachean Ethics, specifically in Book 8, he explores the virtue of friendship. He believes that there are three branches of friendship: that of utility (where two parties derive some benefit from each other), of pleasure (where two parties come together for the sake of pleasure received) and that of the good (where two parties of similar good virtues come together, admire one another for it and help each other strive for more goodness). The last of these types is of the highest form, with Aristotle describing it to be ‘perfect’. It is also naturally permanent unlike the other two, because these friends are not concerned about any other external factor outside of the other’s personality and virtues.

According to Aristotle 's views on friendships he believes that friendship is necessary to live a good life, inspires us to be virtuous, and is a kind of love. Aristotle also believes friendships help people predispose their character and keeps the youth away from errors. Additionally friendship gives support during weakness and helps people be generous and know when they need help. Aristotle views that there are three kinds of friendships, pleasure, utility, and perfect friendships. Pleasure friendships according to Aristotle are typically found in young people. Pleasure friendships are based on the person producing pleasure for the friend. Pleasure friendships tend to end once the person providing the pleasure stops. Utility friendships can be found in young or old people and is based on a person being useful to another. Utility friendships are fulfilling a person 's needs and is based on mutual use. Friendships based on utility typically end if the other person stops being useful. The third friendship is perfect friendship that is found through a state of perfected character. Perfect friendship is motivated by unselfishness and mutual self interest. Friendships that are perfect need to include people that are alike in character, virtue and social station/ equality. Perfect friendships according to Aristotle require time and familiarity. Another requisite is the mastery of self, the friends must know themselves before they know each other.

Aristotle wrote on many subjects in his lifetime but one of the virtues that he examines more extensively is friendship. Aristotle believes that there are three different kinds of friendship: utility, pleasure, and virtuous friendships. He also argues that a real friendship should be highly valued because it is a complete virtue and he believes it to be greater than honor and justice. Aristotle suggests that human’s love of utility and pleasure is the only reason why the first two types of friendships exist. Aristotle also argues that humans only set up these types of relationships for personal gain. But when he speaks of the virtuous friendships, Aristotle states that it is one of the greatest attainments one can achieve.

In this essay, I will provide an ethical analysis of Phil Connors’ character through the philosophical lenses of Aristotle and Plato, by demonstrating how Phil’s sour attitude at the beginning of the film turns virtuous by the end, through a self-imposed, major character shift. During the majority of Groundhog Day, Phil’s attitude toward his seemingly hopeless situation is portrayed as very outwardly cynical and condescending, thus leading him to experience pain in many forms. Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics describes how virtue is acquired, similar to learning a craft (1103a32-33). He goes on to detail our personal interactions with others, saying that “a state of character results from the repetition of similar activities” (1103b14-22).

In his Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle explores virtues as necessary conditions for being happy. A virtuous person is a person with a disposition toward virtuous actions and who derives pleasure from behaving virtuously. Aristotle distinguishes between two types of human virtue: virtues of thought and virtues of character. Virtues of thought are acquired through learning and include virtues like wisdom and prudence; virtues of character include bravery and charity, which are acquired by habituation and require external goods to develop. As a consequence, not all people can acquire virtues of character because not all people have the external goods and resources required to develop that disposition.

Within book 8 and 9 of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, he concludes that an excellent friendship is the most choice-worthy good an individual can externally attain (Aristotle 149, 1170a, section 7). However, in chapter 3 of book 8, Aristotle asserts the finest friendships are enduring insofar the individuals are good, and the virtues remain similar. However, his proposal about the similarities of virtues doesn't seem entirely correct since people gradually change over time, but the relationship can continue to be good and the individuals remain close friends. Aristotle would assert that if the virtuous character of the friend were to change, the friendship could potentially dissolve; unless the agent can return their friend to their original state of similarity. This is because his assertion about an enduring friendship requires that the individuals are both good and similar in virtuous behaviour. Nevertheless, this essay aims to argue that friendships are enduring through the means of gaining/building a state of mutual confidence in our friend, rather individuals being similar in virtue.

In the book Nicomachean Ethics, by Aristotle, Aristotle describes various way of living one’s life, the ultimate goal in life, and how to achieve happiness and live the best life. Aristotle describes three different kinds of lives in Nicomachean Ethics. These three lives consists of the life of honor, the life of pleasure, and the life of study. Aristotle, from the first book, insists that the life of study or contemplation is considered to be the best life. He argues that self-sufficiency is required for the life of study whereas the life of honor and pleasure are based upon a need for other people as well as a never ending cycle of pursuing higher goods.

In the book Aristotle and the Philosophy of Friendship, (based off the Nicomachean Ethics) the author, Pangle, informed the audience that Aristotle believe in three different types of friendships based off three different types of motives: Friendships of Utility, Friendships of Pleasure, and Perfect Friendship. He identifies these types of friendships as different types of sources of affection that are lovable as the good, the pleasant, and the useful. Before analyzing Aristotle three types of friendships we must first understand what he meant by friendship. During Aristotle’s rein friendship was commonly known as the love one person had for another. Philia, brotherly love, was essential

“No one would choose a friendless existence on condition of having all the other things in the world (Aristotle).” Humans are social beings, social beyond any other creature in the world. Human interaction is a must for survival. It is in our nature. Aristotle understood this, he even had his own analysis of friendship. In the Nicomachean Ethics written by Aristotle, books VIII and IX are based off of friendship. Today, the definition of a friend is, “A person with whom one has a bond of mutual affection, typically one exclusive of sexual or family relations (Oxford Dictionary).” To Aristotle, friendship is much more than this. In this research paper, I will evaluate whether or not Aristotle’s analysis of friendship is applicable to the modern world.

Aristotle highlighted the importance of friendship through various practices and concepts, such as utility and virtue. Virtuous practices were believed to enhance the friendship and encourage happiness among the participants (Kraut 64). Unfortunately, a friend whose behavior and practices are malevolent causes a rift in the practice of Aristotle’s principles. Therefore, to preserve the friendship and to protect one’s friend, one must do all that is possible to cease his or her friend’s actions.

is one who wishes well to the object of his wish for his sake, even if