Confucius And Aristotle On The Goods Of Friendship

In The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle claims that there are three types of friendships. The three friendships being that of utility, pleasure, and virtue. First, in Sections 1-3, I will explain Aristotle’s claims of the three types of friendship. After that, in Section 4, I will examine Aristotle’s argument that there are two friendships that are not as lasting as the other friendship. Then, in Section 5, I will analyze whether or not the friendship of virtue can occur between only virtuous people. Next, in Section 6, I will evaluate whether or not true friendship is the friendship of virtue like Aristotle claims. Lastly, in Section 7, I will object to Aristotle’s claims.

From humanity comes friendship, but friendship may not be as one-dimensional and simplistic as the common person believes it to be- it may not stop at the surface level. In David Whyte’s book, Consolations: The Solace, Nourishment and Underlying Meaning of Everyday Words, he writes on friendship, exposing the true facets of an authentic friendship that oftentimes are overlooked by many people. In Whyte’s opinion, friendship is an eternal experience, or at least an experience in which people take part over an extended period of time. The need for continuous support and forgiveness from and for both parties in a friendship presupposes this prolonged temporality. Naturally, as friendships take constant conscious effort, they require interest

I believe Cicero position in the discussion about friendship is stronger than Aristotle’s position because Cicero believes friendship exists between two people, he also went deep in talking about friendship, the limits of friendship, how loyalty is important in friendship, the way friendships get stronger and older, which is also talked about the golden rule of friendship which he stated in section nineteen “put yourself on a level with your friends”. He also talked about the cause of friendship which he stated in section eleven that a belief in a man’s virtue is the original cause of friendship that friendship can hardly remain if virtue be abandon. By this , he made me understand virtue

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

The ‘Analects’ is a book created by Confucius’ disciples containing all of Confucius’ teachings; combined they form the set of beliefs known as Confucianism. There were 5 basic relationships: father and son; elder brother and younger brother; husband and wife; friend and friend; and ruler and subject. All of the relationships fall into 2 categories: proper conduct in the family and proper conduct in society. Now we delve into a primary source-The Analects:

Certain relationships are of profound importance for human life and of great significance for the moral life. Meilaender explores some of the tension which Christian experience discovers in one such relationship, that of the bond of friendship. These tensions help to explain why friendship was a more important topic in the life and thought of the classical civilizations of Greece and Rome than it has usually been within Christendom.

Firstly, Aristotle asserts friendships based on the love of virtue is the complete type of friendship, compared to two other types (122, section 6). The two other types of friendships are pleasure, and utility. However, he asserts these types of friendship are not lasting, because they are created for the sake of obtaining a good generated from their peer. Insofar the individuals in the relationship generate pleasure, or provide a service of utility to each other (121 section 2 line 15-17). Problematically, once that pleasure/utility has ceased, the friendship will likely dissolve since the advantageous goods have stopped being provided (122 section 2 line 15-17). He does propose that a friendship based on pleasure resembles the virtuous friendship, because the individuals in these relationships aim to be pleasant to each other (126, section 4). However, a friendship based on the goods an agent has to give is considered a lesser friendship, in comparison to the virtuous friendship. It is because the peer has a qualification that makes them desirable, but there is no mutual desire/awareness to generate goodwill for the

Many philosophers through history have dealt with happiness, pleasure, justice, and virtues. In this essay there will given facts on virtues between two philosophers who have different views on the topic. Aristotle and Kant have two totally different views on virtue, one being based on the soul and how you character depicts you virtue and the other which is based of the fact that anyone has a chance of being morally good, even bad people. There is a lot of disagreement between Aristotle and Kant, which has examples to back the disagreements. Aristotle takes virtue as an excellence, while Kant takes it more to being a person doing something morally good in the society and for them as a person. One similarity between these two philosophers though, is that these two descriptions of virtue lead back to happiness in the individual. At the end of this essay, the reader should be capable of understanding that Aristotle’s theory is more supported than Kant’s theory. Of course, explanations for both sides will be given thoroughly throughout this comparison.

However, this breadth in his explanations is not something casual, but rather responds to Aristotle’s belief that friendship is something particularly valuable and we would say that is something unique in the life of human beings. Friendship, in fact, is an incentive, among others, for a happy life is --in Aristotle’s words-- "as necessary for life" as necessary for a happy life itself. Therefore, Aristotle says, "For no one would choose to live without friends even if he had all the other goods” (Nicomachean Ethics VIII 1155a, pp. 119). Moreover, besides necessary, friendship is something noble, something beautiful, for it is a virtue, or it involves virtue. Ultimately, since human being is a social animal, which naturally tends to coexistence with other human beings, friendship is the fullest realization of sociability and more fulfilling way of living.

Confucius and Aristotle are some of the greatest thinkers in the history of mankind. While Confucius was born in China and spearheaded a new way of perceiving morality, Aristotle was born in Macedon/Greece and also immersed his philosophical work to addressing moral thinking.Both philosophers have addressed similar subjects with major points of divergence and convergence. On virtue, these two authors have almost similar opinions. However, it is their points of convergence or agreement that have had a huge impact on the modern world’s thinking and understanding of virtue and moral behavior.

Friendships are special relationships that begin the development of social skills in each human person. Every time we open the door to form new friendships it begins with an experimental and holistic practice of philosophy and science. Whether we recognize the use of philosophy and science or not it’s being applied to shape friendships. The formation and bond of friendships has been studied for many years through science, philosophy, and theology. The point of this paper is to give the point of view and purpose of friendship according to science, philosophy, and theology and how it is applied to our everyday life.

“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.

easeaseaeeesaeaeeIn conclusion, we must be careful to include the elements of contingency and transience in a description of friendship. In the strictest sense, no one “needs” friends. We can survive without having purely social relations with anyone. Humans have need of only food and shelter to survive and yet, there are few people that we encounter who would not count their friends among their greatest assets. However, these unique relationships among people support our society and gives enormous contribution to our life. The transience and contingencies of friendship should be construed as a suggestion of friendship’s unworthiness. It is the spark of countless stories, the reason wars are fought, and the answer to the quest for peace.

Confucius wrote the Analects during the Warring States, where smaller states were vying for power, causing constant outbreaks of war. Thus he went from state to state, transmitting his teachings in hope that it would be a solution for the rulers to govern their subjects, such that there is political obedience to the authority. It would stop the war and the suffering of the people, and different states would be able to co-exist with one another. Besides that, the underlying goals of the five primary cardinal relationship is to help cultivate moral virtues, where it can be also be seen as a way to achieve social stability. The relations between two individuals amongst the five primary cardinal relationship except for friendship, is always of a superior and subordinate, where one must submit himself to the superior. However friendship also plays an important role though it does not have this superior and subordinate relation. Friendship instead can be seen as a platform to further develop our virtues and extend it beyond our family. This helps us to achieve the highest ren where we acquired habits of freely assuming responsibilities for individuals beyond the family group. Thus in the society, we will be able to extend it to others, and treat them with sympathy, empathy and compassion from the cultivation of virtues. Lastly, Confucius also mentioned 3 kinds of good friendships, where "He stands to benefit who takes pleasure in three kinds of things. Equally, he stands to lose who takes pleasure in three other kinds of things. To take pleasure in the correct regulation of the rites and music, in singing the praises of other men's goodness, and in having a large number of excellent men as friends is to benefit..." (Analects, Book 16:5) Drawing from this quote, the similarity among the 3 kinds of good friendships are beneficial to one if his friends are committed to moral cultivation; where