The Contributions Of Friendship In Ethics And Aristotle's Ethics

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

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.

Aristotle’s Book 9 of Nicomachean Ethics discusses the importance of friendship in an individual's life. Throughout the book, he hints at this idea of friendship. In Book 8.1, he writes, “In poverty as well as in other misfortunes, people suppose that friends are their only refuge. And friendship is a help to the young, in saving them from error, just as it is also to the old, with a view to the care they require and their diminished capacity for action stemming from their weakness; it is a help also to those in their prime in performing noble actions, for 'two going together' are better able to think and to act.” (N. Ethics 8.1). In other words, Aristotle emphasizes this idea that life is easier when there is a friend to support you; it is difficult

In The Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle argues that friendship is the greatest of external goods which is necessary to live a pleasant life. Aristotle then proceeds to define three different kinds of friendships: utility, pleasure, and purpose. He begins his argument with examining friendship based on utility. He claims that under this friendship, both people derive some benefit from the other. He indicates that this type of friendship is when two people use one another to be able to better oneself with the help of the other partner in the friendship. Aristotle further supports this claim when he states, “Now those who love each other because of utility do not love each other for themselves but in virtue of some good which they get from each other,” (Nicomachean Ethics, p.144) implying that this is the type of love that people get from one another for the purpose of getting some type of good (idk if good is a good word here) out of the other person. (kinda sounds like a wordy sentence) The good that the other person is getting out of the friendship

According to Aristotle, one can experience three different types of friendship. The first type is a friend who is used for utilitarian purposes. Aristotle, however, quickly dismisses this type. As an example, Aristotle explains that one could never be friends with wine; while wine is satisfying to the person drinking the wine, no person ever wishes wine good fortune (Aristotle, 32). In order for a relationship between two people to be considered a friendship, one must want good things for the person who they consider their friend and vice versa (Aristotle, 32). Aristotle continues to describe another type of friendship, which is friendship for pleasure. According to Aristotle, young adults are most likely to pursue pleasure-related friendships, because the young are more likely to live to please their emotions; they develop friendships and erotic relationships quickly (Aristotle, 33). Aristotle notes that since young people make decisions based on their emotions, they are quick to change passions, friendships, and lovers (Aristotle, 33). Although both parties receive equal pleasure in this type of friendship, Aristotle says that it is not a complete type of friendship because it is short-lasting (Aristotle, 33). Aristotle considers only one type of friendship to be complete, and that is friendship that is devoted to the other person’s virtue. This type of friendship, Aristotle says, is a friendship that is developed slowly and infrequently; this is the only type of

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

I personally believe that Aristotle covered all aspects of friendship because you have to think hard and deep about what he is trying to get across. He is not trying to tell us we should do this and that for a certain type of bond, but he is telling us what this type of friendship will be like and what we should expect to happen and to at least try and aim for this goal. He is speaking in past tense rather than present because he does not want it to seem as if he is telling us what to do like we have no choice but to follow what he is saying. For example when he says that our highest goal is happiness, I agree with that because what mortal would just

He said was also important to understand the acts performed towards virtue, because it directly related to the character of the resulting morals. Aristotle felt that fear and pain influenced ethics, as people would avoid that which he/she was scared of and/or that would cause pain. He believe friendships to be vital in order to be a good person, and that it required “reciprocal and explicit goodwill”. Aristotle taught that friendships were uncommon, but could be achieved requiring time to build familiarity and trust. He claimed that this perfect virtue must be achieved and maintained for the lifetime.

Since we have discussed the states of friendship and virtue in relationship to happiness, we must now examine the activities of friendship and virtue that make a happy life easier to attain. Aristotle claimed that of the goods in life “some are necessary conditions of happiness, while others are naturally useful and cooperative as instruments (1099b28-29).” He goes on further to exclaim that “having friends seems to be the greatest external good (1169b10-11).” Therefore this external good would be useful in attaining happiness. Friendship can be used as an instrument in performing virtuous actions necessary for happiness because “the solitary person’s life is hard, since it is not easy for him to be continually active all by himself; but in relation to others and in their company it is easier (1170a6-8).” Friends can also help us achieve happiness but guiding us to do virtuous acts, “for it is proper to good people to avoid error themselves and not to permit it in their friends

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

The proposition is that the virtuous agents are benefitting off each-other, through an egoistic manner. It is evident that the virtuous friendship entails the concepts of egocentrism as Aristotle quotes, “the friend is another himself” (142, 9.4.SS5.30). The ideal Aristotelian friendship is where friends resemble the each other, through similar strains of thinking. Significantly, the concept of egocentrism means if the friends are like us, to disagree with them would be contradicting ourselves. In effect, the friendship based off similarity is enduring, because the agents whom think alike will avoid conflict with each other since they will agree with each other on many grounds. Significantly, the excellent Aristotelian friendship would seem to require that our friends “praise everything to please us and never cross us” (62 section 1). This is further evident when he asserts the friendship of virtue is immune to slander (126, section 7 line 10). The concept of slander can be interpreted as a form of disagreement/quarrel between individuals, and taking insult from this dissimilarity. Problematically, this would leave no room for dispute on differing idea’s, or to further explore different perspectives. Furthermore, the qualification of the virtuous friendship aims to use the similarities of the peer as a moderator, which would benefit the agent in their pursuit towards achieving an intermediate state. The closer the similarities are between individuals, the better they can moderate each other’s actions/intentions. If one of the agents were to act out of line, their friend would respond accordingly and put them back on track. However, presuming the individuals in the relationship are excellent people since they are virtuous, they ought to unconditionally desire to aid their friend, for the good of the friend. Arguably, if the virtues of the friend were to change sporadically or gradually, the right response of the loving agent would be to adjust their behaviour to aid their friend through whatever situation they are undergoing. Significantly, empathy becomes a key requirement for enduring friendships, because it demonstrates we can positively react to our friend’s change (and vice-versa). However, Aristotle uses

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.

Technology is changing the world in a fast pace. This is evident most especially in social networks. Due to the widespread and growing use of these new social media, especially social networking sites such as Facebook, researchers began to study its ethical implications.

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle states that the “proper function of man consists in an activity of the soul in conformity with a rational principle, or, at least, not without it” (Page 17 1098a ll. 3-5). The proper function of man is needed to understand happiness. In this understanding, Aristotle explains that happiness is the highest good, one could wish to achieve through human function. Aristotle states “a happy man lives well and fares well” (Page 19 1098b ll. 20-22). This allows the reader to begin questioning what the necessities are in order for one to fare well. One answer to this question may be in regard to friendship, because, Aristotle asserts that friendship is the greatest external good. According to Aristotle, it is possible to say that a friendless man is able to fare well because “supremely happy and self-sufficient people do not need friends” (Page 263 1169b ll. 2-3). However, “Happiness, as we have said, needs external goods as well.” (Page 21 1099a ll. 32-33) With this being said, it can be determined that a friendless man cannot achieve supreme happiness, because, while he may be self sufficient, he is unable to perform acts of good for friends.