They are our friends in part because they are good people. In philosophical discussions of friendship, it is common to follow Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics, Book VIII in distinguishing three kinds of friendship: Badhwar65—66 seems to think so, claiming that the sexual involvement enters into romantic love in part through a passion and yearning for physical union, whereas friendship involves instead a desire for a more psychological identification.
We may be raised to be vicious without a sufficient store of natural virtues upon which to build.
Submit your essay in a Microsoft Word or Open Office document freeware found at Open Office and place it in the appropriate assignment dropbox. Once again, the literature on shared intention and plural subjecthood is relevant here; see, for example, Gilbert, ; Tuomela; Searle ; and Bratman Even when it comes to the idea of government and the bond of the people within a state, friendship seems to be the base, the glue that holds everything and everyone together.
Unlike goodwill, love implies some kind of commitment and cost, though it need not be great. You would expect a friend to drive you to the interview and would be disappointed in a friend who did not.
Not everyone may be up to the challenge. Given our understanding of typical interactions in friendship, this reinforces and plays a role in the development of understandings in particular friendships. See Mason for further elaborations of this argument, and see Sadler for an alternative response.
Be sure to identify the criteria needed to attain this level of friendship, if you do believe it is possible. And spontaneous acts of friendship tend to be more pleasant than impersonal acts of virtue for the doer as well as for the recipient.
One can get terminal cancer.
In responding to this argument, Hurka argues that this argument presupposes a conception of the value of friendship as something we ought to respect as well as to promote that is at odds with the teleological conception of value and so with teleological conceptions of friendship.
With whom could we be ourselves, spontaneous, open and fully trusting.
Aristotle felt that friendship was so important that he devoted an entire section of the Nicomachean Ethics to it.
It does seem that Aristotle believes that truly thriving lives are going to be somewhat rare. Such moral schizophrenia, Stocker argues, prevents us in general from harmonizing our moral reasons and our motives, and it does so in a way that destroys the very possibility of our having and sustaining friendships with others.
We must see our friends as good people in many ways. How many of us would stop being friends with the kid down the hall if he was not the smart kid who could help you with homework. And this generally seems to be the case: We cannot be friends with people whom we view as significantly superior or inferior to us.
Casual sexual relationships or relationships with people for purely their sense of humor or some other trait are examples of pleasurable friendships. The pattern of interaction and understandings give rise to legitimate expectations about caring, support, honesty, etc.
The trouble is, Stocker argues, the characteristic actions of friendship cannot be understood in this way.
Agape is a kind of love that does not respond to the antecedent value of its object but instead is thought to create value in the beloved; it has come through the Christian tradition to mean the sort of love God has for us persons as well as, by extension, our love for God and our love for humankind in general.
The only alternative is to split her moral reasons and her motives for friendly acts, thereby becoming schizophrenic.
Scanlon uses friendship to argue against what he calls teleological conceptions of values presupposed by consequentialism.
As the friendship develops, an intricate web of reciprocal and mutual dispositions, beliefs, understandings, feelings, etc. Aristotle identifies three motivations for friendship: usefulness, pleasure and good.
He postulates that when people seek friendship, they look for someone who is worthy of their affection based on one of those three motives. Aristotles Friendship Nicomachean Ethics. Print Reference this. Published: 23rd March Aristotle categorizes friendships into three categories: friendships of utility, friendships of pleasure, and friendships of the good ().
If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays. Essay about Aristotle’s Three Categories of Friendships. Aristotle identifies three motivations for friendship: usefulness, pleasure and good. More about Essay about Aristotle’s Three Categories of Friendships.
Essay on Three Types of Friendship: Nicomachean Ethics Words | 4 Pages. 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.
Ethics, Philosophy - Aristotle's Three Motivations For Friendship. Title Length Color Rating: Thing that can Affect Friendship Essay - A friendship is a bond of mutual affection.
To me, friendship is a bond that people share in which they have mutual kindness, loyalty, respect, and equality. Aristotle’s theory of the good life and in particular, his analysis of the role that friendships play in achieving human flourishing, has been one of the most influential and long-lasting theories on human connections and friendships.Aristotles three motivations for friendship essay