And in poverty and in other misfortunes men think friends are the only refuge. The result is a book that is full of fascinating discussions, not all of which directly advance her central argument.
Thus, an intuitive high regard for friendship need not undermine the claim of the philosophical life to be the happiest, but may actually support it.
It is also in friendship that people feel most fulfilled, and so it is tempting to think that by studying friendship we can see how the life of moral virtue and happiness come together. But perhaps not all the greatest goods; for it is for himself most of all that each man wishes Argumentative essay on aristotle s views on friendship in books viii and ix is good.
Do men love, then, the good, or what is good for them? But qua man one can; for there seems to be some justice between any man and any other who can share in a system of law or be a party to an agreement; therefore there can also be friendship with him in so far as he is a man.
This happens because all or most men, while they wish for what is noble, choose what is advantageous; now it is noble to do well by another without a view to repayment, but it is the receiving of benefits that is advantageous.
This is why, while men become friends quickly, old men do not; it is because men do not become friends with those in whom they do not delight; and similarly sour people do not quickly make friends either.
After what we have said, a discussion of friendship would naturally follow, since it is a virtue or implies virtue, and is besides most necessary with a view to living. The greater it is, the more exposed is it to risk.
For not everything seems to be loved but only the lovable, and this is good, pleasant, or useful; but it would seem to be that by which some good or pleasure is produced that is useful, so that it is the good and the useful that are lovable as ends. These people then, if they do not do what they have been paid for, are naturally made the objects of complaint.
Democracy is found chiefly in masterless dwellings for here every one is on an equalityand in those in which the ruler is weak and every one has license to do as he pleases.
These people seem to bear goodwill to each other; but how could one call them friends when they do not know their mutual feelings? We may even in our travels [see] how near and dear every man is to every other.
How does this show that being-loved is not adequate recompense to a superior? First, he believes that honor has no intrinsic value and so it cannot possibly repay what the superior has given Or how can prosperity be guarded and preserved without friends?
They come to be closer together or farther apart by virtue of the nearness or distance of the original ancestor. Those who get the money first and then do none of the things they said they would, owing to the extravagance of their promises, naturally find themselves the objects of complaint; for they do not fulfill what they agreed to.
Thus when the motive of the friendship is done away, the friendship is dissolved, inasmuch as it existed only for the ends in question. In friendships based on virtue on the other hand, complaints do not arise, but the purpose of the doer is a sort of measure; for in purpose lies the essential element of virtue and character.
How man and wife and in general friend and friend ought mutually to behave Argumentative essay on aristotle s views on friendship in books viii and ix to be the same question as how it is just for them to behave; for a man does not seem to have the same duties to a friend, a stranger, a comrade, and a schoolfellow.
Therefore we too ought perhaps to call such people friends, and say that there are several kinds of friendship — firstly and in the proper sense that of good men qua good, and by analogy the other kinds; for it is in virtue of something good and something akin to what is found in true friendship that they are friends, since even the pleasant is good for the lovers of pleasure.
Such too is the friendship of a father, though this exceeds the other in the greatness of the benefits conferred; for he is responsible for the existence of his children, which is thought the greatest good, and for their nurture and upbringing. But he does explain the respect in which virtuous friends are pleasant to each other: But that we should not give the preference in all things to the same person is plain enough; and we must for the most part return benefits rather than oblige friends, as we must pay back a loan to a creditor rather than make one to a friend.
Thus it emerges that the best friendships, those between people who most clearly understand the nature of human life and the value of moral virtue, will be friendships between philosophers.
For many people have goodwill to those whom they have not seen but judge to be good or useful; and one of these might return this feeling. In all friendships between dissimilars it is, as we have said, proportion that equalizes the parties and preserves the friendship; e.
The friendship of brothers is like that of comrades; for they are equal and of like age, and such persons are for the most part like in their feelings and their character. The moral type is not on fixed terms; it makes a gift, or does whatever it does, as to a friend; but one expects to receive as much or more, as having not given but lent; and if a man is worse off when the relation is dissolved than he was when it was contracted he will complain.
For friendship asks a man to do what he can, not what is proportional to the merits of the case; since that cannot always be done, e. We would also want to know why equalization seems so particularly important in utility friendships where, Aristotle claims, very little pleasure is to be had.
For not even with regard to each other will their tastes agree, and without this as we saw they cannot be friends; for they cannot live together.
This becomes clear if there is a great interval in respect of virtue or vice or wealth or anything else between the parties; for then they are no longer friends, and do not even expect to be so. It is in this way more than any other that even unequals can be friends; they can be equalized.
Of these two kinds that which is for the sake of pleasure is the more like friendship, when both parties get the same things from each other and delight in each other or in the things, as in the friendships of the young; for generosity is more found in such friendships.
If they are capable of being reformed one should rather come to the assistance of their character or their property, inasmuch as this is better and more characteristic of friendship.
In her study of the discussion of friendship in Books VIII and IX of the Nicomachean Ethics, Lorraine Smith Pangle argues that Aristotle begins with these high-minded hopes in order to show something quite different to those who are willing to think carefully i.
Now if the friendship is one that aims at utility, surely the advantage to the receiver is the measure. For most things are not assessed at the same value by those who have them and those who want them; each class values highly what is its own and what it is offering; yet the return is made on the terms fixed by the receiver.
More needs to be said in defense of this suggestion since it is not clear why equality of reciprocation is necessary for seeing another person as a kindred spirit.In book VIII of Aristotle's The Nicomachean Ethics (; a6 - a30), the notion of 'The Three Kinds of Friendship' (Philia) is expressed.
Holding that there are three basic kinds or species of friendship that bind us together expressing that in respect to each there exists a mutual and recognised love. Aristotle considers the nature of friendship and its role in making life good.
Our selection comes from around B.C.E. The assignment: Give yourself an overview of the whole here. Then focus in on our assignment: read Book VIII, chapters 1 – 8 and then 13; and Book IX, chapters 1, 3, and 8 – 10, and prepare answers for class discussion.
Essay on Aristotle and Argument; Essay on Aristotle and Argument. Submitted By kristinadot. Words: Aristotle wrote on this discussion of the Ideal State in books VII and VIII of The Politics. What Aristotle observed around him were the prevalent city-states of ancient Greece.
ARISTOTLE'S CONCEPTION OF FRIENDSHIP In Book IX. Introduction In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Books VIII and IX are focused on the idea of friendship and defining it. He asserts that friendship is a necessary and desirable aspect that all virtuous individuals require to live a full and satisfying life.
She argues that Aristotle’s purpose in NE VIII and IX is to correct these misconceptions in a way that shows that true virtue and the best friendship arise among people who do not seek their happiness in either.
Instead, it is the friendships of philosophers that best exemplify virtue in friendship.
Aristotle understood the importance of friendship, books VIII and IX of the Nicomachean Ethics deal solely with friendship.
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"/5(6).Download