“Without friends no-one would choose to live, though he had all other goods.” (Aristotle)
Three kinds of friendship
Aristotle begins by considering the question: how many kinds of friendship are there? As always, he proceeds in a very logical manner. Friendship is a form of love, he reasons. But not everything can be an object of love. We love only things that are useful, pleasant or good.
There are, then, three corresponding kinds of friendship. In friendships of utility we love people because they are useful to us. In friendships of pleasure we love people because we find them pleasant. And in perfect friendship we love people for themselves, because we perceive them to be good.
Aristotle says, “Those who love each other for their utility [usefulness] do not love each other for themselves, but in virtue of some good which they get from each other.” This is the least perfect form of friendship, because the love involved is ultimately self-directed. If I love you for what I can get from you, it is really myself that I love.
Friendships of this type are quickly dissolved. Once they outlive their usefulness, the friendship ends. Because, says Aristotle, “They were lovers not of each other but of profit.”
Friendships of utility are (by definition) useful; they are an essential part of life. But they can easily lead to bitterness once they outlive their usefulness. One problem is that when people use each other for their own interests, they are likely to feel let down when they don’t get everything they expect. And it is those expectations of man that leads to disappointment. Idealisation can be poisonous at times.
A deeper, and potentially more damaging, problem arises when one of the people involved misunderstands the nature of the friendship. If I think you love me for my character, and then find that you love me only because I am useful to you, I will become angry and upset.
“Most differences arise between friends when they are not friends in the spirit in which they think they are,” says Aristotle.
Are work-friends real friends?
Not all friendships of utility are exploitative. In his book The Philosophy of Friendship Mark Vernon points out that most workplace friendships are utility-based.
The thing that unites us with our workmates is a set of common goals, which we must pull together to achieve. It’s only natural that some camaraderie will ensue, and this is a good thing. Our workplace friendships make us more productive, and make our work more enjoyable.
But these friendships tend to be rather shallow. We all know how embarrassing it is to bump into a colleague at the supermarket. Even if we’re on good terms with them in the workplace, we find we have little to say to them outside of it.
We also know how quickly workmates are forgotten once they move to a new job. We may have enjoyed their company day-in day-out for years. But once they’ve gone, it’s as though they never existed.
This is because most workplace friendships are ultimately determined by their utility. What unites us is our work, not our characters. And, in the words of Aristotle, “When the motive of the friendship is done away, the friendship is dissolved, in as much as it existed only for the ends in question.”
Avoiding the pitfalls
It is wise simply to accept friendships of utility for what they are. There’s little point bemoaning their shallowness if it’s in their nature to be shallow. For more meaningful friendships, we must look elsewhere…
“Those who wish well to their friends for their sake are most truly friends.” (Aristotle)
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle goes on to examine two other kinds of friendship: friendships of pleasure, and perfect friendship.
Friendships of pleasure
In friendships of pleasure we love people because we find their company pleasant. Aristotle gives the example of people who are always cracking jokes and making us laugh. “It is not for their character that men love ready-witted people, but because they find them pleasant,” he says.
Pleasure also lies at the heart of friendships between people who share hobbies and interests. If you play golf, and have lots of golf-partners who are, in a sense, friends. But you know very little about them, and they know very little about you. Your friendship is based solely on the pleasure you derive from playing sport together.
Friendships of pleasure have a lot in common with friendships of utility. Both are ultimately rather selfish, and both are quickly dissolved.
But the key feature of utility-based and pleasure-based friendships is that they are incidental. They are formed by chance rather than by choice. I have no special affinity with my workmates; I just happen to work with them. And it’s no big deal if you lose one of your golf partners; you simply find yourself another one. “For it is not as being the man he is that the loved person is loved, but as providing some good or pleasure,” says Aristotle.
Perfect friendship
In perfect friendship we love people not merely because they are useful or pleasant, but because of their character. We love them for who they are.
“Perfect friendship is the friendship of men who are good, and alike in virtue… [and who] wish well to each other. Now those who wish well to their friends for their sake are most truly friends; for they do this by reason of their own nature and not incidentally.” (Aristotle)
Perfect friendship isn’t tinged with selfishness in the way that utility-based and pleasure-based friendships are. It has as much to do with giving as receiving. Unsurprisingly, such friendships are rare and take time to develop. “A wish for friendship may arise quickly, but friendship does not,” says Aristotle.
Harry Potter
The theme of friendship runs strongly through J. K Rowling’s Harry Potter books. The relationship between Harry, Ron and Hermione provides a good example of Aristotle’s perfect friendship in action.
A number of incidental circumstances initially bring the three Hogwarts pupils together. For example, they are all put into the same house, Gryffindor. But it is character rather than circumstances that binds them together. They are all brave, fiercely loyal, and share a highly developed sense of justice and fairness.
It is the mutual recognition of one another’s goodness that makes their friendship so special and enduring, and makes them willing to risk even their lives for one another.
quoting André Comte-Sponville: “Our lives – private and public, domestic and professional – have value only in proportion to the love we invest in them and find in them.” This is certainly borne out in Harry Potter’s experience.
I recently watched Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Harry goes through some very difficult times in this film. Only the support of his friends prevents him from sinking into despair. At the climax of the film, nothing less than love and friendship can provide him with strength of will to continue the fight against Voldemort.
A hierarchy of friendship
Clearly there is a hierarchy of friendship, with utility-based friendships at the bottom, perfect friendship at the top, and pleasure-based friendships in-between. Each type of friendship is necessary, and each adds a certain amount value to our lives.
But perfect friendship is what we really desire. Or perhaps the word ‘perfect’ is misleading. After all, nothing’s perfect. But in any case, we want friendships that go beyond utility and pleasure. We want true friends, good friends, real friends, friends who will stick by us and love us for ourselves…
But how are such friendships formed?
“What we ordinarily call friends and friendships are nothing but acquaintanceships and familiarities formed by some chance or convenience … [But] in the friendship I speak of, our souls mingle and blend with each other so completely that they efface the seams that joined them.” (Montaigne)
C. S Lewis on Friendship
According to the philosopher, theologian and writer C. S. Lewis, Friendship arises out of Companionship.
Companionship is the feeling of closeness that comes about whenever people work together, play together or pursue common goals. You see it all the time: office-workers chatting during the lunch-break; football-players enjoying a drink after a game; church-goers picnicking on a Sunday afternoon…
Companionship and Friendship are not the same. “[Companionship] is often called Friendship,” says Lewis, “and many people when they speak of their ‘friends’ mean only their companions. But it is not Friendship in the sense I wish to give the word.”
There is no doubt that companionship is a good thing; and companions are friends, of a sort. But they are friends with a small ‘f’ - no substitute for the intimate friends we all want and need.
Although Companionship is not Friendship, it is Friendship’s source. C. S. Lewis calls it ‘the matrix of Friendship’. Our closest and dearest friends start out as mere companions – but then something sets them apart.
“Friendship arises out of mere Companionship when two or more of the companions discover that they have in common some insight or interest… which the others do not share and which, till that moment, each believed to be his own unique treasure (or burden). The typical expression of opening friendship would be something like, “What? You too? I thought I was the only one.” (C. S. Lewis, The Four Loves)
With characteristic insight, C. S. Lewis observes, “The man who agrees with us that some question, little regarded by others, is of great importance, can be our friend. He need not agree with us about the answer.”
Making friends
Dale Carnegie’s 1936 book, How to Win Friends and Influence People, has sold millions of copies worldwide. Its success shows just how important friends are. It’s a good book, which offers sound, practical advice. But its techniques have more to do with Companionship than Friendship.
In The Four Loves, after describing how Friendships arise through shared insights, C. S. Lewis adds, “That is why those pathetic people who simply ‘want friends’ can never make any. The very condition of having Friends is that we should want something else besides Friends.”
His point is valid. True friendship requires that people ‘see the same truth’. There has to be something for the friendship to be about.
Aristotle says, “The wish for friendship arises quickly; friendship does not.” It cannot be forced. But it will develop naturally, given time and the right conditions.
There is no magic formula for ‘winning friends’ – not real friends, anyway. Friendship would be impoverished if there were. Perhaps the best advice is simply to lead a full life, cultivate interests, and treat people with consideration and respect. Friendship will follow.
No comments:
Post a Comment