tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14574087.post112403601887715100..comments2023-08-25T09:44:42.886-04:00Comments on The Lyceum: Friendship and PhilosophyDanielhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10190478379984737926noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14574087.post-1124211955172354382005-08-16T13:05:00.000-04:002005-08-16T13:05:00.000-04:00Thanks for your replies Ash Sere and Kyle.Ash Sere...Thanks for your replies Ash Sere and Kyle.<BR/><BR/>Ash Sere, let me see if I can answer your concerns about subjectivity. I should mention first that the Greek word for friendship, <I>philia</I>, covers most human relationships, including family. Imagine all the aspects of our nature we would be unable to fulfil without <I>philia</I>. Aristotle provides the strongest reason: language. We can tell that we are by nature social animals because we express ourselves (and even think) in langugage. Language is useless outside a social context.<BR/><BR/>Even if that were not true, though, Socrates does not need friends to be a universal good to make his argument work. All he needs is my belief that my friends are beneficial, and my other belief that I would still want friends if I were perfectly happy. It is these two intutions most people have that causes the confusion.<BR/><BR/>I had a look at your Aristotle post, too. There's a reason the <I>Nicomachean Ethics</I> is one of the greatest books ever written. 2300 years later, two people are writing about it on the same day.Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10190478379984737926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14574087.post-1124143604846613402005-08-15T18:06:00.000-04:002005-08-15T18:06:00.000-04:00Daniel, I really really enjoyed reading this post....Daniel, I really really enjoyed reading this post. Thanks for taking on board my comments on a previous post, you've made the transition fantastically to a very readable blog for the (relative) layman.<BR/><BR/>Two further points:<BR/><BR/>1) Your argument is somewhat subjective isn't it? Just because you need friends for happiness does not mean everyone does. Can friendship be defined as a universal good (if indeed such a thing exists)?<BR/><BR/>2) This is the weirdest thing - I wrote my post tonight before I came to your site again. I have written a post about Ethics I as well! Coincidence? (If indeed such a thing exists...)<BR/><BR/>I'm a philosophy novice, having only considered it in my spare time over the last few years. I feel I could learn a lot from your posts, keep up the accessibility!Matt McGrathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06076825151483605719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14574087.post-1124118512510107732005-08-15T11:08:00.000-04:002005-08-15T11:08:00.000-04:00Thank you for your comment, Mathetes. I really di...Thank you for your comment, Mathetes. I really did enjoy your site, and I blogmarked it immediately when I happened on it yesterday. I look forward to reading it in the future. That dog on your site is the ugliest creature I think I've ever seen. I think the pound should stop picking up strays in Mordor.<BR/><BR/>Socrates' argument's really tricky, eh? Every time I think I've refuted it, it sneaks up on me again. I certainly grant your point that we do benefit our friends in friendship, but the issue is whether they benefit us. There's a two line version of Socrates' argument I like. I would rather have friends than have no friends. Therefore, my friends benefit me. QED.Danielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10190478379984737926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14574087.post-1124083956285138642005-08-15T01:32:00.000-04:002005-08-15T01:32:00.000-04:00Hello- Thanks for blogmarking me. I enjoyed this p...Hello- Thanks for blogmarking me. I enjoyed this post. If you don;t mind, I'd like to comment. <BR/><BR/>I like your argument, that that which is instrumental in happiness is freinds, and therefore happiness is impossible without them. <BR/><BR/>However, I think that your third paragraph could be restated.<BR/><BR/>"We do act sometimes in a selfless manner with friends, but how would our friends feel if we said that we didn't enjoy their company at all and that all the time we spent on them was toil in the service of duty? "<BR/><BR/>You seem to assume that "service" and "duty" are bad things. "Toil," is the word you used. In my experience, happiness is gained also through service and duty. Serving my friends is a happy thing for me, hence making it a good.<BR/><BR/>This, however raises the question of whether this happiess I gain would prove Socrates right. Since this good that I gain in serving my friends would only be accomplished with them, it seems it would. That is unless I could gain this good from others other than my friends...<BR/><BR/>Perhaps I need to think this out more...<BR/><BR/>Either way, I am impressed with your blog and will be a frequent visitor. Hit up <A HREF="http://katamatheten.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">my site too if you wish.</A>K. Follmerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06266421413581539921noreply@blogger.com