Essay On Aristotle's Unequal Friendships

In Nisccomachean Ethics Book VII, Aristotle argues that there are three types of friendships; that being, utility, pleasure and goodness. Goodness, encompasses both utility and pleasure and only exists when both people involved admire each other’s goodness over a long period of time; this sort of friendship is very rare. According to Aristotle friendship is either “a virtue or implies virtue,” if there is something loveable in a person, “for not everything seems to be loved but only the lovable and this is good, pleasant or useful.” The idea of a perfect friendship relies on an equal exchange of with utility, pleasure, or goodness to sustain equality and love between the two people. However, in some cases, where the power structure between the two is unequal then the love on either side must be proportional to the others worth to reestablish equality of love. However, there is a flaw in Aristotle’s argument, where he presents conflicting views regarding unequal friendships; he claims that the superior friend should be loved more due to their merit, while he also claims that friendship is more about loving than being loved. One can see the flaw in …show more content…
These unequal relationships can be between a father and son, man and wife, ruler and the ruled or between two people who differ morally from one another where one possesses virtue in greater degree than the other. When there is an unequal friendship, Aristotle argues that to establish equality that they must “love each other in proportion to their worth,” therefore “the better should be more loved than he loves, and so should the more useful and similarly in each of the other cases.” This statement supports his earlier claim that friendships are based on characteristics that are lovable, such as utility, pleasure and goodness. All friendships, therefore, will be good if the loveable in each person is loved in proportion to how much love they