Philosophy Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words - 6

Philosophy - Essay Example Aristotle points out that nature of causes determines the nature of the causes’ objectives and the friendships differ in species (Aristotle, 78). Aristotle claims that to love for pleasure is only to love for utility as love for utility x while mean an individual loves x for pleasure (Pangle 56). Accordingly, utility varies with each individual, as older people are more inclined to seeking utility relationships (Aristotle, 1156a25). In this case, Aristotle clarifies that what is relative is not enduring. Aristotle defends his argument by outlining that This essay will explore the strengths of objections to the argument in order to confirm Aristotle argument on the nature of true friendships. Objectors to key premises Opponents of Aristotle argument outline that relationships develop after a long period of time and long-term relationships are more meaningful than short-term relationships. In this case, objectors point out those individuals who take time to form intimate and clo ser relationships will avoid the temptations of pleasurable and transitory relationships that entail utility considerations. The opponents assert that life is ever-changing with new forms of friendships thus individuals must aim at attaining satisfactory at every day. The objectors assert that the nature of certain relationships entail unequal exchanges and the amount of love must be equivalent to proportion to the utility obtained by each person. Case example of such relationships includes rule-subject relationship and father-son relationship. In this case, the subject will display more love for the ruler if he or she believes is getting enough utility from the ruler (Pangle 100). Replies to objections Aristotle counters the objections by asserting that ‘true friends’ are good in themselves and virtues since they wish well to their friends and desire to maintain the friendship. True friends will be pleasant and useful to each other and do not enter in to incidental fri endships that are based on expected pleasures or utility (Pangle 67). Aristotle clarifies that love for utility means that an individual loves for pleasure and love for pleasure only is to love for utility thus the love is based on extrinsic reasons. In this case, some lovers complain their excess love is not reciprocated while beloved may complain that his lover promised some pleasures, but performs nothing of those expectations. A case scenarios will arise when the lover loves the other for the sake of attaining pleasure while the beloved for the sake of utility and both do not possess the qualities expected in the relationship. Aristotle demonstrates that the friendship will cease to exist if the parties do not receive the things that formed the motive of love since each did not love each other for the sake of their likeable characters and qualities. From the argument, Aristotle concludes that love for pleasure and utility is transient unlike love formed on the basis of character s and qualities that are self-dependent and do not change with time (Pangle 234). The utility in friendships is relative to the needs as older people are oriented towards the expedient seek utility relationships. Individuals who are guided by feelings seek to satisfy such feelings as evidenced by young personas who engage in routine activities such as football games in order to satisfy their pleasure and erotic feelings of young persons. The satisfaction of the underlying feelings leads to pleasure, but feelings change with time thus making the relationship not enduring (Pangle 167). Theoretical observations Aristotle articulates that genuine friends loves and likes the other person for the same of that other person and friendship entails reciprocal goodwill. Aristotle offers three types of friendships that include