Friendship and Fidelity: an Historical and Critical Examination Joshua Walter Schulz Marquette University
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects Friendship and Fidelity: An Historical and Critical Examination Joshua Walter Schulz Marquette University Recommended Citation Schulz, Joshua Walter, "Friendship and Fidelity: An Historical and Critical Examination" (2010). Dissertations (2009 -). Paper 26. http://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/26 FRIENDSHIP AND FIDELITY: AN HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL EXAMINATION by Joshua W. Schulz A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2010 ABTRACT FRIENDSHIP AND FIDELITY: AN HISTORICAL AND CRITICAL EXAMINATION Joshua W. Schulz, B.A. Marquette University, 2010 Aristotle considers friendship the greatest external good, one integral to the attainment of happiness. However, while Aristotle limits distrust to what he calls imperfect forms of friendship, subsequent philosophers have stressed our uncertainty regarding the benevolence, beneficence and loyalty we may expect of friends. They do so in part because overcoming this uncertainty requires the exercise of the virtues of trust and loyalty if our friendships are to survive intact. For example, insofar as Aquinas holds that we cannot scrutinize the wills of others – thus inviting uncertainty regarding their present and future conduct – he argues that friendship requires the virtue of hope as a cause of friendly love, a hope which helps us to make virtuous presumptions about others’ wills. Likewise, Kant argues that all de facto friendships are plagued by epistemic uncertainty regarding the wills of others. In consequence, he treats loyalty as an unenforceable ideal of virtue (rather than as an enforceable and determinable right). Kierkegaard goes further, framing his treatment of non- agapic love – in which he argues that friendship cannot be ethically justified – with a discussion of deception in Works of Love. If Aristotle is correct in thinking that friendship ‘is a virtue, or involves virtue’ (1155a1), and that ‘loving is the virtue of friends’ (1159a35), then addressing the epistemological, conceptual, and normative concerns these philosophers have regarding trust and loyalty between friends is needed to understand a central goal of the ethical life: the perfection of love. After a historical survey of the thought of these four thinkers regarding the relationship between friendship and loyalty, this study suggests that contemporary problems about the origins, nature, and limits of loyalty can be fruitfully resolved using insights derived from the historical survey. i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Joshua W. Schulz First and foremost, I would like to extend my love and thanks to my wife, with whom I first discussed the idea of becoming a philosopher twelve years ago, and whose subsequent sacrifices have made this dissertation possible. I would also like to thank my parents, who encouraged my love of reading and questioning. Much thanks goes to my philosophy professors at the University of Nebraska at Kearney: Dr. David Rozema, Dr. Tom Martin, and Dr. Gene Fendt. Their humble midwifery is responsible for “the birth of many gloriously beautiful accounts and theories in unstinting love of wisdom” (Plato, Symposium 210d5-6). I would finally like to thank my professors at Marquette University, especially my committee – Dr. Richard Taylor, Dr. Noel Adams, and Dr. William Starr – and my director, Dr. Michael Wreen. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..........................................i ABBREVIATIONS............................................iv INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1 Friendship ................................................6 Outline of the Dissertation ..............................19 CHAPTER 1. ARISTOTLE ON FRIENDSHIP: FROM APPLES TO ETHICS ......................................................... 23 1. Introduction ..........................................23 2. Friendship, Art and Nature ............................25 3. Aristotle’s Naturalistic Analysis of Friendship .......32 Eunoia: The Efficient Cause of Friendship ...........37 The Formal Cause of Friendship: A Definition ........38 The Final Cause of Friendship .......................42 4. Aristotle’s Normative Analysis of Friendship ..........50 The Problem .........................................52 Strict and Schematic Interpretations of Aristotle’s Definition of Friendship ............................54 Friendship and Pros Hen Equivocation ................61 5. Conclusion ............................................71 CHAPTER 2. ARISTOTLE ON LOYALTY: RESCUING FALLEN FRIENDS 73 Précis ...................................................73 1. Aristotle and Loyalty .................................74 2. A Textual Puzzle ......................................79 3. Friendship, Loyalty, and Justice ......................85 Aristotle on Justice .....................................85 The Limits of Friendship .................................89 4. Aristotle’s Normative Self ............................97 Solving the Explanatory Problem ....................102 5. Conclusion ...........................................107 CHAPTER 3. AQUINAS ON LOYALTY: LOVE, TRUST, PRESUMPTION AND HOPE ................................................ 111 Introduction ............................................111 1. Aquinas’s Theory of Action ...........................112 2. Aquinas on Friendship ................................119 3. Two Problems .........................................125 4. Hope, Trust, Loyalty and Presumption .................128 Hope and Trust .....................................131 The Role of Presumption in Friendship ..............136 6. Aquinas’ Debts and Legacy ............................141 CHAPTER 4. KANT AND FRIENDSHIP ......................... 147 1. Background ...........................................147 2. Kant’s Two Ethical Theories ..........................149 3. Friendship ...........................................158 iii Moral Friendship ...................................161 4. Friendship as a Figure of Kant’s Summum Bonum ........166 Friendship and Hope ................................168 CHAPTER 5. KIERKEGAARD’S TASK OF LOVE: EROS, PHILIA, AGAPE ........................................................ 172 1. Introduction .........................................172 2. The Failure of ‘Pagan’ Eros and Philia ...............174 (F1) Friendship is Amoral ..........................178 (F2) Passionate Preferences are Fundamentally Forms of Self-Love ..........................................181 2. Interim ..............................................187 3. Kierkegaard’s Tragic and Comic Lovers ................190 Counterpoint .......................................198 (F3) and (F4): The Superiority of Agape ............201 4. Evaluating Kierkegaard ...............................210 Problem 1 ..........................................210 Problem 2 ..........................................213 Problem 3 ..........................................216 5. Conclusion ...........................................218 CHAPTER 6. LOYALTY, CARE, AND JUSTICE .................. 219 1. Two Objections .......................................219 (a) The Genuine Reasons Objection ..................219 (b) Non-Obligatory Reasons .........................223 (c) Some Theses ....................................232 2. Loyalty ..............................................234 3. Strong Relations and Deep Interests ..................238 4. Functions of Loyalty in Moral Discourse ..............251 5. Conclusion ...........................................262 CONCLUSION .............................................. 265 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................ 270 iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Works by Aristotle • Categories – Cat. • Eudemian Ethics - EE • Metaphysics – Met. • Magna Moralia – MM • Nicomachean Ethics – EN • Politics – Pol. Works by Aquinas • Summa Theologica – ST Works by Kant • Critique of Pure Reason - CPR • Critique of Practical Reason - KpV • Critique of Judgment - KU • Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals - GW • Metaphysics of Morals - MM • Religion Within the Limits of Reason Alone – Rel. Works by Kierkegaard • Works of Love - WOL 1 INTRODUCTION Three passages of Aristotle have always struck me as linked. The first occurs in the Poetics: Imitation is natural to man from childhood, one of his advantages over the lower animals being this, that he is the most imitative creature of the world, and learns at first by imitation. And it is also natural for all to delight in works of imitation. … To be learning something is the greatest of pleasures not only to the philosopher but also to the rest of mankind.1 The second occurs late in the tenth chapter of the Nicomachean Ethics: For as in cities laws and character have force, so in households do the injunctions and the habits of the father, and these have even more because of the tie of blood and the benefits he confers; for the children start with a natural affection and disposition to obey.2 The third passage occurs in Aristotle’s Politics: … the power of speech is intended to set forth the expedient and inexpedient, and therefore likewise the just and the unjust. And it is a characteristic of man that he alone has any sense of good and evil, of just and unjust, and the like, and the association of living beings who have this sense makes a family