David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Apeiron 34 (4):269 - 305 (2001)
Epicurus is strongly committed to psychological and ethical egoism and hedonism. However, these commitments do not square easily with many of the claims made by Epicureans about friendship: for instance, that the wise man will sometimes die for his friend, that the wise man will love his friend as much as himself, feel exactly the same toward his friend as toward himself, and exert himself as much for his friend's pleasure as for his own, and that every friendship is worth choosing for its own sake. These claims have led some scholars to assert that Epicurus inconsistently affirms that friendship has an altruistic element. I argue that the Epicurean claims about friendship can be reconciled with egoism and hedonism in psychology and ethics. Friendship is valuable because having friends provides one with security more effectively than any other means, and having confidence that one will be secure in the future either is identical to ataraxia, or the grounds on which one has it.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
R. Eugene Bales (1971). Act-Utilitarianism: Account of Right-Making Characteristics or Decision-Making Procedure? American Philosophical Quarterly 8 (3):257 - 265.
David O'Connor (1989). The Invulnerable Pleasures of Epicurean Friendship. Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 30:165–86.
Citations of this work BETA
John Thrasher (2013). Reconciling Justice and Pleasure in Epicurean Contractarianism. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):423-436.
Similar books and articles
William O. Stephens (2011). If Friendship Hurts, an Epicurean Deserts : A Reply to Andrew Mitchell. In Adrianne Leigh McEvoy (ed.), Essays in Philosophy. Rodopi 7.
Daniel J. Kirchner (2010). Augustine's Use of Epicureanism. International Philosophical Quarterly 50 (2):183-200.
Joyce L. Jenkins (1999). The Advantages of Civic Friendship. Journal of Philosophical Research 24:459-471.
Thomas Hurka (2006). Value and Friendship: A More Subtle View. Utilitas 18 (3):232-242.
Joe Mintoff (2006). Could an Egoist Be a Friend? American Philosophical Quarterly 43 (2):101 - 118.
Neera Badhwar Kapur (1991). Why It is Wrong to Be Always Guided by the Best: Consequentialism and Friendship. Ethics 101 (3):483-504.
Dean Cocking & Jeanette Kennett (2000). Friendship and Moral Danger. Journal of Philosophy 97 (5):278-296.
John Lippitt (2007). Cracking the Mirror: On Kierkegaard's Concerns About Friendship. [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 61 (3):131 - 150.
Bennett W. Helm (2008). Friendship. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Barbro Fröding & Martin Peterson (2012). Why Virtual Friendship is No Genuine Friendship. Ethics and Information Technology 14 (3):201-207.
R. K. Bentley (2013). Civic Friendship and Thin Citizenship. Res Publica 19 (1):5-19.
Laurence Thomas (forthcoming). The Character of Friendship. In Danian Caluori (ed.), Thinking About Friendship: Historical and Contemporary Prespectives. Palgrave MacMillon
Wanda Cizewski (1992). Friendship With God? Philosophy and Theology 6 (4):369-381.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads63 ( #72,509 of 1,938,541 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #98,699 of 1,938,541 )
How can I increase my downloads?