FQ

The idea of friendship is broad and vague that it would seem hard to give a quick and good definition of friendship. I stumbled upon an article on the Philosophy of Friendship at the website, www.markvernon.com. It discusses the opinions and ideas of philosophers like Aristotle on friendship that are enlightening and intellectually stimulating.

There is also a Friendship Intellegence Test (FQ) and spirituality intelligence test where a detailed analysis of your answers will be shown after hitting the finished button. Here is my FQ result:

Question 1(b) First, you said that you have between 4 and 8 very close friends. Aristotle would say that this is possible but unlikely because the amount of time any individual has in practice only allows them to get to know a few people well; probably less than a handful. ‘Host not many but host not none,’ was his formula.

Question 2(a) When it comes to lesser but still good friends, you said that you try to speak to them at least once a week in order to maintain the friendship. Clearly, this will vary from friend to friend, but on average speaking to your wider circle of friends at least once a week is probably more than most would manage. Though Aristotle said, ‘Cut off the talk and many a time you cut off the friendship’, your answer suggests that you are either an exceptionally conscientious friend, have time on your hands, or are a little over-anxious about your friendships!

Question 3(b) Aristotle also said that a good friend is worth more than any other good thing a person might have – be that a fulfilling sexual relationship, complete financial security or right self-esteem. You ranked friendship as more important than sex and financial security but less important than self-esteem. He would argue that you simply cannot enjoy life without a good friend, so you should value friendship more highly even more than your self-esteem. But at least you put friendship higher than money!

Question 4(c) Finally in this section, we came to the matter of soulmates – the closest friend that anyone can hope to have. You indicated that you have someone in mind as your soulmate but that sometimes the friendship is not as close as it might be, probably for mundane reasons as well as more challenging ones. Well, the philosophers of friendship are right with you on this one. Most have thought that soul friendship is an ideal to which the best friendships aspire, rather than something that is lived day by day. Their point is that it requires exceptional people to form exceptional friendships. But there is a paradox here: those who see their failings in this respect, are also the ones most likely to form very close friendships indeed.

Question 5(b) The next section asked you about friendship and other loves. You thought it most like family love. The truth of the matter is that friendship is both like and unlike family love. For example, it is like family love in caring for others. But it is unlike family love since in the family the feeling may not be equally or mutually felt. Incidentally, friendship is like and unlike erotic love and divine love too. In the former case, they are both focused on one other, but in erotic love the feeling is probably more possessive. In the latter case, they both make life possible in the richest possible sense, though since strictly speaking God is not a person, or even a being (but being itself), it is hard to know what to make of calling God a friend.

Question 6(c) We next came squarely to the matter of friendship and sex. You said that a sexual relationship can be satisfying between people who share little or no sense of being friends but only for a limited time. The philosophers would partly agree with you. Sex is always to some degree an attempt to form a connection with another, so to insist it is only physical (‘just sex’) is like saying you can talk to someone only using a limited range of words; very quickly it becomes frustrating. In other words, a sexual relationship always begs the possibility of a friendship: ‘Love is the attempt to form a friendship inspired by beauty,’ was the way the Stoic philosophers put it. Where the philosophers would disagree with you is that a friendless sexual relationship was always doomed. So, it is not really satisfying even for a limited period of time.

Question 7(a) Perhaps most of the philosophers of friendship lived in less permissive times; perhaps not. But they would still argue that a close friendship between two people who are not and never have been lovers might nonetheless occasionally feel a whiff of sexual energy, if only because the passion the friends share as friends is easy to confuse with the passion of lovers. So when it comes to sexual frisson in friendships, they would disagree with you.

Question 8(b) Speaking more personally, you confess to having had an affair with a friend once, and once only. The philosophers of friendship say you are wise, fortified by the wisdom of experience!

Question 9(c) We move onto another sort of friendship – work friendship: perhaps the quintessential example of ambiguous friendship. Although people form friends at work, even good friends, they are readily dropped, dissolved or disregarded when the pressures or vicissitudes of working life take over. You mostly feel pragmatically when someone with whom you were friendly at work finds a new job and leaves: you have much in common with others.

Question 10(a) Another area full of ambiguity, even risk, in work friendships arises when someone works for a friend. The old adage has it about right: money and friendship do not readily mix. You are not wise to say you would work for a friend with barely a second thought.

Question 11(c) This also relates to the question of using friends and is often misunderstood. We feel that our intentions in friendship should be pure, so any sense of personal gain or convenience threatens to compromise them. But, if you think about it, all friends use each other from time to time; the trick is to ensure they do not feel merely used. Thus, you are quire right to suggest that friends use each other as needs be.

Question 12(c) The next question was which is the most important social virtue a society needs to exhibit in order for friendship to flourish in it? You said comradeship. Aristotle would agree with you. For friendship, a genuine sense of common life as citizens is require – or comradeship.

Question 13(a) Aristotle said that friendship is itself not a virtue, but that because good friends are likely to be virtuous people, it seems quite like one. So when it comes to judging friends, he thought that necessary, in order that people might become better. On the other hand, friendship never ‘puts the scales centre stage’, as he put it. Your answer – never judge friends – would then miss out on the opportunity to become better as a result of a friendship.

Question 14(c) You said that goodwill is the most important virtue that good friends share. Aristotle thinks you are right: ‘Friendship is a relationship of goodwill where that goodwill is reciprocated between the friends.’

Question 15(c) When it comes to the individual virtues that someone needs in order to be a good friend, personal integrity is a good one. Someone who blows with the wind is unlikely to be steady enough for close friendship.

Question 16(c) If the virtues that are positive to friendship are relatively obvious, the qualities that are detrimental to it can be as easily misunderstood. You highlighted dishonesty in this category. The philosophers of friendship would agree with you but actually with a qualification. In fact, strictly speaking friends are often dishonest with each other – hiding their real opinions or feelings – for the sake of the friendship: how many friendships would last if the individual really knew what their friends thought of them all the time, Nietzsche asked?

Question 17(a) Finally the friendship trivia. You are right: Aristotle wrote more about friendship than any of the other philosophers. His work still sets the agenda to this day.

Question 18(a) Second, Disraeli did indeed say that a nation has no permanent friends, only permanent interests.

Question 19(a) Third, Montaigne thought that people formed soul friendships only once every three centuries – and that he was one of the lucky ones! You said it happens all the time – probably not, for the reasons we have already discussed above.
Question 20(b) Finally, the FQ questionnaire asked whether you could come up with a robust definition of friendship. You answered, ‘yes, with a little effort’ – a modest answer but probably deluded. Plato himself failed, and Aristotle tried but realised his formula was limited. On the other hand, that is not to say there is nothing to be said about friendship!