Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by noduerme 995 days ago
Yeah, yeah. You got me. But I was kinda going for an unspoken point. Which man is sicker: One who needs to classify friendships as either pleasure or utility? Or one who admits a certain utility to pleasure, and a certain pleasure to utility?

And saying it was accidental in either case is quite a sophisticated little excuse...

2 comments

Aristotle would have been using "accidental" as opposed to "essential". Both used slightly differently to today's common usage. Essential being of the essence of a thing, i.e. it could not be that thing without it. Accidental being non-essential, i.e. it can be itself without that thing`[0].

It's not clear how a friendship can be essential though. Of what is the friendship essential? Or is it more like a friendship that fits the platonic form of a friendship.

edit: I do realise that your comment was a joke, and doesn't deserve to be "uhm actuallied", but I've personally always found the essential vs accidental usage to be very useful and interesting :)

[0] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/essential-accidental/

Hah... that's fascinating (I by no means mind having a joke turn into a real dialogue, and this is good stuff). So, it's interesting to apply this ancient pre-Abrahamic-moralizing, Platonic division between extrinsic/intrinsic, deduction/induction to modern friendships. All of us westerners still have 19th C. romantic biases that make it hard to admit if a romance serves a purpose, that might block us from being honest with ourselves. Then again, we're not so different. Essential is that love who is so entangled with your life that you make every decision together. Aristotle might've well thought his relationship with a 12 year old slave boy defined the essence in "essential". So, no one's perfect, but it's still possible to guess the meaning.

We might do well to begin sorting our relationships again by those which possess intrinsic meaning and the others which don't.

Friends that combine pleasure and utility are so few in a lifetime we established cultural norm to mark them with rings and loudly announce the pairing to the entirety of the town one resides, or smth.
I'd say marriage is a doggedly hopeful way to make someone please you, be useful, and act like they're friendly, under color of law, but it rarely captures the actual thing you imagine it's enshrining.