Lysis Socrates What Is Friendship Essay Example

Lysis Socrates: What Is Friendship? Paper What is friendship? In this dialogue between Socrates, Allis, and Allis best friend Nexuses, Socrates is trying to show Hippocrates that the way to attract attention from someone Is NOT by praising them, but by drawing them Into a philosophical discussion. He claims that praising them (especially young people) will only make them pigheaded, and that developing their mind soul with deep conversation Is the right way to draw their attention. Socrates shows this by starting a debate with Allis and Nexuses about friendship. From the get-go Socrates suggests to Allis that his parents love him, and In Greek the word for love Is related to the word for friendship. So, what Is friendship, and under what conditions does It exist? The first question Socrates poses Is to Nexuses and Is as follows: When someone loves someone else, which of the two becomes the friend of the other, the one who loves or the one who is loved? Or is there no difference (Plato, Bibb). Nexuses claims there to be no difference at all, and it is possible for two people to be friends if only one loves the other. We will write a custom essay sample on Lysis Socrates: What Is Friendship? specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Lysis Socrates: What Is Friendship? specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Lysis Socrates: What Is Friendship? specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer Socrates disagrees, saying it is possible for one o love the other but not e loved in return, and possibly even hated in return. If this is the case, is the lover the friend of the loved or vice-versa? Or can they not be friends because they do not both love each other in return? Nexuses agrees with the latter, meaning his thoughts of love and friendship have been questioned and even changed a little. Now, Socrates decides to take the discussion in a different direction. He turns to a quote from the poets, God always draws the like unto the like (Plato, 214). The poets are saying that God is the one who makes people friends. However, Socrates reasons to the idea that if this were true (that like is friends with like) then that would mean that evil would be friends with evil (because they are the same). This cannot be true because if evil people were friends than they would eventually do something wrong to the other causing them to be enemies. Consequently, Socrates says it Is Impossible for those who do wrong and those who suffer from It to be friends! After this explanation, Allis agrees with the Idea. Maybe, Socrates goes on to think, the poets only mean to attribute this to things that are good, so that only the good are like. The bad cannot befriend the bad, nor can It befriend the good, so whoever/ whatever are good are friends. Of course, Socrates finds a problem In this argument. He wonders although something Is good, how Is It that the Like Is friends with the like? Can two similar things be appreciated by each other even though they have no way of assisting the other? Socrates says absolutely not, and further, that nothing can be a friend If not valued by the other. Therefore, a Like Is not a friend of the like. Then he questions how this Is applied to the good, Insofar as It Is not the like. Socrates explains that whatever Is good Is self-sufficient (doesnt need anything from anyone/anything else). So the result is the same as with two like things or people. But now Socrates takes It In an even Deterrent Loretta. He sat arts out DAY remembering a saying from Hissed: Potter is angry with potter, poet with poet, and beggar with beggar (Plato, 21 c). In other words, things that are like are envious of each other, and filled with hate (for each other). For example, the rich befriend the poor; the weak befriend the strong, etc. This concludes that it is opposites that are friends, not likes. This is true because things desire what they are lacking, or their opposites. But, once again Socrates finds a reason to reject this claim. The opposite of friendship is hostility, meaning that a friend would have to be a friend to the enemy and vice-versa. This obviously cannot be true! So, what is a friend then? After some long thought, it comes to Socrates. The answer is that which is neutral! It is something that is neither good or bad that is a friend to the good. It is only a friend to the good thought because we know nothing can befriend the bad. The example given in this dialogue is that off human body. First, Socrates wants Allis and Nexuses to consider a healthy body. It does not need a doctor, medicine, etc. , but a sick body does. Isnt a sick body a bad thing? Socrates says no, not really. It is the disease that is causing the body to be sick that is bad, not the body itself. The human body itself is a neutral entity. Therefore, what is neither good nor bad becomes a friend of the good because of the presence of something bad (Plato, Bibb). But still Socrates questions the legitimacy of this argument. He is curious as to whether something good that is in the presence of something bad is itself bad. I mind it necessary to note that I tend to get somewhat lost in the dialogue here, but will contribute what I understand of the conclusion to this question. Socrates finds an answer in the scenario of a man with painted white hair, and an old man with naturally white hair. He claims that the hair in the first case is not really white yet, but is only in the presence of the whiteness. It is different in the old mans case however, because his hair has turned white on its own because of his old age. It is the same as the presence of the white, it has actually taken on this state of whiteness. Socrates concludes here: So now, Allis and Nexuses, we have discovered for sure what is a friend and what it is friend to. For we maintain that in the soul and in the body and everywhere, that which is neither good nor bad itself is, by the presence of evil, a friend of the good (Plato, chic). Socrates soon after rejects this conclusion as well. His logic for denying this conclusion I still cannot understand. It seems to me to be perfectly feasible. I do not necessarily believe this is the correct definition of a friend or friendship but I cannot find any fault in it either, and certainly do not submit to Socrates reasoning of feeing this definition. My idea of friendship however, is not very philosophical. Either way, the group of debaters eventually came to an end because of Allis and Nexuses being pulled away, and because it had been such a long, exhausted discussion. Unfortunately, no satisfactory conclusion to the question of friendship was reached. Although, this dialogue was very intriguing and caused the brain to really think, it is disappointing to walk away with no certain answer from Socrates. I guess one well Just nave to Tort tenet own conclusion Dads problems with the arguments that Socrates confronted. EAI on all teen arguments Ana