Aristotle argues in the Ethica Nicomachea that eudaimonia, or flourishing, is the chief human good. This chief good will be that towards which all human activity aims. Amongst the features that contribute to, and help maintain, the eudaimon life Aristotle includes philia, or friendship. Aristotle dedicates one-fifth of the Ethica Nicomachea to an explanation of philia and the conditions under which philia can occur. The three forms of philia are friendships for utility, pleasure, and character, or virtue, based. The virtue-based friendships, or primary friendships, is the ideal and contributes the most to eudaimonia. The attention to detail regarding philia in this work on ethics demonstrates that Aristotle views friendly relationships as playing an important role in the eudaimon life. In contrast, Aristotle pays little attention to relationships founded on eros, or erotic love. I argue that just as philia can contribute to the development and maintenance of eudaimonia, so too can eros. My argument, then, is that Aristotle, having a complete view of philia, fails to provide a complete account of eros. Eros, for Aristotle, is mainly a relationship for pleasure but may also be for utility. On my account, Aristotle ought to extend his view of eros to include primary relationships just as he does with philia. Furthermore, I argue that as Aristotle's view is heteronormative, it focuses on a problematic sex and gender binary. If the primary form of eros is applied, ideal erotic relationships will be those which are relationships founded on virtuous character, and not on sexual orientation or gender. In lieu of evaluating erotic relationships on problematic sex or gender binaries, we ought to focus on whether the relationships are virtuous. As such, I criticize heteronormativity and argue for a broadened approach to erotic relationships.
Read
