Skip to content

Classification Essay On Friends Families And Love

EEAnyone who has spent time with friends will notice that each one has a special personality all of their own. Friends, have different traits that make up their personalities. A sense of humor, great advice, and honesty are all things that come to mind when you think about a friend. Friends are important to have because they are a backbone when things get tough in life and are always there to love and support. However, anyone who has spent time with friends will notice that each one has a special personality with respect to their honesty, loyalty, and care. There are three major types of friends, which are acquaintances, social friends, and best friends.

The first type of friend is simply an acquaintance. This means that you basically only know their name. Not even remembering what they look like. You usually meet these type of friends in school, at work, on the bus, in the gym, or anywhere else you might be. You normally would not mind having a cup of coffee with them, but if anything else came up, you would have no problem parting company. We see many people in the work. Sometimes we speak them compulsorily and we don’t remember even their face. While we are on the bus, we come across some people who get on the bus regulars like us. Therefore we call them as an acquaintance. Someone you know socially or through the business world would be called an acquaintance if you don’t know them well personally.

An acquaintance can remain a personal or business contact for you or can become a friend at some point. It depends on the relationship and the people involved. You may have some acquaintances you see over and over throughout your life that you never really get to know. However, they are still good people to know because they can connect you to potential friends. This group includes people who one talks to out of awkward obligation. Observed in their natural habitats of classrooms, bus seats, and the general public acquaintances are random encounters. A person often speaks to this species out of necessity, loneliness, or boredom. For instance, when a person is alone in the bus station with nothing to do, they see a person reading a magazine and decide to make conversation about that magazine. This is not done to bother the other person, and usually both people don’t care but it’s a tool to make a person feel less alone. This sect of friends does not evolve past a random encounter or conversation. Acquaintances include people who one exploits for their own personal gain.

The second category of friends is a social partner. One you often meet at social occasions, or one who may accompany you to social gatherings, but with whom you don’t have a personal relationship. This is because they are closer than acquaintances, but nowhere near as close as a true friend. Social partners are usually acquaintances who evolve into “guest friends” through increased extracurricular activities. You know their name, a little of what they like or dislike, a little of their family history, and usually have several things in common. As the saying goes, “Birds of a feather flock together,” so too the social partners have to have several things in common with you. No one is going to want to spend any more time than necessary with somebody completely opposite and aggravating to him.

Social friends are closer than acquaintances, but nowhere near as close as a true friend. You know much more about each other than you would as mere acquaintances, but much less than if you were personal friends.

The last type of friend is the “best friend.” Normally, you know them the longest and you probably grew up together as children. He or she knows everything about you. Likewise, you know everything about him or her. They are basically like family. You would have no problem if they spent the night at your house. You know each other’s habits and can always tell when there is something wrong. You would not hesitate to share your deepest feelings or thoughts with them. A best friend has no problem correcting you when you are wrong, or being stern with you when you are out of line. They will see you through when others see that you are through.

He/she will always be there for you. They are not perfect, but at least they will always look out for you and never do anything intentionally to hurt you. They are there to find national solutions to the many unexpected problems that life presents for us. “Best friends” are very important to us, because we share with them something which are secrets things that have not be known by anybody. They are very generous people. For example, when we have not enough money, they lend us. When we fall into bad condition, they cheer us up. They support us.

In conclusion; we always meet people and classify them in terms of their personalities. There are three types of friends. The first type of friends is simply an acquaintance. The second is the social friend. Finally the best friends. We will always encounter those types of friends in our lives. Every friend has a different type of character. Some friends are helpful while some friends are caring. No matter what traits they have as long as we interest and comfort each other. Friends caneither make or break us.

The Four Loves is a book by C. S. Lewis which explores the nature of love from a Christian and philosophical perspective through thought experiments.[1] The book was based on a set of radio talks from 1958, criticised in the US at the time for their frankness about sex.[2]

Need/gift love[edit]

Taking his start from St. John's words "God is Love", Lewis initially thought to contrast "Need-love" (such as the love of a child for its mother) and "Gift-love" (epitomized by God's love for humanity), to the disparagement of the former.[3] However he swiftly happened on the insight that the natures of even these basic categorizations of love are more complicated than they at first seemed: a child's need for parental comfort is a necessity, not a selfish indulgence, while conversely parental Gift-love in excessive form can be a perversion of its own.[4]

Pleasures[edit]

Lewis continued his examination by exploring the nature of pleasure, distinguishing Need-pleasures (such as water for the thirsty) from Pleasures of Appreciation, such as the love of nature.[5] From the latter, he developed what he called "a third element in love...Appreciative love",[6] to go along with Need-love and Gift-love.

Throughout the rest of the book, Lewis would go on to counterpart that three-fold, qualitative distinction against the four broad types of loves indicated in his title.[7]

In his remaining four chapters, Lewis treats of love under four categories ("the highest does not stand without the lowest"), based in part on the four Greek words for love: affection, friendship, eros, and charity. Lewis states that just as Lucifer (a former archangel) perverted himself by pride and fell into depravity, so too can love—commonly held to be the arch-emotion—become corrupt by presuming itself to be what it is not.

A fictional treatment of these loves is the main theme of Lewis's novel Till We Have Faces.

Storge—empathy bond[edit]

Storge (storgē, Greek: στοργή) is liking someone through the fondness of familiarity, family members or people who relate in familiar ways that have otherwise found themselves bonded by chance. An example is the natural love and affection of a parent for their child. It is described as the most natural, emotive, and widely diffused of loves: natural in that it is present without coercion; emotive because it is the result of fondness due to familiarity; and most widely diffused because it pays the least attention to those characteristics deemed "valuable" or worthy of love and, as a result, is able to transcend most discriminating factors. Lewis describes it as a dependency-based love which risks extinction if the needs cease to be met.

Affection, for Lewis, included both Need-love and Gift-love. He considered it responsible for 9/10th of all solid and lasting human happiness.[8]

Ironically, however, affection's strength is also what makes it vulnerable. Affection has the appearance of being "built-in" or "ready made", says Lewis, and as a result people come to expect it irrespective of their behavior and its natural consequences.[9] Both in its Need and its Gift form, affection then is liable to "go bad", and to be corrupted by such forces as jealousy, ambivalence and smothering.[10]

Philia—friend bond[edit]

Philia (philía, Greek: φιλία) is the love between friends as close as siblings in strength and duration. The friendship is the strong bond existing between people who share common values, interests or activities.[11] Lewis immediately differentiates friendship love from the other loves. He describes friendship as "the least biological, organic, instinctive, gregarious and necessary...the least natural of loves".[12] Our species does not need friendship in order to reproduce, but to the classical and medieval worlds it is a higher-level love because it is freely chosen.

Lewis explains that true friendships, like the friendship between David and Jonathan in the Bible, are almost a lost art. He expresses a strong distaste for the way modern society ignores friendship. He notes that he cannot remember any poem that celebrated true friendship like that between David and Jonathan, Orestes and Pylades, Roland and Oliver, Amis and Amiles. Lewis goes on to say, "to the Ancients, Friendship seemed the happiest and most fully human of all loves; the crown of life and the school of virtue. The modern world, in comparison, ignores it".

Growing out of companionship, friendship for Lewis was a deeply appreciative love, though one which he felt few people in modern society could value at its worth, because so few actually experienced true friendship.[13]

Nevertheless, Lewis was not blind to the dangers of friendships, such as its potential for cliquiness, anti-authoritarianism and pride.[14]

Eros—erotic bond[edit]

Eros (erōs, Greek: ἔρως) for Lewis was love in the sense of "being in love" or "loving" someone, as opposed to the raw sexuality of what he called Venus: the illustration Lewis used was the distinction between "wanting a woman" and wanting one particular woman—something that matched his (classical) view of man as a rational animal, a composite both of reasoning angel and instinctual alley-cat.[15]

Eros turns the need-pleasure of Venus into the most appreciative of all pleasures;[16] but nevertheless Lewis warned against the modern tendency for Eros to become a god to people who fully submit themselves to it, a justification for selfishness, even a phallic religion.[17]

After exploring sexual activity and its spiritual significance in both a pagan and a Christian sense, he notes how Eros (or being in love) is in itself an indifferent, neutral force: how "Eros in all his splendor...may urge to evil as well as good".[18] While accepting that Eros can be an extremely profound experience, he does not overlook the dark way in which it could lead even to the point of suicide pacts or murder, as well as to furious refusals to part, "mercilessly chaining together two mutual tormentors, each raw all over with the poison of hate-in-love".[19]

Agape—unconditional "God" love[edit]

Charity (agápē, Greek: ἀγάπη) is the love that exists regardless of changing circumstances. Lewis recognizes this one as the greatest of the four loves, and sees it as a specifically Christian virtue to achieve. The chapter on the subject focuses on the need to subordinate the other three natural loves—as Lewis puts it, "The natural loves are not self-sufficient"[20]—to the love of God, who is full of charitable love, to prevent what he termed their "demonic" self-aggrandizement.[21] Lewis did not actually use the word "agape", although later commentators did.[22][23][24]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^Carl Rogers, Becoming Partners (1984) p. 238
  2. ^Walter Hooper, C. S. Lewis: A Companion & Guide (1996) pp. 779 and 88–90
  3. ^C. S. Lewis, The Four Loves (1960) p. 9-12
  4. ^Hooper, p. 368-70
  5. ^Lewis, pp. 20 and 27
  6. ^Lewis p. 26
  7. ^R. MacSwain ed, The Cambridge Companion to C. S. Lewis (2010) pp. 147–148
  8. ^Lewis, pp. 50 and 66
  9. ^Lewis, pp. 50–2
  10. ^Hooper, pp. 370–1
  11. ^Hooper, p. 654
  12. ^Lewis, p. 70
  13. ^Lewis, pp. 77, 84–5, and 70
  14. ^Hooper, p. 372
  15. ^Lewis, p. 108-9 and p. 116
  16. ^Hooper, p. 373
  17. ^Lewis, p. 127-32 and p. 113
  18. ^Lewis, p. 124
  19. ^Lewis, p. 124 and p. 132
  20. ^Lewis, p. 133
  21. ^MacSwain, p. 146
  22. ^A. Lindsley. C.S. Lewis on Love. C. S. Lewis Institute
  23. ^P Kreeft. Love, in Fundamentals of the Faith: Essays in Christian Apologetics. Ignatius Press 1988, p. 181
  24. ^The Question of God, Program Two: C.S. Lewis: The Four Loves. PBS

External links[edit]