Eric Schwitzgebel's How To Tell If You Re A Jerk

In a world where there are many relationships available there is one that pertains to living a fulfilling life, friendship. Friendships arguably falls into three different categories, pleasure, utility, and virtue (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics - VIII – IX, 121). These styles of friendships behave in such a way analogous to bonds in chemistry. Bonds require time and energy to fully form. The bonds between pleasure, and even utility is considered the weakest. These relationships usually stem from the innate reciprocal enjoyment or benefit from another party. Rarely would one call a mate that they have partied with for a favor. Instead they would call up the mate for pleasure such as going to a party. If one were to ask of such a favor in this
friendship, it would fall into the category of obligation and the friendship could be strained. However, of the former merits of friendship, a virtuous friendship is much like looking in a mirror. Most people genuinely care for their own wellbeing. In a true friendship both parties genuinely care for each other much like they do themselves. In a virtuous friendship one could easily count on another, for either their time, energy, and support. In the case of all three types of friendship there is an obligation to uphold. Equality, and understanding are an essential part of becoming friends, friends in which makes life full.
There is a type of person that won’t ever find a friendship of virtue based on their sole nature, let alone friends.
This person is the “jerk.” In a quickly moving world there are people that take advantage of other people. There are people that look upon others with disdain, or even prey on them. In friendships of pleasure, utility, and pressure both parties benefit in some way from each other. In other words, these relationships are obligated to be peer to peer. However, a jerk is different. In Eric Schwitzgebel’s How to Tell if You’re a Jerk he explains that:
“Jerks are people who culpably fail to appreciate the perspectives of the people around them, treating others as tools to be manipulated or fools to be dealt with, rather than as moral and epistemic peers. To be a jerk is to be ignorant in a certain way—ignorant of the value of others, ignorant of the merit of their ideas and plans, dismissive of their desires and beliefs, unforgiving of their perceived inferiority.” (Eric Schwitsgebel, How to Tell if You’re a Jerk,
4)
A jerk would place themselves higher than another person on a sort of mental pedestal, possibly unaware of the value in them. It is impossible to make friends when prior to the engagement of friendship there is an unequal perception of one another. Much like how two students could become friends because they acknowledge each other’s values to each other in terms of passing a class. The relationship of a mentor and pupil, in contrast, is less likely to form because the mentor is on a higher level than the pupil and thus less likely to also benefit from this friendship. These two students would become friends of utility (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics - VIII – IX, 121.) In the jerk’s eyes, someone they could use would be a tool, while two friends based on utility are friends because there is an acknowledgement of a give and take all the while not considering each other as tools. Aristotle touched upon the obligation for the equality of the two friends where he says “The friendships we have mentioned involve equality, since both friends get the same and wish the same to each other”. (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics - VIII – IX, 126) Thus without equality a friendship cannot be deemed as true. With equality friends, must know when they are no longer equals and it is up to them to decide the proper steps to maintain friendship. Over time people change, their views, behavior, location, and responsibilities change. It is here that a friend must be able to evaluate whether the friendship can be maintained. Julie Beck in her article How Friendships Change in Adulthood relates to Aristotle’s forms of friendship by comparing the friendships of youth vs the friendships of adulthood Beck says “In childhood, friends are mostly other kids who are fun to play with” (Beck, How Friendships Change in Adulthood, 3). In youth friends are composed of neighbor children that coalesce to play hop scotch, these friends fall under friends of pleasure. But in adulthood friends could become more complex as people to share problems, and socialize with. Favors are more easily exchanged in adult hood than in youth as there is an unspoken. In adult hood friendships are less easily maintained as the resources required form friendships are taken by other things. For example, time is less available for both friends to socialize with (Beck, How Friendships Change in Adulthood, 2). Understanding in a relationship is key for it to be healthy. For example, in a pair of friends, one becomes angry at another for not being able to socialize. One lacks the cognizance that the other does not possess the time to socialize, while the other will be displeased, being viewed as just someone to play with. The latter friend assumes that the former friend is a virtuous friend but realizes it is a friendship of pleasure (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics - VIII – IX, 140). Thus, the latter friend feels as if they are being used. This is the disconnect that will end such friendships that are important in life. In the different types of friendships, when the prerequisite obligations are upheld and maintained, people become friends.
When friendships are dissolved, the consequences can be devastating. In Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics - VIII – IX he explains how humans learn from one another, and that humans are innately social animals (Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics - VIII – IX, 148-149). Friendships are required in life learn about values. Without friends, humans would not be able to learn such values from each other, nor will they be able to confide in each other. Having friends in life allow for the mutual growth of both parties. Rebecca Traister writes in her article “What Women Find in Friends That They May Not Get from Love” her experiences with her friend Sara. Traister says, “In each other, we found respite, recognition, a shared eagerness to relax, take stock and talk about it all.” (Sara Traister, “What Women Find in Friends That They May Not Get from Love, 1), going on to say this relationship was mutual where they benefited from each other’s company. As they both grew together over time, much like Aristotle suggests is the value of friendship. Humans life are not fulfilled unless friends are there to support each other. As Traister says, “For many women, friends are our primary partner through life” (Sara Traister, “What Women Find in Friends That They May Not Get from Love, 5). In Traister’s case, the friendship she shares with Sara is a friendship of virtue.
Friendships of pleasure and utility, although are easily broken, there was a profound impact on Traister when her friend had