Yamamoto on Friendship

Prof. Yoshihisa Yamamoto's paper on friendship('Thomas Aquinas on the Ontology of Friendship: Selfness and Otherness', The 22nd World Congress of Philosophy, Seoul, 2008) is rich in its metaphysical implications and full of insights. My reading of it was one of the opportunities of joy where I can experience of philosophizing.

As I read it, the basic structure of the paper may be summarized in the following 5 propositions. I took the last paragraph of the paper to mean the conclusion (5) and premises (1)~(4) may allow interpretations by which one can derive the conclusion.

1. A man is 'undivided in itself(unum)', holding his own uniqueness.
2. He is 'distinct from others(aliquid)',
negating something he can share with others.
3. Whatever exists is active(Thomistic ontology),
then the world is the organic totality of interactions among what there are.
4. Anything good is self-diffusive(Neoplatonic principle).
5. Friendship is a relationship
(5.1) among two independent individuals(1 & 2);
(5.2) of mutual betterment(3 & 4).

If this understanding of the paper is plausible, the notions of God, cause, finitude, and love which were introduced in the paper may not be necessary for the argument, while they may help some readers to understand the arguments.

I remember the conversations which Professors Yamamoto, Taesoo Lee and I shared at the Congress Dinner. Some of the questions raised at the time still linger in my mind. Is the notion of friendship (5) acceptable and persuasive? Even though it has a merit of allowing and/or requiring a universal friendship, aren't human beings finite in their resources in their emotion, time, and economy? If we take 'friendship' to mean a relationship among persons who love to share what they consider precious or pleasant, aren't this is too restricted and yet ordinary? Which is more beneficial and/or strategic for human kind, Aquinasian friendship or an ordinary one?