though in the UK most male friendship is cemented and reinforced by mock non-nice/I-hate-you behaviour – many men [esp non-middle-class] would greet each other with an insult as part of some kind of play-conflict

I am aware of that fact – having spent enough time growing up in the UK. I don’t see the pertinence of local or personal code in philosophical question ‘should we treat everyone as our friends in order to be more ethical’ somehow…

Just home from work and blown all over, even my magic hi-vis jacket and elegant plastic cycling trousers were of little use against such gusts…

Maybe a typology of friendship is what we need – I will think about – but this evening I am meeting a friend (one I actually do like) – and I will be only as nice to him as he deserves

(though in the UK most male friendship is cemented and reinforced by mock non-nice/I-hate-you behaviour – many men [esp non-middle-class] would greet each other with an insult as part of some kind of play-conflict)

@Dave:
I understand that you’re looking for more discussion and that is fine. I’m just a bit stern when it comes to blogging etiquette. On that topic: glad if I can convince you to switch to wordpress.

And now for “something more serious”:
I cannot agree with your approach to friendship or your categories somehow.

it seems to idealise friendship somewhat. I have connections with friends, but I am not always sure I even like them – never mind wanting to touch their souls (yuck).

Friendship is not colleagueship, nor are old friends the same as casual friends. If you have friends that you call friends that you don’t like, you are in trouble or simply call anybody a friend that is acquainted to you.
That’s fine by me, but then you cannot use your category of friendship for general use. Because in a strong kantian way of speech: I certainly wouldn’t want to have friends that I don’t like.
Even if you adopt the all-as-friend approach you still will have several statuses or “classes” of friends. So it’s all a matter of terminology. Not of ethics.

[I worry that having an over-strong conception of the value of friendship may lead us to be less fair in our dealings with people]

Only if the underlying maxim of my dealings of the world would imply that I am only courteous, nice or helpful to my friends, which would come close to a utilitarianist approach.

I was tempted to say that human-animal friendship is prevented as ‘true friendship’ requires a level of equality and the ability to mutually respond – but then, I am not sure this is true.

Well, I can surely say that my dog does respond to anything I do or do not do. As for the concept of truth within friendship, I am not sure that it has anything to here, since truth cannot be verified in friendship: the mirror right into the inner emotional workings of a person not having been invented as of yet.
Have a nice end of the day and watch out for Kyrill.

I had not thought of it quite as “spamming for traffic”, but rather as trying to pull others into discussions normally aimed at our Undergrads… They are often quiet in January due to the shape of our academic year – and thought some external comments might inspire them.. but no matter…

With reference to blogger – I agree. It has changed of late – and the comment-leaving process has made it more troublesome, esp for casual visitors. I think WordPress is looking much more of a feasible proposition.

I think re the util/deontology appraoch – you amy be right – but I also feel many do some the notion of friendship as infused with intrinsic value of some sort..

When you write:
“Friendship starts with fascination. With inspiration. With a touching of souls. There can be no must or should. Ever. Applying an ethical framework to friendship would be it’s ultimate death.”
it seems to idealise friendship somewhat. I have connections with friends, but I am not always sure I even like them – never mind wanting to touch their souls (yuck).

Applying an ethical framework to it may, though, be to take away from its value – but that does not mean that we cannot recognise that the nature of friendship-relations might sit within our broader ethical approach to life.

[I worry that having an over-strong conception of the value of friendship may lead us to be less fair in our dealings with people]

I fear you may be right with ref to the tainted-ness of the all-as-friend approach – but given the broad cultural currency of the notion of friendship, it may yet have something to offer – but maybe it is just too dirtied?

Arsedendi makes a comment I am not sure quite how to respond to – but will say something anyway…

I see the difference here – but what interests me is the idea of explicating friendship more than I have done at all so far – as suggested. I was tempted to say that human-animal friendship is prevented as ‘true friendship’ requires a level of equality and the ability to mutually respond – but then, I am not sure this is true.

Some kinds of intense childhood friendship look rather like practice for romantic relations. This led me to think of all the ‘friends are the new family’ stuff we saw in the 90s (and the TV show Friends, etc) – which we might argue is that 20-somethings now, in many places, delay permenant family-settling things – and then use friendships as a bridge between their own family they began in – and the one they may start/end in – but this is more to do with the cultural constructions of different modes of friendship than the touching of souls…

Sorry this is rather incoherent – in a rush this morning – maybe try to tidy some of this into some sense later!

Maybe I should end with a quote from someone I don’t normally much like: Morrissey:

We hate it when our friends become successful
And if they’re Northern, that makes it even worse
And if we can destroy them
You bet your life we will