Aristotle and Kant, in the Nicomachean Ethics and Lectures on Ethics, both have different views on the positive and negative forms of self-love. This difference is clearly distinguished from the start. Aristotle uses the word self-love, also known as philautia, in a positive form, while Kant uses it in a negative form. Each philosopher also made their separate case that self-love plays an essential role in friendship.
To begin with, Aristotle used the word of self-love as being a friend to one's self. He gave a positive and negative argument for self-love. On the positive end, Aristotle says that people with self-love are ruled by their highest part of the soul, which includes their mind, and their logos. Self-loved people are most concerned with nourishing their psyche or rational part of themselves. He is a good man that concerns himself for the sake of others. This person also strives and wishes for what are the noblest and the best and "gratifies the most authoritative element in himself and in all things obeys this" (Aristotle 236). He does so by using his reason, which allows him to recognize and distinguish what is good. They obviously aren't selfish at all and don't seem to seek personal material gains. The virtuous deeds the good man does are done for the sake of the self and for the sake of others as well. By doing these greatest of deeds, the virtuous man, "will both himself profit by doing noble acts, and will benefit his fellows" (Aristotle 237). On the other hand, the bad part of people having self-love is that Aristotle describes them as being narcissistic, egotistic, and arrogant. The myth of Narcissus pretty much meant to turn oneself away from others. This side of self-love, which is used as an insult, is the most common among people. Aristotle believed that since we loved ourselves we wouldn't be able to love another in return. These bad men are driven by their appetites and mostly desire what is the wealthiest, the most honorable, and what is the most physically beautiful.
