Journal of Philosophy of Education 51 (1):161-176 (2017)

Mary Healy
University of Roehampton
The loss of friendship can be a frequent occurrence for children as they explore their social worlds and navigate their way through the demands of particular relationships. Given that friendship is a relationship of special regard, and associated with a particular partiality to our friends, the ending of friendship and the subsequent interactions between former friends, can be difficult areas for schools to deal with. Whilst there has been considerable research on the formation and maintenance of friendship, a consideration of what happens after friendship has had surprisingly limited attention. Much of our current understanding of issues on moral behaviour fails to fully address the positioning of former friends in our moral thinking particularly as regards matters arising from the priority of attachment. Recent empirical research seems to indicate that the memory of prior encounters has a far greater influence on future reciprocal exchanges than previously accepted. This paper considers suggests that this view of memory can be played out in two contrasting ways. First, a prudential view suggests that as our former friends were previously given access to our intimate secrets and confidences, self-interest would seem to indicate that we treat them well. Secondly, a residual duties view suggests that some obligations remain after the friendship has ended based on the history of the relationship. Finally, I then draw out some of the implications this may have for schools and the education of children.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/1467-9752.12191
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,008
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality.Peter Railton - 1984 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (2):134-171.
Law's Empire.Ken Kress - 1986 - Ethics 97 (4):834-860.
Role Obligations.Michael Hardimon - 1994 - Journal of Philosophy 91 (7):333-363.
Friendship and Moral Danger.Dean Cocking & Jeanette Kennett - 2000 - Journal of Philosophy 97 (5):278-296.
Friendship, Altruism, and Morality.Laurence Thomas - 1983 - Philosophical Review 92 (1):135.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

After Friendship.Mary Healy - 2016 - Journal of Philosophy of Education 50 (4).
Should We Take the Friendships of Children Seriously?Mary Healy - 2011 - Journal of Moral Education 40 (4):441-456.
Should Children Have Best Friends?Mary Healy - 2017 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 36 (2):183-195.
Friendship.Bennett W. Helm - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The Meaning, Value, and Duties of Friendship.David B. Annis - 1987 - American Philosophical Quarterly 24 (4):349 - 356.
The Advantages of Civic Friendship.Joyce L. Jenkins - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Research 24:459-471.
The Advantages of Civic Friendship.Joyce L. Jenkins - 1999 - Journal of Philosophical Research 24:459-471.
Civic Friendship and Thin Citizenship.R. K. Bentley - 2013 - Res Publica 19 (1):5-19.
On Friendship: Derrida, Foucault, and the Practice of Becoming.David Webb - 2003 - Research in Phenomenology 33 (1):119-140.


Added to PP index

Total views
27 ( #422,873 of 2,505,164 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #277,142 of 2,505,164 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes