1

1

AN EXPLORATION INTO UNIVERISTY STUDENTS’ NOTION OF FRIENDSHIP

A descriptive study on modern-day friendship

Submitted by:

Sailah L. Guerra

Shay P. Juaneza

November 2014

2

2

The research paper focuses on the modern-day concept of friendship amongst university

students, with most of the respondents coming from universities within Metro Manila. The aim

of this paper is to identify the best kind of friendship to exist in society as well as identify the

prevalent notion that university students have on friendship, and whether this understanding

conforms to the Aristotelian definition of what true friendship is. The researchers used a survey

questionnaire specifically the Likert-type scale method in order to find out the prevailing concept

of friendship. The respondents were asked to rate a given set of statements according to their

preferences and experiences. The findings revealed that college students’ view on friendship fits

Aristotle’s model that which is grounded on mutual well-wishing and virtue. Likewise, the study

concluded that civic friendship is the best foundation in societal relationships, and that “good

friendship” is still the prevailing concept of friendship among the youth of today.

3

3

Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the study

The twenty-first century has brought about a lot of change, whether it be in politics,

media, entertainment or business. With all of these developments happening in society and

influencing the way man acts and thinks, it is inevitable that these changes affect not only the

external life of man, but his internal one as well. Ideologies and beliefs have changed as fast as

the latest fashion trends, and have radically altered the way man sees the world. Nowadays,

friendship has been strongly connected to the trend that is social networking in which everyone

considers the other person as a friend, without having even seen some of them in person. It is

difficult to create a criteria upon which to decide whether a person is a friend or not, but to claim

that each new person that is met is just as ludicrous. These social platforms eventually affected

the kind of friendship that people create through interpersonal means such as making friends in

school or in social events.

Aristotle believes that there are three different kinds of friendship; that of utility,

friendship of pleasure, and virtuous friendship. Aristotle argues that friendship should be so

highly valued because it is complete virtue and he explains that it is above both honor and

justice. The first two kinds of friendship highlight man’s political nature since it talks about

man’s love for what is easy and pleasurable, and allows him to gain something from the

relationship. But the third kind of friendship, which is virtuous friendship, stems from the

understanding of virtuous love as the basis of any relationship. This is because virtuous love

urges people to want the best for others rather than focusing only on personal gain (Book VIII,

Nichomachean Ethics).

But this is not necessarily how the youth understand friendship. What has become more

prevalent is a friendship that exists since one person sees the other as someone to be used. Once

this happens, individuals are commoditized and their value is not based on their self-worth but on

how they can serve the other person (Prevos, 2005). This adds to the destruction of society

because these people become too individualistic and focus on their own flourishing rather than

that of the society as a whole. Through this, it can be seen that how friendship is understood can

4

4

affect the kind of society that exists. It is only through understanding the virtuous kind of

friendship that individuals will start treating others as equal to him or herself.

In this study, the researchers look into how the youth of today, specifically those falling

in 17-20 age range understand friendship, and how their definition of friendship affects societal

relations and whether it contributes or weakens the role of society. Through friendship, people

are able to work together peacefully. It allows the individual to look not only into his or her

personal interests, but also those of the people around him or her. The results of this study will

then help in understanding if today’s youth are able to interpret friendship as a means of being a

better citizen that is able to contribute to their immediate community, rather than a hindrance that

prevents progress within that community.

Statement of the problem

In this study, the role of friendship in society is shown to be important because the kind

of understanding that the youth has of friendship affects how that society works. The problem is

that having a wrong understanding of friendship, which is that of a utilitarian nature, rather than

a virtuous one, becomes detrimental to society because the essence of a common good is lost

since individuals are focused only on themselves.

In line with that, this paper aims to look into how the youth of today understand the

notion of friendship, in contrast with the Aristotelian definition of friendship which is based on a

virtuous love. Once the researchers have understood how the youth of today define friendship,

they are able to determine if it is in line with Aristotle’s definition. And in doing so, it will allow

the researchers to understand how that definition has affected the society that they are situated in.

Scope and limitations

The study focuses on the kind of friendship that is the best foundation in the relations in

the society and second is the prevailing concept of friendship of college students. Moreover, the

study is only limited among the colleges and universities in the Philippines, both rural and urban

areas. The time frame of the study is one (1) month from the 4 th week of October until the 2nd

week of November.

There were a total of 54 respondents from the various colleges and universities in the

Philippines. A survey questionnaire was the primary tool used for the dating gathering.

5

5

The research questions for this study are:

· What is the kind of friendship that is the best foundation in the relations in the society?

· What is the prevailing notion of friendship amongst college students in the Philippines?

Chapter II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

Friendship, according to Aristotle (as cited by Schollmeier, 1994), is essentially altruistic.

It is about acting for the sake of another’s goodness. It starts from bearing good wishes to one

another, and once reciprocated and there is a continuous exchange of it, only then can one call

the other a friend. Aristotle states that (as cited by Pangle, 1994), firstly, the mark of a good

friend is someone who does what is good for the other person. Secondly, a friend is someone

who wishes always the good for the person's sake. Thirdly, he enjoys spending time with the

person. Fourthly, he is someone who chooses the same things as his friend. Lastly, a friend is

someone who always stays beside his friend, both in the good and bad times.

As mentioned, good will is an important element of friendship since it is the starting point

of such a relationship. It can either be altruistic, which is when a person acts for the sake of

another person's end; or it can also be egoistic when a person acts for the sake of his own end or

benefit. Having mentioned this, a friendship cannot grow and develop when it is egoistic rather,

it can only grow when it is selfless or altruistic. Friendship is therefore classified into two types,

one is essential friendship and the second is accidental friendship. Aristotle stated that there can

only be one type of friendship that falls under essential friendship and it is called good or

virtuous friendship. This is the ideal type of friendship for Aristotle because it is grounded on

selfless love, which, in other words, is altruistic. Good friends are those that act for the sake of

the good of another person (Schollmeier, 1994).

On the other hand, there are two other types of friendships that fall under accidental

friendship. These are useful friendship and pleasant friendship. In these types of friendships, the

person is loved not for who he is, but for his qualities that are deemed to be useful or pleasant.

Aristotle points out that these types of friendships are unstable or temporary, for when the person

is found to have no use or gives no pleasure anymore, the good will vanishes and the love ceases

6

6

to grow as well. Moreover, according to Wadell (1989), in these types of friendships, the object

of love is not the friend nor her goodness, but the advantage a person gains in being a friend.

On the contrary, virtuous friendship is long-lasting, for the person is loved for who he really is

and the person’s happiness is the goal of the act. According to Cooper (as cited by Wadell,

1989), he calls this kind of friendship, “friendship of character”. This kind of friendship is built

on goodness and virtue. This friendship is sustained by the persons’ love for the good which

makes it long-lasting. Furthermore, this relationship is constituted by persons who agree and are

committed for the good and have the same of virtue. They have more or less the same interests,

likes and dislikes, and they agree on the things they think are important. Lastly, they are persons

who love one another because they are virtuous. Unlike accidental friendships, where the object

of love is the person’s usefulness or pleasantness, in good friendships there is “unity between

what is loved and the person who is loved, between the good that is sought and the person who

embodies it” (Wadell, p. 53). In other words, character friendship is one that best fulfils

Aristotle’s definition of friendship. It is long-lasting because goodness and virtue, according to

Aristotle, is long-lasting or transcendental.

Wadell (1989) also clarifies Aristotle’s take on good friendship, which is said to be only

and ideally consisting of good men. He asserts, “Friendships of moral goodness cannot be the

preserve solely of those who have already achieved the good, but must also be the relationships

in which people who want to be good can become good; in short, these are the relationships in

which moral growth occurs” (p. 54). He said that if friendship were to consist of good or almost

perfect people then what else could be the purpose of friendship? Friendship is supposed to be an

avenue for friends to grow in virtue and become better persons.

According to Aristotle (as cited by Wadell, pg. 63), friendship consists in the community.

It is a community of virtue, a relationship or set of relationships defined by the purpose from

which it began and for which it continues, the ongoing growth of each friend in the good that is

her life. It is a friendship of community of those who seek delight in virtue, but as a community

it is not just a relationship, but a moral activity. Indeed, friendship is the activity of acquiring and

growing in the virtue, a community whose purpose is its constitutive activity, namely, to be the

relationship in which those who love the good actually become good.

Civic friendship, similar to Aristotle’s definition of virtuous friendship, is a relationship

of mutual well-wishing, each person motivated from concern of enhancing the good of each one

7

7

in the society. And in this, the important element of bearing good will is present. It is a win-win

situation since there is a common goal which is the pursuit of the good. One could therefore say

that when one enhances the good of another, one is also enhancing his own. (Wadell, 1989).

Aristotle adds (as cited by Wadell, 1989), “virtue cannot be attained in solitude. By definition, it

is a relationship because the virtuous life is the activity of doing good, of practicing good, of

developing good habits; and as such, it needs opportunities to be exercised, it demands others on

whom the good can be bestowed” (64). Therefore, friends are there to provide the things that

persons are unable to provide for themselves, and he argues this one thing a person cannot

provide is virtue. Hence the need for a society in which virtuous friendship paves the way for a

good community becomes a necessity.

Aristotle states that society is a means to ensure that the social nature of people - in

forming families, in forming friendships and equally in trying to rule and control others, is

channeled away from the negative attributes of human beings - greed and cruelty - towards the

positive aspects such as love of truth and knowledge (Cohen, 2008). He pushes forth the notion

of positive aspects as formative means of influencing society, in contrast to negative attributes

which become a means to create a destructive race. Likewise, he posited that a society will

always be situated in a state, which he understood as an organism with the purpose to promote

happiness, or as the Greeks put it, “eudaimonia”, meaning to promote human flourishing.

Man by nature, is a social being and therefore is able to best understand his purpose

through coexistence with others. Aristotle describes a man who is unable to thrive in a living and

organized society as the “stateless man”. He goes as far as saying that if his isolation is natural

and not accidental, he is either superhuman or very low in the scale of development (Ellwood,

1902). This only proves that it is not natural for man to desire to live on his own without the

company of others and that organized social life is essential to the existence of man as man. The

state has a virtuous character by becoming a source of knowledge and moral purpose. This is

then further improved if all individuals residing in a particular society are guided by the same

objectives and understanding of what it means to be a member of society.

In order for a society to become an environment conducive for the flourishing of each

individual to allow him to meet his end, there must be the presence of social justice, in which

there is equality and fairness between human beings. With that, Friedrich Hayek emphasizes that

in trying to understand social justice in man’s own time, there is no better place to start than with

8

8

the man who, in his own intellectual life, exemplified the virtue whose common misuse he so

deplored. Social justice is supported by the underlying notion that there is the need for a peaceful

coexistence within and among nations (FSG Australia, 2014). Going back once again to

Aristotle, he defined justice as “the virtue through which each person enjoys his own possessions

in accordance with rightful and just laws—not those that legalize theft and redistribute property

from some individuals to others” (Younkins, 2000). Furthermore, it means treating individuals in

accordance with their deserts, treating equals equally, and treating unequals unequally. In more

current times, social justice is understood to exist when "all people share a common humanity

and therefore have a right to equitable treatment, support for their human rights, and a fair

allocation of community resources." In conditions of social justice, people are "not be

discriminated against, nor their welfare and well-being constrained or prejudiced on the basis of

gender, sexuality, religion, political affiliations, age, race, belief, disability, location, social class,

socioeconomic circumstances, or other characteristic of background or group membership".

(Toowoomba Catholic Education, 2006).

The best manifestation of such is through social capital development as a result of strong

ties in friendship. The concept of social capital has gained more recognition in the past few

decades but has created conceptual confusion due to varying uses of the term by different

writers. (Schaefer-McDaniel, 2004). Through friendship, society is able to work hand in hand

because it promotes three basic concepts upon which effective human capital is built upon. These

include: 1) Social networks/interactions and sociability; 2) trust and reciprocity; and 3) sense of

belonging/place attachment. If individuals prior to becoming members of the working force

understood the notion of friendship, the abovementioned pillars would come naturally to these

individuals rather than something that needed to be taught to them. We look into Bourdieu

(1977) who further described the concept of a “cultural capital.” He used the term to refer to

information or knowledge about specific cultural beliefs, traditions, and standards of behavior

that promote success and accomplishment in life. This can be strongly tied to the previous

understanding of civic friendship, and it is through this that the two terms are connected.

Robert Putnam (n.d.) then further strengthens the claim by explaining that social capital

has therefore often been referred to as a “collective asset” and a “common good” (Warren,

Thompson, and Saegert 2001, 1) of neighborhoods and communities. It is further important to

note that in order to achieve a strong community with high social capital, the notions of trust and

9

9

reciprocity as well as the consequential obligations must be mutual among residents. Looking

into the dimensions of social capital among young people, there is a disconnect since the youth

have a different notion of social interaction. The youth are heavily dependent on notions of trust

and reciprocity when it comes to social relations, which is formative rather than utilitarian. This

understanding can further be polished should the youth have a firm background on friendship, to

begin with.

With that, Aristotle strongly related the notion of justice to that of friendship by exploring

both justice and friendship as ways of maintaining balance within the social and political fabric.

He claims that friendship is an important of feature of the so-called “good life” since being part

of a morally upright community can allow the individual to acquire virtuous habits as influenced

by those around him. In the Nichomachean Ethics, it is stated that “friendship seems also to hold

states together, and lawgivers to care more for it than for justice; for unanimity seems to be

something like friendship, and this they aim at most of all, and expel faction as their worst

enemy; and when men are friends they have no need of justice, while when they are just they

need friendship as well, and the truest form of justice is thought to be a friendly quality”

(Nicomachean Ethics 1155a-24).

10

10

Chapter III

METHODOLOGY

Research participants

The researchers gave an online survey among college students ages 17-20 years old, who

came from different colleges and universities in the Philippines. College students were the

chosen respondents since they are the next working class in the future hence, the shapers of the

society. They are from, University of Asia and the Pacific, University of Santo Tomas,

Polytechnic University of the Philippines, University of the East Manila, University of San

Agustin, University of the Philippines- Los Banos, Southwestern University, De La Salle

University- Manila, Southern Luzon State University, Adventist University of the Philippines,

De La Salle- College of St. Benilde, University of Perpetual System- DALTA, La Salle- Lipa,

Enderun Colleges, Mapua, Mapua Institute Technology, Far Eastern University, Calayan

Educational Foundation, Inc., and Colegio De San Juan De Letran.

Research Instruments

The instrument used for data gathering was a survey questionnaire (See Appendix 1). The

questionnaire is composed of two parts; one is the qualitative which is composed of questions

about the respondents’ perspective regarding friendship, its purpose and its importance in their

lives. Moreover, they were asked as well about the importance of having a friend and his or her

role in one’s life. On the other hand, in the second part of the survey, quantitative method is used

wherein respondents were asked to rate on a given set of statements about friendship and

specifically, about friends. Their rating was based on how they relate to the given statements

according to one’s preferences and experiences. Their choices for this part were, SA for Strongly

Agree, A for Agree, N for Neutral, SD for Strongly Disagree and D for Disagree.

Data Gathering Procedure

This study aims to know the prevailing concept of friendship amongst college students in

the Philippines. A total of 54 questionnaires were answered by the respondents via Google

forms. Through this website, tally of responses and statistics are provided already as well.

11

11

Using the Likert scale, respondents were asked to rate a given set of statements about

friendship and the characteristics of a good friend, according to their preference and experience.

The items were all based on the researchers’ review of related literature. The following table

shows the mean scores of the general item categories based on the Likert scale.

12

12

Chapter IV

DATA PRESENTATION

(Qualitative Data)

Friendship in a modern society

Many of the youth today see friendship as an interpersonal relationship. Interpersonal

because it happens between two people and there is a certain degree of dependency between the

two. There is an exchange of ideas, habits, and virtues which is part of the whole process of

friendship. The survey showed that the beginning of any friendship is built upon a common

interest which then turns into an avenue that allows one to get to know the other person. In this

sense, friendship is then also a gradual process because getting to know a person doesn’t

automatically make him or her a friend, rather, just an acquaintance. Hence, being referred to as

a friend holds a deeper and more meaningful definition. Going deeper into the role of friendship

in their lives, a majority emphasizes that friendship, like all relationships, had to be built on trust.

This is because the respondents believe that once the trust has been established, both parties are

then confident enough to confide with one another as well as open up about themselves.

Friendship was then also described to be unconditional. This means that friendship does not

require agreements or conditions since it is more focused on the flourishing of both the

individuals through a newfound bond.

The role of friendship in an individual’s life

Likewise, the respondents identified friendship as a necessary aspect in each individual’s

life. The respondents believe that man is a social being by nature, and it would be unnatural for

him to want to live in isolation. Through friendship, man is able to rely on another person and

they become a means of influencing the way you think or your manner of acting. Many of the

respondents also understand friendship as a person to share burdens with and someone that can

help with the trials and burdens. They see friends as companions, but guides as well. Friendships

then play a major role in every person’s life because there are certain needs that are derived from

this particular kind of friendship.

13

13

(Quantitative data)

Table 1. Characteristics of a good friendship and a good friend

Characteristics Mean Score Interpretation

1. Friendship is all about the growth of friends into better

persons

2. Friendship is selfless

3. A friend is someone who always wishes the good for

the other person’s sake

4. A friend is someone who does what is good for the

other person

4.6

4.4

4.5

4.4

Strongly Agree

Agree

Agree

Agree

As shown in the table, the concept of good friendship and good friend got an average

mean of 4.5, therefore showing that respondents agree with Aristotle’s definition of friendship

that it is and should be selfless or altruistic. With this, they also believe that friendship is wishing

good will and doing what is good for the other person.

On the other hand, respondents were also asked to rate two other set of statements about

the two other types of friendships, which are useful friendship and pleasant friendship. The

results show (See Table 2 and 3) that the respondents are neutral about the concept of these two

types.

14

14

Table 2. Characteristics of a useful friendship and a useful friend

Characteristics Mean

Score

Interpretation

1. Friendship is all about the benefits that one gets from another

person

2. Friendship is based on usefulness

3. A friend chooses his friend according to his own advantage

4. A friendship chooses someone who has useful qualities

2.5

2.3

4.1

2.6

Neutral

Disagree

Agree

Neutral

Table 3. Characteristics of a pleasurable friendship and a pleasant friend

Characteristics Mean

Score

Interpretation

1. Friendship is all about the pleasure that one gets from another

person

2. Friendship is based on pleasure and enjoyment

3. A friend chooses people who have the same habit as his

4. A friendship chooses someone who has pleasurable qualities

2.8

3.2

3.0

4.1

Neutral

Neutral

Neutral

Disagree

15

15

Chapter V

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

Analysis

Based on the survey results, both from the qualitative and the quantitative, college students

amongst different universities still believe in the concept of virtuous friendship of Aristotle. This

is because for them, friendship consists of having similar virtues, mutual well-wishing, and

reciprocity. Hence, believing in the three (3) important elements of a virtuous friendship.

For them it is an interpersonal relationship where there is an exchange of ideas, habits,

and virtues. Specifically, common interest is an avenue for them to get to know each other

better. It is grounded on trust, and for them, friendship is not conditional because it is unreserved

and is purposive to their flourishing as persons. Furthermore, their concept on friendship comes

to agreement with Aristotle’s marks of a virtuous friend based from the quantitative survey; that

is, doing what is good for the other person; wishing always the good for the other person's sake;

enjoyment of each other’s company; having similar interests; and lastly, always being ready to

offer a helping hand to the other.

It is important to note that the respondents perceive friendship as an altruistic relationship

that involves always thinking of the good of the other person which also encompasses pursuing

the good for the other person’s sake. As mentioned in the literature, Civic friendship is a

relationship of mutual well-wishing, which is similar in what Aristotle calls, virtuous friendship.

This is because the element of mutual well-wishing is present which results to pursuing the good

for the other person’s sake. With this, it could be said that civic friendship is in conformity with

the prevailing notion of friendship amongst the university students in the Philippines.

16

16

Chapter VI

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Conclusion

Through this study, the researchers were able to understand the kind of friendship that

exists in society that allow all individuals to co-exist peacefully, which is that of virtuous

friendship. Looking into the results of the survey, the respondents were able to explain that the

kind of friendship that they have with the people around them is that which focuses on the good

of the other person. In aiming for the good, their definition of friendship is able to fulfill the

conditions of a virtuous friendship which looks into how the whole society can benefit, rather

than a friendship where individuals simply see each other as utility-maximizing. This eventually

leads to strong ties between members and allows for a strong human capital, which is necessary

for any society to succeed.

The researchers conclude that civic friendship is the best kind of relationship that ought

to be present in a society because there is mutual well-wishing, which is also an important

element in a virtuous kind of friendship according to Aristotle. Moreover, civic friendship, as

mentioned previously, is the best foundation in the relations in a society for the flourishing and

attainment of man’s end which is happiness. Furthermore, based on the survey conducted, the

prevailing notion of friendship amongst college students in the Philippines is observed to be

leaning towards a virtuous kind of friendship. This is because the elements of such Aristotelian

definition of friendship are said to be included in their notion of what is true and good friendship,

and these are, mutual well-wishing, reciprocity, and having similar virtue. Similarly, because of

the resemblances between the two (2) subjects of the study, that of civic friendship and of the

prevailing notion of friendship amongst the youth, it could be then said that they conform to each

other.

Finally, it has been said that one’s understanding of friendship can affect the kind of

society that exists. Through this study, the researchers were able to conclude that in spite of the

prompt and at the same time, negative changes that came along ever since the onset of

technology and the rapid development of the world took place in history that affected man’s

perception of the world, particularly in relationships, it can still be said that common good is not

far from being attained in a society like the Philippines.

17

17

Recommendations

1. To conduct a more extensive research on the topic of friendship and find out if whether

the concept of “good friendship” is really applied in real life.

2. To make use of Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) as a methodology, to get a more in-

depth analysis of how the respondents truly understand the meaning of friendship.

3. To research and identify the modern-day factors that affect the youth’s perception on

friendship and how they live it.

18

18

APPENDIX 1

Hi! We are Sailah Guerra and Shay Juaneza, 3 rd year students from The University of Asia and

the Pacific. We are participants in UNIV, an international gathering of university students from

all around the world, where different topics are discussed per year in Rome, Europe. This year’s

theme is, “Friendship: Model For A New Citizenship”. In line with this, our study focuses on

the kind of friendship that is the best foundation in the relations in the society. Your most honest

and complete answers would be of great help in this research. Thank you in advance and God

bless!

What is the prevailing concept of friendship?

1. What is friendship for you?

a. What is its role in your life?

b. Do you think that friendship is necessary?

2. What is a friend to you?

a. What is his or her role in your life?

*Please put a check on the item that best relates to your experience or preference.

SA- Strongly Agree

A- Agree

N- Neutral

D- Disagree

SD- Strongly Disagree

A. What is friendship?

SA A N D SD

1. Friendship is all about the benefits that one gets from another person

2. Friendship is all about the growth of friends into better persons

3. Friendship is all about the pleasure that one gets from another person

4. Friendship is based on usefulness

19

19

5. Friendship is selfless.

6. Friendship is based on pleasure and enjoyment

B. What is a friend?

SA A N D SD

1. A friend is someone who wishes always the good for the other

person’s sake.

2. A friend chooses his friends according to his own advantage

3. A friend chooses the person who possess pleasurable qualities

4. A friend is someone who does what is good for the other person.

5. A friend chooses someone who has useful qualities

6. A friend chooses people who have the same habits as his

20

20

Bibliography

Schollmeier. Other Selves. State University of New York Press, 1994. Print.

Pangle, Lorraine. Aristotle and the Philosophy of Friendship. Cambridge University Press, 2003.

Print.

Wadell, Paul. Friendship and the moral life. University of Notre Dame Press, 1989. Print.

Cohen, M. (2008). Philosophical Investigations: Examining Current Issues in Science and

Society. Retrieved from http://www.philosophical-investigations.org/Front_Page on October 31,

2014.

Ellwood, C. (1902). Aristotle as a Sociologist. Retrieved from

http://socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/aristotle/ellwood.html on October 31, 2014

FSG Australia (2014). Social Justice. Retrieved from http://www.fsg.org.au/about-us/social-

justice/ on October 31, 2014

Kemerling, G. (2011). Aristotle: Politics and Art. Retrieved from

http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/2t.htm on October 31, 2014

Prevos, P. (2005). Impartialist Ethics & Friendship: The Importance of Moral Intuitions.

Retrieved from http://prevos.net/humanities/philosophy/friendship/ on October 31, 2014 Toowoomba Catholic Education (2006). Social Justice Commission. Retrieved from

http://www.tsjc.org/ on October 31, 2014.

Younkins, E. (2000). Justice in a Free Society. Retrieved from

http://www.quebecoislibre.org/younkins27.htm on October 31, 2014