Love And Love In Plato's Interpretation Of Love

Alcibiades’ speech changes the direction of the conversation from praising Agathon to praising Socrates. It might be the reason why Plato ends symposium in this way and also highlights “Platonic Philosophy of love ”.

The Symposium revolves around a Greek party made up of various men throwing around their views on love, building up to height of the evening by a speech from Socrates. Socrates knows the true way to obtain love, and tells of a tale between him and his mentor, Diotima. Through Diotima, Socrates is able to

Socrates sees love as something that is in between being beautiful and ugly and believes that love is a search for beauty and wisdom. Much like Diotima, Socrates presses Agathon to have him admit that love is not beautiful as it desires beauty, and one does not desire what one already has therefore it is not beautiful. Socrates view contrasts with that of Aristophanes from the benefits of love to the nature of love, as Socrates sees no benefits in something that is not beautiful. Love is seen as primarily a relational property by Socrates that holds between things rather than a desire or a need for another person. Love is not itself beautiful or good or anything specific as much as it is a relation that holds between the beautiful, the good, and those who

Comparing Socrates' speech on love in the Symposium and what he says about wisdom in Apology, through the perspective of wisdom and ignorance, there is definite contradiction. The reason being that in Symposium, Socrates first implies the idea that people already have knowledge that they do not know they have, and that by question and answer, we can bring out that knowledge. In the Symposium, Socrates' speech on love is a retelling of a story he was told by Diotima. He claimed that love and beauty is only a concept to the ignorant and uneducated people. It is said that through question and answer, people can develop and become aware that love and beauty is a real being instead of an object. Socrates claimed that “[Diotima] [was] the one who

In the Symposium Plato places Socrates in a dialogue with the goddess Diotima. She says two things of interest to this paper about love. Firstly, at 206a that humans when they love long to possess the good and do so for ever, and secondly that at 206b that "To love is to bring forth upon the beautiful, both in body and soul (Hamilton 558)." The first statement makes a claim about what love is, a desire to posses the good, and the second a statement about what love does, bring forth the beautiful. I will now briefly analyze both claims.

In Plato’s work Symposium, Phaedrus, Pausania, Eryximachus, Aristophane and Agathon, each of them presents a speech to either praise or definite Love. Phaedrus first points out that Love is the primordial god; Pausanias brings the theme of “virtue” into the discussion and categorizes Love into “good” one or “bad” one; Eryximachus introduces the thought of “moderation’ and thinks that Love governs such fields as medicine and music; Aristophanes draws attention to the origin and purposes

with some very different views of love as brought to us by Agathon, Phaedrus and

Plato’s Symposium attempts to define the eclectic theory of love, a theory that is often believed to be the universal principle that guides mankind’s actions. Plato introduces several narratives in the form of a dialogue that seek to characterize this multifaceted theory of Eros. The meaning of love naturally varies in each narrative. Yet, in this dialogue of love, Plato presents a metaphysical approach to understanding the ambiguous meaning of love. Ultimately, Plato values the perennial quest for knowledge above all else. In Symposium, Platonic love is exhibited in the relationship between virtue and desire, as expressed in Diotima’s ladder. Desire is the vehicle, or the means to an end. The six Athenians ultimately present different

“Love is complex: considered simply in itself, it is neither honorable nor a disgrace-its character depends entirely on the behavior it gives rise to,” (Plato 183d). There are two different types of love that Pausanius refers to, which are the common and heavenly love. The common love is based on your love for someone for their body, sex or beauty making it physical love and desire for a person. Heavenly love is love for the mind such as your intelligence and strength, someone you can benefit from making one more wise. Any love that is encountered has a purpose whether is it the love between a mother and daughter or the love between a husband and wife. In the end, all love leads and is directed to virtue and improves the loved ones.

Phaedrus believed that Love was the eldest of the Gods, and that made him the mightiest. His viewpoints on love and how the opposite sex, when in love, will do anything to make the other happy. I still believe that his theory on love can be applied to the modern day, now more so than before. As Phaedrus explains, chaos is the only god that is older than love. That makes sense because after chaos, love is needed to get things back on track.

Plato was a philosopher from Classical Greece and an innovator of dialogue and dialect forms which provide some of the earliest existing analysis ' of political questions from a philosophical perspective. Among some of Plato 's most prevalent works is his dialogue the Symposium, which records the conversation of a dinner party at which Socrates (amongst others) is a guest. Those who talk before Socrates share a tendency to celebrate the instinct of sex and regard love (eros) as a god whose goodness and beauty they compete. However, Socrates sets himself apart from this belief in the fundamental value of sexual love and instead recollects Diotima 's theory of love, suggesting that love is neither beautiful nor good because it is the desire to possess what is beautiful, and that one cannot desire that of which is already possessed. The ultimate/primary objective of love as being related to an absolute form of beauty that is held to be identical to what is good is debated throughout the dialogue, and Diotima expands on this description of love as being a pursuit of beauty (by which one can attain the goal of love) that culminates in an understanding of the form of beauty. The purpose of this paper is to consider the speeches presented (i.e. those of Phaedrus, Pausanias, Eryximachus, Aristophanes, and Agathon) in Plato 's Symposium as separate parts that assist in an accounting of the definition and purpose of platonic love.

Levy’s argument of egocentrism on Plato’s definition of love as “wishing good things for someone for that person’s sake” is attractive to me, since he does not regard that love only has the value based on instrumental and self-acknowledgement function. A person gains all the benefits of love, while those benefits are not the purpose why he loves another person, or an object. So I may regard love as an emotion which can be neither necessary or not, since a person can still survive without it. Also, I do not much agree in Socrates’ account that love can be “the desire to possess what is beautiful,” because when a person really love someone, he would accept all the virtues and weakness belongs to that person. If he only pursues the idea of beauty

Overdosing on the drug Love is something that many people do quite often without even knowing it, until they experience the withdrawal symptoms. Book IV of the Aeneid by Virgil focuses mainly on Queen Dido and Aeneas’s love relationship. After Queen Dido falls in love with Aeneas he leaves her in Carthage to go focus on his own duties. Dido doesn't take this very well and the withdrawal symptoms of the love they had are fatal. Love is just as powerful as a drug.

Also, Love must be between wisdom and ignorance. She says Socrates mistook Love to be the beloved instead of the lover and that is why he thought Love to be beautiful and good. The loved thing is perfect and beautiful.

Under the influence of Diotima, Socrates has come to understand that Love must not be confused with the object of love, which is in contrast, extremely beautiful and extremely good. Diotima has explained to Socrates that if love desires, but does not possess beautiful and good things, then love cannot, as most people think, be a god (Symposium 5). However, though Love cannot be beautiful or good, this does not mean on the contrary that he is ugly and evil, but rather at some point in-between. So Diotima, taught Socrates that Love is not a god, but a daimon, or something like a spirit that not only conveys the prayers of man to the gods and the answers and commands of the gods to the minds of man alike (Symposium 5), connecting one who desires something with that which he desires. “He is by nature neither mortal nor immortal, … never in want and never in wealth; and, further, he