Socrates And The Early Athenian Era

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

Think about the various passages in the tutorial reading. Answer the question “How believable and consistent is the version of Spartan society which we get from the passages?”

Through the speakers presented in the Symposium, Plato showcases a variety of viewpoints about the essence, worth, and expression of love. Though it can be argued that Plato suggests that love is determined by how an individual chooses to interpret it, I will be arguing that he supports the idea that there is a difference between true love and false love. These differences in the forms of love can be seen through the ideas expressed in Pausanias’ speech, Eryximachus’ speech, and finally, Diotima’s speech which was expressed through Socrates’ speech. While the first two speech serve to portray that there is a difference, Plato showcases his opinions through Diotima’s speech. She defines true love as the appreciation of the abstract idea of Beauty.

The main topic of Plato’s Symposium is the question “what is love”. It is a record of six speeches by different academics that all tell a story and use verse to express a lot of varying stories and themes about the nature and function of love (eros). In the Theaetetus, Socrates explores three definitions of what knowledge is and each of these

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

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.

Socrates’ critics level three major accusations; corrupting the youth, believing in foreign spirits and serving other gods. Socrates plays as his own defense against 501 jurors (Nichols and the political community pg. 143). He divides his accusers into two groups, the older group and the younger group. He explains that the older group perceived the hatred while the young ones were still growing up. The younger generation has grown to hate what they do not know. Socrates insists on using nothing but the truth as testimony in his quest to gain freedom. He uses several tales to pose questions to the jurors.

The Trial and Death of Socrates, depicts the different stages of Socrates’s life, from his prosecution until his execution. During the narratives, Socrates gives us, as readers, insight towards his beliefs and philosophy, which are viewed as reasons for his imprisonment. Phaedo’s recollection of Socrates’s last few hours alive, reveals Socrates’s most important belief, that the soul is an entity which is immortal and is valuable during and after life. All perceived lusts, greed, and fear are caused because people fail to pursue knowledge over self-indulgence, which is meaningless once the body is deceased.

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 (Naugle, 2016). 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 (Plato, 2014). 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 (Dorter, 1969). 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.

Socrates speaks just after Agathon, who heaped lavish praise on Love for his youth and beauty. He begins by cross-examining the young Sophist and drawing out the faults in his speech. Love, Socrates forces Agathon to admit, is always love of something, in the same way that a father is always the father of someone. Love desires what is beautiful and good, and we always desire that which we do not possess. Love, therefore, must be neither good nor beautiful in

Plato 's Symposium is written in such a manner that each speech accounted has at least one insight into the nature of love or Eros that is latter expanded, contradicted or confirmed by the speech given by Socrates using Diotima 's wisdom. Plato was very wise in his teaching on love, progressing from the simple to the much more complex, climaxing with the with the recounted exchange of Socrates and Diotima and then finalizing the instruction with a comical, but well-placed praise of the paragon of a beloved from a completely drunken fool. This ordering is contrived but serves as an excellent framework for investigation into the question of what exactly is Plato 's idea of love. Building upon the notion that Diotima 's speech illuminates the highest mysteries of the art of love, the best course of investigation is to review each speech with the context of Diotima 's claims to distill out the recurring ideas. These ideas then can be constructed into a decent definition of Platonic Love.

Plato’s Symposium is a glimpse into antiquity of some philosophical conversations on love. The focus here is on two different perspectives between Aristophanes and Socrates.

Plato’s Symposium depicts a party, at which several historical figures discuss at length about their numerous perspectives of Love – both the God and the idea of Eros. The whole idea of the Symposium was to uncover the true meaning of love. Socrates is obsessed with the mystery of love and how we should understand its importance. Love can be defined as a force compelling lovers and guiding them to seek something. Guidance is an encompassing theme apparent in the dialogue and several speakers in Plato’s Symposium make clear this guiding nature of Love. The predominance of Love acting as a guiding force would suggest that it directs towards goodness or at least something worthy of being guided towards. In the Symposium love has been implied to be narcissistic. I will argue for the claim that love is shown, not as a benevolent and compassionate essence, but as a selfish one, a spirit infused with a narcissistic essence and a force that propels personal ambition. In this paper I will attempt to uncover the truth behind what the purpose of love is by taking on instances from the text supporting my claim.

Plato’s Symposium is primarily composed of speeches and presentations in regards to love, with each speaker proposing their own perception on the topic. Moreover, it is evident that all the speeches made prior to Diotima’s appearance in the text may have been a sort of buildup for Socrates’ recollection of his discussion with her like how Phaedrus argues that love motivates one to pursue virtuous acts which is a central theme in Diotima’s dialogue on love or how Pausanias’ categorizes love similar to Diotima’s separation of the various types of loves into stages on a ladder. Consequently, it is clear that while there may be many differences in their views of love, Phaedrus’s outlook also aligns with Socrates’ and Diotima’s view to a certain extent. Throughout this paper, Socrates and Diotima will be referred to as Socrates to avoid unnecessary repetition.