Alcibiades's Speech On 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

Plato’s Symposium introduces a speech in which Diotima teaches Socrates of Love—what he is and art of him. The dialectic tells of how Love came to be, the very nature of Love, and that Love is something entirely separate from beauty, yet he participates with beauty. Her dialogue expresses the faults in Socrates’ previous stance, along with Agathon’s, “that Love is a great god and that he belongs to beautiful things” (201e).

According to Aristophanes, love (eros) – the highest form of love that one human being can feel towards another – is the desire of dissected halves, one to another, for restoring the wholeness of the nature’s origin. I will explain what does Aristophanes mean by his metaphor and why do people fall in love.

Agathon hosted a gathering for a small group of philosophers to talk about how they perceive love and what their own unique ideas are of beauty, virtue, honor, or anything else that may fall under the category of love. Eros, or Love, is a god that the philosophers have decided to praise with a speech of their own perspective. You get to see each philosophers different style and way of thinking within their speeches. All philosophers have agreed to drink while each other is speaking, but there is no pressure from one another or one’s self to drink excessively. The first to kick off the speeches is Phaedrus, an idealist, who believes that being shamed upon who you love most is of the highest caliber of embarrassment, even compared to relatives

The outstanding play “Antigone” written by Sophocles introduces how Antigone can reveal the honor within a family. “Antigone” produces a tragic hero, which is Antigone because of her pride and imitation of action.

This contrasts both Phaedrus’ and Aristophanes’ descriptions of love. She broadly states that “a lover does not seek the half or whole” unless it is “good” because people will even amputate, or separate, part of their own body if diseased (Sym. 205E). Aristophanes argues “love is the name for our pursuit of wholeness” but Diotima explains this cannot be true if the other half is bad, even if it seems to bring wholeness, such as bodies with a temporary veneer of beauty (Sym. 192E). So, love must be explained by separating it to an upwards trajectory, rising towards the concept of good. Otherwise love is only an impermanent “promise” (Sym. 193D). Therefore, Aristophanes’ lack of separation from the concrete cause love to come from incompleteness and a fallen condition (Dutton Lecture). Likewise, Phaedrus’ speech lacks a removal from the present and therefore fails to explain love’s effects, as seen in his Achilles and Patroclus example. To Phaedrus, Achilles still dying after Patroclus passes is love, for “no one will die for you but a lover” (Sym. 179B). But, Diotima claims this love is unhealthy as it fails to represent the abstract notion of beauty. Since beauty is something to be indirectly experienced, it is unmeasurable and instead “preserves”

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

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.

Finally, we can appreciate how love, just as any instantiation of our moral framework, comes as embodied in a human ideal – and here we witness the figure of a familiar figure. If as we have seen above Lear considers Socrates as a prime example of someone who strived to achieve humanity, and if to achieve humanity is to become enter in an ever stronger relationship with love as our moral source, it follows that Socrates can be seen – as Lear does – as an ideal of what I shall call an erotic life. This, implies that there is a connection between living the life of the ironist and that of living the life of the eroticist. However, in order to fully explain this link between irony, love, and individuation, we must now consider how Lear describes

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

In The Symposium Diotima’s speech on love it is the most important, therefore she should be the last speech to help impact the overall meaning. Although, she actually is not the last speech, Alcibiades is. This leads to questioning over why Alcibiades is at the end if the speech is just drunken madness. Diotima’s speech focuses on love and places important emphasis on the idea of beauty pertaining to love. She also focuses on the way a boy and a man’s relationship are centered around love because of the mentorship that they obtain with each other. It does not make sense in a book about love to have the ending be Alcibiades drunk confessing his love for Socrates.Bataille has led me to the belief that it does make sense for Alcibiades to be the end of the Symposium because of the objective for humans to reach continuity through a drunken state of being. After reading Erotism, Diotima cannot be the final speech in The Symposium.