Symposium (Plato dialogue)
From Free net encyclopedia
Current revision
- This article is about Plato's dialogue with the title "(The) Symposium". For Xenophon's dialogue with the same title, see Symposium (Xenophon)
The Symposium is a Socratic dialogue by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, student of Socrates, focusing on Eros (love) and its place in the philosophic path. Along with the Republic, it is often considered to be one of Plato's literary high points.
Contents |
Setting
The cultural elite of Athens are holding a Symposium celebrating Agathon's victory in his first drama-writing contest. Our first view of Socrates, as he is joining the second day of revels in the artist's honor, has him washed and primped and "even" wearing shoes.
Almost the entire dialogue is told by Apollodorus to an unnamed friend; Apollodorus includes a conversation he had the last time he related the story, in which Glaucon, Plato's brother and an interlocutor in the Republic, was under the impression that Apollodorus himself had been at the symposium (172-173). There are, then, a multitude of layers set up between the symposium itself and Plato's retelling which Plato wishes to make clear; Apollodorus heard it from Aristodemus, who was at the party, and it is likely that Plato is suggesting that he heard it from his brother or possibly the unnamed friend. Plato, then, heard it fourth-hand, and it comes to us fifth-hand; in addition, the speech Socrates gives was previously given to Socrates by the priestess Diotima, creating one more layer between the explication of the philosophic path that Socrates provides, as well as its goal and resolution.
Dramatis Personæ
- Apollodorus
- unnamed friend
- Phaedrus
- Agathon
- Eryximachus
- Pausanias
- Aristodemus
- Aristophanes
- Alcibiades
- Socrates
Summary
Start of the discussion
Due to the excesses of the previous night's drinking, it is decided that no one will be forced to drink more than he desires and the flute-girl will be sent away, the night to be spent in conversation rather than in reveling (176). Eryximachus, spurred on by a previous discussion he had with Phaedrus, proposes that everyone give "as good a speech in praise of love as he is capable of giving" (176e-177d). Socrates agrees, stating that the only thing he understands is "the art of love" (177e).
The speeches are to be given "in proper order from left to right", beginning with Phaedrus (177d). The first several speeches are given in praise of love, outlining the origins of Eros and the goods that he provides. Between the speech of Phaedrus and that of Pausanias are several that are unaccounted for, Apollodorus explaining that Aristodemus was unable to remember those in his recounting of the night.
Speeches
Phaedrus
Phaedrus, best known from the dialogue named after him, the Phaedrus, and generally considered to be the beloved of Eryximachus, speaks first. He first explains that love is one of the most ancient gods, arising with Earth out of Chaos (178b). Regarding love in its role in Greek pederastic relationships, he claims that love gives us "the greatest goods" (178c). Love inspires great valor on the battlefield, as nothing gives a lover more pain than to be seen doing something shameful or cowardly by his beloved (178d-179b). In addition, only a lover will die for you, which is seen as noble by the gods. He describes the story of Alcestis, whose love was so strong that the gods sent her soul back from the dead; Orpheus, on the other hand, who did not dare to die for love's sake but rather went to the underworld to search for his wife while living, was shown only an image of his wife and was then "made to die at the hands of women" due to his weakness (179b-e). Achilles, he explains, chose to avenge his lover's death despite the knowledge that this would lead to his own death, and as a reward the gods sent him to the Isle of the Blest (179e-180a).
He concludes his short speech in proper rhetorical fashion, reiterating his statements that love is one of the most ancient gods, the most honored, and the most powerful in helping men gain honor and blessedness.
Pausanias
Pausanias begins by claiming that there are two forms of love: Heavenly love and Common love (180e). He states that love is not on his own worthy of praise; in itself, he says, no action is good or bad. Rather, this depends on whether the performance of the action is done honorably and properly or improperly (181a). Accordingly, Common love is that that is performed improperly and shamefully, while Heavenly is that which is performed honorably and properly.
Common love, he explains, is the love felt by the vulgar: those who are attached to women as much as boys, the body more than the soul, and unintelligent partners as they care only about completing the sexual act (181b-c). Heavenly love, on the other hand, is felt by those who are attracted to the male whose "cheeks are showing the first traces of a beard" and have "begun to form minds of their own", rather than to young boys or women. With this sort of love, one desires to spend the rest of his life with his beloved, and does not aim to deceive or take advantage of the beloved (181c-d).
He then describes the complexity of love and the customs governing love. In Athenian society, it was generally frowned upon to take on a lover; Pausanias claims that this is to "separate the wheat from the chaff" (184a). Athenian customs provide for only one honorable way of taking a man as a lover and subjecting one's self to the lover: for the sake of virtue. It is only honorable to take on a lover if the beloved believes that the older lover will "make him better in wisdom or any other part of virtue" (184c); if the beloved is deceived in this and the lover is in reality lacking in virtue, it is still noble for him to have been deceived, as he has shown himself to be one "who will do anything for the sake of virtue" (184e-185b).
He concludes by stating that Heavenly love is immeasurably valuable, as it compels lover and beloved alike to make virtue their central concern; any other form of love belongs to the vulgar sort of love (185b-c).
Eryximachus
The speech of Eryximachus comes out of order, as Aristophanes has come down with a case of the hiccups. Eryximachus, a doctor, prescribes a cure before he begins: Aristophanes is to hold his breath for as long as possible, with several other courses of action also given in case this fails (185c-e).
Eryximachus begins voicing his agreement that the distinction between two species of love is quite useful; however, he states that love goes far beyond simple atraction to human beauty: It occurs all throughout the animal and plant kingdoms, as well as all throughout the universe. Love directs everything that occurs, in the realm of the gods as well as that of humans (186a-b).
Medicine, he says, is the science of the effects of love on repletion and depletion of the body; it is the physician's job to transform the desires of the body based on his knowledge of noble love and vulgar love, implanting the proper species of love when it is absent and eliminating the other sort when it occurs (186d). This, and all Heavenly love, revolves around the nature of oppositions; whatever is healthy must be encouraged, and what is unhealthy must be rebuffed (186c):
- The physician's task is to effect a reconciliation and establish mutual love between the most basic bodily elements . . . They are, of course, those that are most opposed to one another, as hot is to cold, bitter to sweet . . . In fact, our ancestor Asclepius first established medicine as a profession when he learned how to produce concord and love between such opposites . . .
- Symposium, 186d-e
He goes on to demonstrate that love guides many (if not all) professions, taking a negative element to its positive opposite and vice versa: music, for instance, creates agreement by producing concord and love between opposites such as high and low notes, and is "therefore simply the science of the effects of Love on rhythm and harmony" (187a-c).
Even the seasons are under the influence of love. When the various opposing elements such as wet and dry are "animated by the proper species of Love, they are in harmony with one another . . . But when the sort of Love that is crude and impulsive controls the seasons, he brings death and destruction" (188a). As it is love that guides the relations between these sets of opposites throughout existence, in every case it is the higher form of love that brings harmony and cleaves toward the good, while the impulsive vulgar love creates disharmony.
He concludes that the highest form of love is the greatest; when love "is directed, in temperance and justice, towards the good, whether in heaven or on earth: happiness and good fortune, the bonds of human society, concord with the gods above- all these are among his gifts" (188d).
Aristophanes
The speech of Aristophanes is often regarded by classicists as being the literary high point of the Symposium. Departing from the rhetorical structure of the preceding speeches, Aristophanes, a comedic playwright perhaps best remembered today for his satire of Socrates in The Clouds, contributes a myth accounting for the origin of both humans and love.
He explains that there were originally three types of humans: male, female, and an androgynous combination of the two (189e). These humans had four arms, two faces, two sets of sexual organs, and so on; they were completely round, and when they wished to move quickly, used their eight arms and legs to spin rapidly by performing cartwheels (189e-190a). The male was an offspring of the sun, the female of the earth, and the androgyn of the moon, as according to Aristophanes, the moon is a combination of the sun and the earth (190b).
Due to their form, they had great strength and made repeated attempts to attack the gods (190b). In response, Zeus cut these early humans in half (190e). The humans, in turn, began to die from hunger and general idleness: they longed for their former halves so deeply that they did nothing but wrap themselves around each other (191a-b). Zeus took pity and moved their genitals to the front; previously, Aristophanes explains, humans had reproduced by casting their seed on the ground (191c).
- The purpose of this was so that, when a man embraced a woman, he would cast his seed and they would have children; but when male embraced male, they would at least have the satisfaction of intercourse, after which they could stop embracing, return to their jobs, and look after their other needs in life.'
- Symposium, 191c-d
Humans continue to seek after their halves; love, then, "is the name for our pursuit of wholeness, for our desire to be complete" (192e-193a). For the human race to flourish, love must be brought to its conclusion, and one must win the favors of his own young man, "so that he can recover his original nature" (193c).
The previous division between higher and lower forms of love is not completely disregarded; Aristophanes claims that many "lecherous" men are those who run after women, and seems to rank lesbians above them, with men who love men being superior to both (191d-e). Aristophanes also suggests that sex, even between people that have matching halves, is not what each lover truly longs for. Aristophanes states that "these are the kinds of people who finish out their lives together and still cannot say what it is that they want from one another" (192c4) When Hephaestus offers to give the lovers what they want from each other, they are unable to answer him. When Hephaestus suggests welding the lovers together physicaly, Aristophanes postulates that no lovers could find anything the desired more. However, this union cannot actually be what the lovers truly desire because they were unable to state what they did desire. This is because what the lovers, and all humans, desire is what they have been deprived of by Zeus; their true, whole form. The "welding" of the body is desired by the lovers because during sex humans are as close as physically possible to becoming one with their other half. Hepaestus cannot, however, join the lovers where it matters most; their soul or Φυσις. Thus, Aristophanes exhibits an intrinsic shortfall of all human love. He also shows that the desire to unite one's soul with its other half is what love truly is.
Agathon
After answering a few questions from Socrates, Agathon contributes a speech claiming that first Love himself must be praised, and afterwards for his gifts, unlike the preceding speeches (194e). Love, rather than being among the oldest of the gods, is in fact the youngest, "born to hate old age" (195b). Love is delicate, so delicate that he can't walk on earth or even human skulls, but rather he makes his home in the souls of gods and men with soft and gentle characters, a harsh character turning him away (195e-196a). He settles only in that which can flower and bloom; he is neither the cause nor the victim of any injustice (195b). As the highest pleasure, he has the biggest share of moderation (sōphrosunē) and power over pleasures and passions (196c).
Love's wisdom is also great; any good poet will have love as his teacher, and even Apollo and the Muses, who invented archery and music, were his pupils- as were Athena, Zeus, and Hephaestus (196d-197b). When love came along, he settled the quarrels of the gods, as love is drawn to beauty rather than ugliness (197b-c). He concludes by saying that love is the most beautiful and best leader, and every man should follow love (197e).
Socrates
When Agathon concludes, Socrates begins by praising the beauty of Agathon's speech (198b); but he quickly claims that he must have been wrong to say that the only thing he understand is love (198d). Socrates states that he had mistakenly thought that you should always tell the truth about what you are praising, with that truth as the basis, and the speaker should select the most beautiful truths and arrange them most suitably (198d). Socrates, then, will be unable to give a "proper" speech, since he had been mistaken about what a proper speech consists of, but will "tell the truth [his] way" if that is acceptable (199a-b).
With approval given by Phaedrus, Socrates embarks on a brief session of dialectic questioning of Agathon. They together conclude that Love is neither beautiful nor good- as he desires good and beautiful things, it is clear that he is, in fact, lacking these things (200a-201c). Starting with this, Socrates begins his speech.
In it, he relates a speech about love that he once heard from the priestess Diotima, who, Socrates claims, is the one who taught him all about love (201d). Love, in fact, is not a god, as he desires beautiful and good things, which the gods already have (202d). Neither is he mortal- just as love's lack of beauty does not make him ugly (202a), not being a god does not make him a mortal. Rather, he is in between mortal and immortal, like all spiritual things (202d-e); these spiritual things carry messages between the worlds of god and men, and "[b]eing in the middle of the two, the round out the whole and bind fast the all to that all" (202e). He is also a lover of wisdom, being in between wisdom and ignorance (204a).
Based on all that she had to explain to Socrates, Diotima concludes that Socrates was mistaking love for being loved rather than being a lover; this is why love struck him as beautiful in every way (204c). It seems that this would apply to at least some of the speeches preceding Socrates' as well- Phaedrus, for instance, clearly describes being loved rather than being a lover.
They go on to determine that "love is wanting to possess the good forever" (206b) and that the object of love is "giving birth in beauty, whether in body or soul" (206b). Furthermore, the lover desires not just to have beauty, but for "reproduction and birth in beauty" (206e); as a lover desires to possess the good forever, he seeks immortality as well, and achieving this is possible for mortals only in reproduction (207d).
She then outlines the difference between being pregnant in body and pregnant in soul. Those pregnant in body see childbirth as the way to provide themselves with "immortality and remembrance and happiness", while those pregnant in soul are pregnant with "what is fitting for a soul to bear and bring to birth . . . Wisdom and the rest of virtue, which all poets beget, as well as all the craftsmen who are said to be creative" (208e-209a).
The path taken by one pregnant in soul is then given; she then tells Socrates that "these rites [of love] when they are done correctly . . . is the final and highest mystery, and i don't know if you are capable of it" (210a). One pregnant in this way must devote himself to beautiful bodies in his youth; he will then see that ultimately "the beauty of all bodies is one and the same" (210a-b). With this, one comes to see that the beauty of one's soul is more valuable, and seeks to help young men pregnant in soul to bring birth to ideas (210b-c). The lover then sees the beauty of activities and laws, and then moves on to knowledge (210d-e).
It is here that Diotima explains the conclusion and purpose of these rites.
- The result is that he will see the beauty of knowledge . . . the lover is turned to the great sea of beauty, and gazing upon this, he gives birth to many gloriously beautiful ideas and theories, in unstinting love of wisdom, until, having grown and been strengthened there, he catches sight of such knowledge, and it is the knowledge of such beauty . . .
- . . . The man . . . who has beheld beautiful things in the right order and correctly, is now coming to the goal of Loving: all of a sudden he will catch sight of something wonderfully beautiful in its nature; that, Socrates, is the reason for all his earlier labors:
- First, it always is and neither comes to be nor passes away, neither waxes nor wanes. Second, it is not beautiful this way and ugly that way, nor beautiful at one time and ugly at another, nor beautiful in relation to one thing and ugly in relation to another; nor is it beautifull here but ugly there, as it would be if it were beautiful for some people and ugly for others . . . It will not appear to him as one idea or on kind of knowledge. It is not anywhere in another thing, as in animal, or in earth, or in heaven, or in anything else, but itself by itself with itself . . . So when someone rises by these stages, through loving boys correctly, and begins to see this beauty, he has almost grasped his goal. This is what it is to go aright, or be led by another, into the mystery of Love: one goes always upward for the sake of this Beauty . . . and from these lessons he arrives in the end at this lesson, which is learning of this very Beauty, so that in the end he comes to know just what it is to be beautiful.
- Symposium, 210d-211c
The purpose of all of this, she explains, is that only one who has seen Beauty in this manner can give birth to true virtue rather than images; the Love of the gods belongs to these people, and "if any human being could become immortal, it would be he" (212a).
Alcibiades
Image:Alcibiades.jpg Just as Socrates finishes explaining the proper path of love and its great importance, a drunken Alcibiades show up to the party. Finding himself seated on a couch with Socrates and Agathon, Alcibiades exclaims that Socrates, again, has managed to sit next to the most handsome man in the room, Agathon; that he is always doing such things (213c). Socrates asks Agathon to protect him from the jealous rage of Alcibiades, asking Alcibiades to forgive him (213d). Alcibiades says he will never do such a thing (213e).
Wondering why everyone seems sober, Alcibiades is informed of the night's agreement (213e, c); after saying his drunken ramblings should not be placed next to the sober orations of the rest, and that he hope no one believed a word Socrates said, it is decided that Alcibiades will offer an encomium to Socrates (214c-e).
Alcibiades begins by comparing Socrates to a statue of Silenus; the statue is ugly and hollow, and inside is full of tiny golden statues of the gods (215a-b). He then compares Socrates to the satyr Marsyas- satyrs often portrayed with the sexual appetite, manners, and features of wild beasts, and often with a large erection. Socrates, however, needs no flute to "cast his spells" upon people as Marsyas did- he needs only his words (215b-d).
Alcibiades states the when he hears Socrates speak, he is beside himself; the words of Socrates are the only words that have ever upset him so deeply that his soul started to protest that his own aristocratic life was no better than a slave's (215e). Socrates is the only man who has ever made Alcibiades feel shame (216b).
Yet, he says, all this is the least of it (216c)- he's crazy about beautiful boys, following them around in a daze (216d). Most, he says, don't know what Socrates is like on the inside:
- But once i caught him when he was open like Silenus' statues, and i had a glimpse of the figures he keeps hidden within: they were so godlike- so bright and beautiful, so utterly amazing- that i no longer had a choice- i just had to do whatever he told me.
- Symposium, 216e-217a
Alcibiades thought at the time that what Socrates really wanted was him, and by letting Socrates have his way with him, he would teach Alcibiades everything he knew (217a). Yet Socrates made no moves, and Alcibiades began to pursue Socrates- as he says, "as if I were the lover and he my young prey!" (217c). When Socrates continually rebuffs this pursuit, Alcibiades explains to Socrates that he is the only worthy lover he has ever had; that nothing is more important to him than becoming the best man he can be, and Socrates is better fit to help him reach that aim than anyone else (219c-d). Socrates responds that if he does have this power to make Alcibiades a better man inside of him, why would he exchange his true beauty for the image of beauty that Alcibiades would provide, and furthermore, Alcibiades may be wrong, and Socrates may be of no use to him (218e-219a). He then slipped under Socrates' cloak and spent the night beside him- yet, to the deep humiliation of Alcibiades, Socrates makes no response (219b-d).
He goes on to detail the virtue of Socrates- his valor in battle being uncomparable, unaffected by the cold or by fear, and even saving Alcibiades' life once and then refusing to be given honors for it (219e-221c). However, he continues, it is not just this- that Socrates is completely unique in his ideas and accomplishments, unrivaled by any man from the past or present (221c). His arguments and ideas seem ridiculous on the surface, but are in fact truly worthy of a god and bursting with virtue inside, and are of utmost importance for anyone who wants to become a truly good man (221d-222a).
He concludes by giving a warning- that Socrates present himself as your lover, but before you know it, you have fallen in love with him.
Conclusion
Despite this speech, Agathon then lies down next to Socrates, much to the chagrin of Alcibiades. The symposium dissolves as a large drunken group shows up and comes in, with many characters leaving; Socrates, however, stayed up till dawn, proclaiming to Agathon and Aristophanes that a skillful playwright should be able to write comedy as well as tragedy as Aristodemus awoke and left the house (223d). When Agathon and Aristophanes fall asleep, Socrates leaves, walks to the Lyceum to wash up, and spends the rest of the day as he always did, not sleeping until that evening (223d).
Interpretations
There are numerous similarities and contrasts between the speeches given; in addition, the dramatic context of the Symposium deepens the possible implications of Plato. It is clear, from Socrates' speech, that the correct way to love (according to Plato) is to be the lover and not the beloved; that love, when used properly, is central to the philosophic path.
The late arrival of Alcibiades is vital; it provides us both with background information on Socrates, describing him to be incredibly virtuous in battle, in thought, and in his conducting of the pederastic relationships central to ancient Greek life. As we learn from Socrates' speech and echoed in that of Pausanias', the purpose of the relationship is the betterment of the beloved in wisdom and virtue rather than the consumation of sexual desire. Alcibiades, an Athenian general and politician, is best known today both for being tried and convicted for desecration of the hermai, after he vandalized numerous statues of Hermes by breaking off their genitals, and his conviction for having profaned the Eleusinian mysteries, initiates of the mysteries being forbidden on the pain of death from revealing what went on at the mysteries. Tried in absence and hearing about his death sentence while at sea, he jumped ship during the Sicilian Expedition and committed treason by joining Sparta and giving away Athenian war plans. Alcibiades is often mentioned in Plato's dialogues as Socrates' most promising student, and his arrival just after Socrates' speech on the true place of love in the philosophic path forces one to reexamine Socrates' speech and just what, exactly, went wrong with Alcibiades. In this, the constant interplay between lover and beloved throughout the dialogue must be taken into account, as it would seem that Alcibiades never got past this, unable to trancend his singular love for Socrates' body and soul and progress to the sea of beauty.
As with almost all Platonic dialogues, the ending is aporetic and the meaning unclear. The possibility that Socrates' employment of the rites of love is flawed is certainly left open; with the constant interplay between lover and beloved and the role reversal executed by Alcibiades in his pursuit of Socrates, the relation of lover to beloved is not altogether clear either. The numerous convoluted relationships of the characters also must be examined- Phaedrus and Eryximachus are lovers, as are Agathon and Pausanias; the relationship of Alcibiades and Socrates is examined in detail, and they both seem to be pursuing Agathon (Cooper, 457). It does seem, however, that Plato regards love as the essential ingredient of the philosophic path and the search for wisdom; that despite the importance of loving and helping those younger than you, it is in coming to the form of beauty that one finds wisdom, and no one, not even Socrates, can give you wisdom.
References
- Plato, the Symposium, trans. by Alexander Nehamas and Paul Woodruff. From Plato: Complete Works, ed. by John M. Cooper, pp. 457-506. ISBN 0872203492
See also
External links
- Project Gutenberg has an English translation of Plato's Symposium
- Template:Perseusde:Das Gastmahl (Platon)
el:Συμπόσιο (Πλατωνικός διάλογος) es:El Banquete fr:Le Banquet (Platon) ja:饗宴 ro:Banchetul (Platon) fi:Pidot (Platon)