Exploring Eros through Speeches in Platos Symposium - Essay Example

Exploring Eros through speeches in Plato’s Symposium Greek philosophers, theologians and critical thinkers perceived Eros/Loveas something beyond the physical desires and bodily requisites in nature. For philosophers like Plato it was not the objective of Love that bore an enigmatic persona but its trueessence. Love is simply defined as to denote bodily or monetary desires however; Greek philosophers were dissatisfied over the stereotyping of Eros. Plato is one of the few philosophers who managed to understand the phenomena of Love closest to its actuality in nature as well as in characteristics. He believed that Eros comprise of varying shades and occurs in numerous forms. In Symposium, an institutional dialogue, Plato described the numerous perceptions he held about Love. In this paper Plato’s presentation of varying facets of Love is analyzed and explained with textual evidence from Symposium. The Link between Eros and Symposium: Eros is a Greek term and can be regarded as the primary theme in Plato’s Symposium. In English language it means Love. This Greek word is the inspirational factor behind the popular term Eroticor Erotica that is usually associated with sex or sexual desire, an association that eventually linked desire as the sole developer of Love. Plato’s Symposium, which unarguably is the Greek philosopher’s “best-loved works,” actually means “drinking party” and is written in the form of a dialogue that clarifies various misconceptions about love (Lawall and Mack864). The subject matter of Symposium was, as described by Pausanias, “to speak in praise of love” and according to Socrates to find out “who Love is and what he is like” (Lawall and Mack874-890). In this dialogue there are seven main characters presented as speakers uttering their views about Love. In reality the speakers were important philosophers from Plato’s era and he presented their theoretical understanding of Eros/Love. These included Phaedrus, Pausanias, Eryximachus, Aristophanes, Agathon, Socrates, and Alcibiades. Symposium was written by Plato between “384 and 370 B.C.E.” (Lawall and Mack875) Phaedrus’s view of Eros/Love: Phaedrus believes Eros is a strong emotion that uphold honor; it can compel a person to die for the beloved and can bring forth such nobility and piousness that easily garnershim the love of the one he desires. Phaedrus says “Love is the most ancient of the gods, the most honored, and the most powerful in helping men gain virtue and blessedness” (Lawall and Mack874). Here, the emphasis is on presenting Love as the oldest of gods and therefore, it should be honored like gods. For him, Love is very powerful and can benefit men by helping them gain respect. Alan Soble writes that “Phaedrus’s Eros makes one abnegate the self” (807). That is, Phaedrus’s approach is highly respectable towards Love and he believed that love is the producer of good virtues in men. He wanted love to be accepted in this way and that is why he uses the example of Alcestis and Achilles to denote the honorary nature of love that compelled a person to commit highly supreme deeds for the sake of love. “He chose to die for his lover Patroclus…the gods were highly delighted…and gave him special honor” (Lawall and Mack874). Thus, it can be stated that for Phaedrus love and honor were intertwined. Pausanias’s View of Eros/Love: Pausanias reinforces the stereotypical image of Eros in his speech by bringing the focus on Aphrodite, the love goddess, and explaining that sexual dimension is the main feature of erotic love. He believes that Eros is complex andhas two categories “since there are actually two goddesses of that name, there must also be two kinds of Love” (Lawall and Mack874) The Heavenly Aphrodite or Urania guides people in the right direction in sexual matters whereas the vulgar goddess named Pandemosor the Common Aphrodite provokes people to put sexual desires above all other good things. Pausanias believes that it is not Love itself that is honorable, virtuous or pure but the sentiments with which it has been endorsed. (Lawall and Mack877) Those who endorse Common Aphrodite’s view of Love are more concerned “to the body more than the soul….since all they care about is completing the sexual act” (Lawall and Mack875). Since Common Aphrodite was a mix of male and female therefore, her followers did not care about whether the beloved was a male or female, intelligent or dull, young or old, they just want to fulfill their desire. The crux of Pausanias’s speech is that Love is preferring soul over body and intellect over beauty.In his view, true love promotes wisdom, justice, virtue and belonging. Eryximachus’s view of Eros: Eryximachus, the doctor, believes that Love is just like the rules of medicine, that is, it promotes good health and eliminates diseases. “The hallmark of accomplished physician is his ability to distinguish the Love that is noble from the love that is disgraceful.” (Lawall and Mack879) He proclaims that Love is not found in bodily pleasures only but it is embedded in everything that exists in this universe. That is, good Love is what creates rhythm and harmony in the world and ugly Love does the opposite. The purpose of a true lover, which he addresses as aphysician, is to distinguish and eliminate the bad from the good to sustain harmony within the cosmos. For him Love is powerful and absolute, and promotes attunement. (Lawall and Mack880) Since he was a doctor therefore, he employed a scientific approach to his view instead of linking Love primarily with matters of heart and desire. Aristophanes’s View of Eros: Aristophanes’s view of Eros is as mythical and superficial as naturalistic is Eryximachus’s and he asserts that “Love is the name for our pursuit of wholeness, for our desire to be complete” (Lawall and Mack883). He states that initially there were three kinds of humans, male, female and hermaphrodites all having circular body shapes, two sets of faces and sexual organs with four sets of arms, legs and ears. (Lawall and Mack881) Since they had everything in excess therefore they did not feel any desire or urges but after the gods cut them into half, their search began to find the other half of their bodies and this generated desire, which was actually Love. When they lost bodied meet, the result is sexual intercourse. Through his view he firstly explains the reasoning behind the differing sexual orientations of humans and also proclaims that Love is the pursuit of completeness and it generates feelings of wholeness, satisfaction and relaxation. Love guides every person to that especial one who shares mutuality in nature, characteristics and can care beyond sexual desires like one would care for his own body. Love also compels a person to be respectful and obedient to God else the probability of being cut in half again cannot be overlooked. (Lawall and Mack883) Agathon’s View of Eros: Agathon views Eros as not merely a fruit of necessity but actually a god that is young and has gifted true lovers with virtues like wisdom, good nature, happiness and “gentle character”alongwith resistance from indulging in ugly acts like war or violence (Lawall and Mack886). For Agathon, Love represents youth, softness andsensitivity; it resides in “flowery and fragrant places,” and has a “moral character” that stops a person from committing crime, injustice or wrongdoings (886). He believes that in a society where Love prevail, law will be followed in all its absoluteness asserts that since Love “has the biggest share of moderation” therefore, everyone in such a society will never ask for more than they need. (886) Moderation means taking only the amount required and that is why Love can easily sustain harmony within a society. Alternately, moderation here means the power to restrain feelings of passion and pleasure so that no injustice is done to another human being. Socrates’s View of Eros: Socrates’s view of Erosis inspired by the understanding he received from a wise priestess Diotima of Mantinea and he rejects the idea that Love is a god or a beautiful figure but instead he suggests that “Love is based on a true and complete understanding of the soul” (Velasquez 505). Diotima’s view, according to Socrates, is psychologically inclined towards Love as a powerful force that compels on achieving wisdom and salient good virtues that Agathonwrongly associated with Love in his speech. Socrates affirms that love does not itself embody noble virtuesbut actually it produces the desire for such virtues. He believes that instead of just knowing, people should start “judging things correctly” to understand the true nature of Love (Lawall and Mack891). Love, for Socrates, is an intermediary spirit that gets created when resources are coupled with poverty because this generates a desire and ultimately Love(Lawall and Mack893). Love is “creating something out of nothing,” to produce/reproduce such as philosophers and scholars’ love for wisdom generate ideas and a couple’s love creates a new life (Lawall and Mack896). The lines “all of us are pregnant.. both in body and in soul… as we come to a certain age we naturally desire to give birth” explains this point very clearly (Lawall and Mack894). He believes that Love is not the extreme of something but lies in between two extremes, that is, “it is between being wise and ignorant” (Lawall and Mack892). In his theory, Socrates associated certain levels with Love and stresses that a young lover starts from admiring beauty of a body then as he grows and receives knowledge he realizes the insignificance of bodily beauty because there are so many bodies surrounding earth that are beautiful. As the lover acquires true wisdom about the laws and nature of earth, he begins to grasp the element of beauty in everything and ultimately reaches the highest level of Love that is unpolluted, spiritually activated and full of wisdom. Such a lover will be able to judge beyond knowledge and perceive everything as beautiful. It is after this revelation that allows a lover to view beauty as it should be seen and “give birth not to images of virtue but true virtue” (Lawall and Mack898). Alcibiades’s view of Eros: Alcibiades’s speech is not actually a presentation of his view but a reinforcement or affirmation of the views of Socrates since he described the incidences where he tried to seduce Socrates and gain some of his wisdom in exchange of sexual favors but he was unsuccessful. (Lawall and Mack899) Alcibiades is a politician and through his personality Plato provided a politician’s view of Eros too. Like politicians of any era, Alcibiades wanted to acquire knowledge and wisdom instead of achieving it like an ardent lover of wisdom should. Conclusion: The phenomenon of Eros/Love has always intrigued intellectuals from ancient times and it still remains a mystery because no specific consensus has been reached regarding the true nature of Love. Plato’s Symposium provided various aspects of viewing Eros and it can be concluded that it is Socrates’s view that Plato considered the most powerful, accurate and reasonable. Plato did not make a distinction between physical and spiritual love; he presented physical love as the first level where one starts understanding love whereas wisdom as the final and highest level. Works Cited Lawall, Sarah N and Maynard Mack.The Norton anthology of world literature. New York: Norton, 2002. Print. Soble, Alan. Sex from Plato to Paglia. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2006. Print. Vela?squez, Eduardo A. Love and friendship. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003. Print. Read More