A feeling that cannot be defined, an emotion that can only be expressed, and a word that is used in everyday life, is what we know as love. Throughout history, there have been many different opinions and interpretations of love. When a person is asked, “what is love?" many people find the answer more difficult to explain than they initially thought. The book Symposium describes love as, "the motivating force in all of us" (Page 11). The book also explains that Plato analyzes many kinds of love and one of those kinds of love may now be considered what one would call "Christian love." Christianity is a large influence on love today, particularly the fact that the Bible says God 's love is unconditional and he loves all creatures. This belief starts to somewhat conflict with Plato 's views because Plato links love to desire and God does …show more content…
He says that one should focus more on heavenly love than common love because it is the moral good. Eryximachus said "it is the Love whose fulfilment lies in virtuous, restrained, and moral behaviour from both gods and men who has the greatest power, and is the source of all our happiness. It is he who makes it possible for us to interact on good terms with one another and with our divine masters" (188b). He also goes on to explain that love exists in every organism on Earth. I agree with Eryximachus 's views on love. He believed that you should please good people and not bad people. He believed that love was the self-control and good actions. Love is the source of happiness just as he says. Eryximachus’s opinion of love seems realistic. It makes more sense to focus on a love based on spirit and emotions, than a love based on body and object. Just as I said for my agreement with Pausanias, it is better to love people for who they truly are on the inside, than how they look on the
When Eros comes to mind, one imagines a couple falling in love and growing old together; one could even imagine a man looking at a woman with lust. While Eros is a love between a man and a woman, it involves much more than lust and the event of falling "in love". Gatsby, a character in "The Great Gatsby", forms a love that is equal to Eros. He does this through desiring only one woman and by unfortunately making Eros a god in his life.
In the Symposium, a most interesting view on love and soul mates are provided by one of the characters, Aristophanes. In the speech of Aristophanes, he says that there is basically a type of love that connects people. Aristophanes begins his description of love by telling the tale of how love began. He presents the tale of three sexes: male, female, and a combination of both. These three distinct sexes represented one’s soul. These souls split in half, creating a mirror image of each one of them. Aristophanes describes love as the search for the other half of your soul in this quote: “When a man’s natural form was split in two, each half went round looking for its other half. They put their arms around one another, and embraced each other, in their desire to grow together again. Aristophanes theme is the power of Eros and how not to abuse it.
In the Phaedrus, Socrates gives several speeches on the subject of Romantic love. Incidentally, Socrates is discussing about the same type of love I am. Given the time period and the numerous new definitions and discoveries on romantic since Plato’s time I interpret that when Socrates speaks of romantic love, he is speaking about true love. In his speech Socrates speaks of a young man he is hypothetically in love with. Socrates sees beauty (a God) that he is lacking within this young man, not just beauty in his appearance but beauty within his mind. Socrates said, “All soul looks after that lacks a soul, and patrols all of heaven, taking different shapes at different times (Phaedrus 111)”. Meaning the mind seeks for what it lacks. The young man is missing some important qualities to become whole while Socrates is lacking the beauty within the boy. He is lacking the knowledge and passion of a true philosopher. Socrates begins to cultivate his true love by teaching and improving the qualities of the young man. The young man and Socrates shared a beautiful goal of gaining knowledge and reproducing ideas. I write this example to support my claim that true love can only be found between two people in a monogamous relationship pursuing a beautiful
Love, in classical Greek literature, is commonly considered a prominent theme. Love, in present days, always appears in the categories of books, movies, music, etc. Interpreted differently by different people, Love turns into a multi-faceted being. 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 of Love; Agathon enunciates that the correct way to present an eulogy is first to praise its nature and gifts.
“The Different Kinds of Love Mentioned in the Bible.” United Church of God. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. .
I have always thought that there was only one type of love, which was that feeling of overwhelming liking to someone else. I am aware that Lust does exist and that it is separate from Love, being that the desire for someone's body rather their mind. In Plato's Symposium, Plato speaks of many different types of love, loves that can be taken as lust as well. He writes about seven different points of view on love coming from the speakers that attend the symposium in honor of Agathon. Although all these men bring up excellent points on their definitions on love, it is a woman that makes the best definition be known. I will concentrate on the difference between the theory of Common and Heavenly love brought up by Pausanias and the important role that Diotima plays in the symposium.
Eros as described above is a love that is seen not only as sexual desire, but a “general, unspecified pre-occupation with her (the beloved) totality (Lewis, 133)”. Although the positive side of Eros is experiencing passionate love, individuals are indulging in their own desires, the end goal to please themselves. This mindset is selfish therefore Eros is no longer able to be morally correct. Eros requires is that the lover has some initial interest in the beloved that gave them some sort of self-gratification or pleasure. This does not make Eros any less of a form of love, but this does inhibit Eros from being considered honest in the lover’s true intentions for loving the beloved. This dishonestly goes against my definition of
To be just or unjust. To be happy or unhappy? Men fall into these two categories. Why does a man act according to these 2 extremes? Is it because they fear punishment? Are they quivering in fear of divine retribution? Or do men do just things because it is good for them to do so? Is justice, good of its rewards and consequences? Or is it good for itself. What is justice? Are the people who are just, just as happy as the people who are unjust? Plato sheds light on these questions and says yes, I have the definition of justice and yes, just people are happy if not happier than unjust people. Plato show’s that justice is worthwhile in and of itself and that being a just person equates to being a happy person. In my opinion, Plato does a good job and is accurate when explaining what it is to be just and this definition is an adequate solution to repairing an unjust person or an unjust city or anything that has an unjust virtue and using the definition of what justice is accurately explains why just people are happier than unjust people.
Plato is often criticized for preaching the gospel of me first. The claim is that his understanding of love is essentially egoistic, and this is seen as troublesome for the obvious ethical reasons. But there may be an even more troubling issue with Plato's understanding of love. In this paper I will attempt to argue that for Plato, love is in a sense impossible; that it can only ever be a desire for something out of one's grasp. The stakes are high but perhaps there is a way to understand this problem in a way that seems a little less damning. To do this I will analyze arguments from the Lysis and the Symposium, first questioning even the possibility of love and then attempt to show that love is in fact possible, all though in weaker versions than commonly supposed.
According to Aristophanes, “Love is the desire of the whole, and the pursuit of the whole is called love.” (Page 8). Love is the name that human beings give to the desire for wholeness, the desire to be restored to original human nature. Love is important given the kind of creatures humans are; it is the only thing that can lead to happiness. Human beings innately find themselves as lacking – as incomplete and wounded. Love is important because it presents itself as a chance to heal this incompleteness. Just by existing, human beings feel this lack; it is innate. Love is the desire to fill that lack/incompleteness. Human beings fall in love in an attempt to become whole again.
This essay explores the differences between the nature of Sappho 's Love and Plato 's Love by examining their respective works. First, we will define each of the author 's idea of love. Next, we will discover what makes them different. After, we will find some of the objections and observations once one places these two philosophies together. Finally, this essay will explore personal extrapolations and opinions made from reading both works
In Sappho's poems, she does not take on a typical point of view of love as she describes the allure and agony through her own experience. This alternative approach to love is shown in Sappho's poems 16 as she makes a connection between her own life and the emotions behind the Trojan war. Also, in 31 she describes a physical pain that opens up her life to the audience through her experience with jealousy. Another link between author and audience is seen in poem 94 as Sappho tells a story of her heartbreak. Then in Sappho's fragments 48 and 51, there are short personal phrases, allowing the readers to fill in the rest with their thoughts. It is with Sappho's first-person perspective that she creates an intimate connection with the audience
Aristophanes explains his view of love using an ancient myth of humans that existed before we did. These people were round, with four legs, four arms, and two different faces. When these early humans tried to rebel against the gods, Zeus punished them by splitting them all in half. After this, the humans are described as having longed to be back together
The Definition of Love Love by definition is an emotion explored in philosophy, religion, and literature, often as either romantic love, the fraternal love of others, or the love of God based on the definition found in The Encarta Encyclopedia. As I explored the definitions through the Internet, books, and articles, I noticed the definitions changed quite a bit, but yet had the same basic understanding. The definition I found in The Encarta Encyclopedia is probably the most simple and most basic. It refers to love in the whole aspect, which is Godly, fraternal, and romantic. All of which can only be defined by one word and that is love.
What is love? Love is a very special and meaningful word to each human being. Each human being has his/her own thoughts about love to guide himself/herself to land safely and smoothly into the kingdom of Love. Without this preconceived idea of love, people would be acting like a blind person searching for the light with thousand of obstacles in front of him.