Plato’s Symposium and Eros
I recently finished Plato’s Symposium in which Socrates describes the philosopher as a lover, driven by Eros. For Plato, love is the feeling that something is lacking or missing. As Marias explains, in the Symposium Socrates tells a myth about Love (the god, Eros), the son of Porus (plenty) and Penia (poverty) [p. 57]. Love is both rich, yet simultaneously needy and lacking. According to Socrates, Love (as well as the lover) seeks that which is lacking–in particular beauty. Because Love seeks beauty, Love must feel a lack of beauty and thus, concludes Socrates, Love cannot be a god. Love is rather something in between humans and gods. This something “in between” describes the philosopher–something halfway between the wise person and the ignorant person. Marias goes on to point out that beauty for Plato is more easily visible than truth–it is brighter and more immediately evident. So between beauty and truth we have an intimate connection, as beauty becomes a kind of path to truth. The philosopher, being a lover of the vision of truth, first contemplates the beauty of particular bodies, then bodies in general, then the beauty of souls and finally Beauty itself (the Form of Beauty)[p. 57].
Clearly, for Plato love/eros as construed above is the driving force of philosophy, as the philosopher him/herself is best understood as a lover. St. Augustine, having been influenced by Platonic thought modifies the concept and it becomes caritas (charity). With his statement, “Non intratur in veritatem nisi per caritatem,” (”One does not enter truth except through charity.”) St. Augustine Christianizes the concept, placing it in harmony with the teaching of St. Paul 9pp. 57-58).
6 Responses so far
10:50 am
ha! I knew we’d get you…it was only a matter of time. “You will be assimilated; resistance is futile.”
10:59 am
“Ubi caritas et amor, Deus ibi est…” Where there is charity and love, God is there.
Looking forward to your posts, C!
11:29 am
Mike:
So you are the Borg? I will not be assimilated–I, I made the decision to enter the blog world!
Rachel:
I enjoyed you post on Phyllis Tickle’s The Divine Hours! Please share more of these prayers (or perhaps I should just buy the book).
4:34 pm
Come now, Cynthia, that’s not a very Calvinisitic thing to say! Do we need to revoke that MAR?
6:50 pm
Ok, “WE” recant :)
6:17 pm
Do you think that Socrate’s and Plato’s experience of doing philosophy was in the nature of “Loving Wisdom” more so then “Love of Wisdom”? I sense a significant difference in the meaning of the two definitions for the act of doing philosophy. It is in the domain of the opposition between being / having, concrete / abstract.
Jack
Leave a comment