opinion of this topic. Platonic love is defined as the friendship between a heterosexual male and a heterosexual female with no other intention. The intentions could be a sexual relationship Lapidos starts off the article by informing the reader about the origin of the word platonic. She continues by stating that the word platonic derived from the famous Greek philosopher Plato. During the 15th century, a scholar from Florentine named Marsillio Ficino created the term platonic relationship, or in Latin
Diotima, Socrates' great teacher from the Symposium, a work by Plato was one of the most influential women thinkers of all time, whether she was a real person or a literary fictional character. She related to Socrates the theory of love that he described to the partygoers at Agathon's banquet, a celebration of Agathon's victory at the competition of Dionysis in Athens and of Eros. Before we search for the idea of why Diotima is a woman, we should first discuss a little about her. We know that, if
ECHOES OF PLATO’S SYMPOSIUM DOWN THE AGES “Because of the centrality and power of love in human experience, men and women throughout the ages have felt the compulsion to sing songs, to write verse, and to tell stories about this ineffable and mysterious force which leads them to the peaks of felicity, and to the depths of despair. Love indeed is an ultimate, if not the ultimate, human concern. It is the universal principle undergirding all human
In the opening scenes, the woman declares to tear her guard down, becoming naked, raw, ready to love and be loved (interpretive dance). Later, she texts and eventually has a girlfriend outing with one of her close friends to confide in her about her fear yet new found courage + trust in her and her boyfriend 's union/bond. However, just as she
Socrates stuns the Symposium when he tells how Diotima showed him that “Love is neither beautiful nor good,” thus contradicting the theme of all speeches before his (201E). Diotima’s logic begins by postulating that love is equivalent to desire. This statement is supported by Aristophanes’s speech in which he describes the origin of human nature. Zeus split the spheres of the three original types of humans: male, female and androgynous; to form the two sexes. Ever since the division of spheres
I’m going to give you my view on Aristophanes, Socrates, and my account of love. Aristophanes speech on “What is Love,” in the Symposium was very interesting. I say this, because back then humans were more powerful, and knowledgeable than we’re today. Nowadays there’re a lot of things that we can’t prove about the past, simply because we don’t have any evidence or proof. Aristophanes says, “Humans once had four legs, four arms, two heads, and so on.” So us humans, were combined with our significant
instances where Socrates and other players in these conversations seem to contradict themselves, or at least muddle their arguments. One such occurrence of this is in Plato's Symposium and Plato's Phaedrus. Both texts speak of love in its physical sense, both texts describe love and its effects, and both discuss how it is best realized, yet they do this in very different fashions, and for different reasons. Plato's Phaedrus is a conversation between Socrates and Phaedrus. In this conversation the
Diotima told Socrates Love is a learning experience growing with age, first learning Beauty by sight, coveting objects, progressively growing to the beauty of a developing body, therefore expanding eventually to the greatest Beauty of all, our souls. Love holds many forms, and while many pursue to reproduce sexually, others have sought to reproduce thoughts and philosophies as their offspring. Our conception of love grows as we do. Finally we discover the Beauty of Love in all
variations. But it must be noticed that both conceptions of Platonic thinking are contradictory and that is reflected in their explanations of Plato’s own philosophical project. To begin with, I will not compare each point of the Hermeneutic and Tubingen School positions. I will explain, so far as I can understand, why the explanation of the Tübingen School is unsatisfactory. (1) These insufficiencies are not related to its deep analysis of the Platonic oral tradition, exactly to its interpretation. (2)
The truth was that Jay Gatsby of West Egg, Long Island, sprang from his platonic conception of himself. He was a son of God-- a phrase which, if it means anything, means just that-- and he must be about His Father's business, the service of a vast, vulgar, and meretricious beauty. So he invented just the sort of Jay Gatsby that a seventeen-year-old boy would be likely to invent, and to this conception he was faithful to the end (99). James Gatz was already "about his Father's business" when he carefully
Antonio's Love for Bassanio in The Merchant of Venice Antonio feels closer to Bassanio than any other character in The Merchant of Venice. Our first clue to this is in the first scene when, in conversation with Antonio, Solanio says, "Here comes Bassanio, your most noble kinsman, / Gratiano, and Lorenzo. Fare ye well: / We leave you now with better company" (i. i. 57-59). Once Antonio is alone with Bassanio, the conversation becomes more intimate, and Antonio offers an indebted Bassanio "My
Philo- means love and –sophia means wisdom. So what does philosophy mean? Philosophy can mean many things. It could be the freedom to reflect, the ideas behind the force of question such as What is life?, Who is god?, Who am I?, etc. Philosophy could be a persons beliefs. Philosophy dates back a long time. It started with Plato talking about platonic forms, moving onto Socrates who used analogies. Others such as Locke, Rousseau, and Dewey also put our their views of philosophy. To me philosophy is
the principal "subversions," in The Merchant of Venice that modern and postmodern critics have imposed upon on the play. Without its’ alleged contradictions, the play has a tight formalist structural unity, it focuses on an essentialist Platonic idea, and, resolving all conflicts, it ends in closure. On the topic of Antonio's sadness, Granville picks up a clue that to my knowledge no modern critic has noticed. In his "methodizing" process, he moved Antonio's play-opening line--"I
In reading the Republic, there is no reason to search for arguments which show that Platonic justice ('inner justice' or 'psychic harmony') entails ordinary justice. The relationship between inner justice and ordinary justice is of no importance in Plato's Republic. We note that Plato tries to argue from the very first book that the true source of normativity lies in knowledge attained by philosophical reason. What is crucial, then, is the relationship between inner justice and acts which brings
successful mortician tells the school to follow his example and pray when things go bad, it is Holden Caulfield who points out that the guy is praying for more people to die. He's depressed by nuns and annoyed by shallow girlfriends, while in love with his platonic friend. Even more interesting is the fact that Caulfield's general pissed off attitude and his hormones are inextricably linked. He practically wants to kill his roommate, Stradlatter, because Stradlatter might have screwed a girl he
mind-constricting because not only does the user not gain knowledge from the experience, but the user destroys self-control and liberty and triggers desires to act immorally. This division of drugs into categories does seem to be of the nature of platonic perfectionism but the ideology is not entirely based on this ethical theory and some arguments might seem to conflict with its philosophy. Using mind constricting drugs leads to immoral outcomes and therefore, mind constricting drugs must be illegal
Money, Love, and Aspiration in The Great Gatsby How do the members of such a rootless, mobile, indifferent society acquire a sense of who they are? Most of them don't. The Great Gatsby presents large numbers of them as comic, disembodied names of guests at dinner parties: the Chromes, the Backhyssons, and the Dennickers. Some, of course, have some measure of fame, but even Jordan Baker's reputation does not do much for her other than get her entrée to more parties. A very few, such as Gatsby
The Republic of Plato begins in a similar fashion that many other Platonic dialogues begin, with that of a question. The conversation between Socrates and the aged Cephalus becomes a philosophical discussion of what advantages money has brought to Cephalus' life. Cephalus replies that money has allowed him "to tell the truth and pay one's debts" (331 b). Nevertheless, Socrates believes this does not portray an accurate description of what justice is. The rest of the first book is a discussion of
format, as to show what I am trying to say in a refined technique. I will try and add my questions and answers at the end, and I hope, Dr. Coyle, that this is an all right journal entry for our first journals. A. Sophistry… Or, more correctly, the Platonic likeness of sophistry. At 19d-21a, Socrates claims, in attempting to differentiate himself from the sophists to whom he has become incorporated in the Athenian popular perception, that sophists claim to be experts about human superiority and can
Runaway Statues: Platonic Lessons on the Limits of an Analogy ABSTRACT: Plato’s best-known distinction between knowledge and opinion occurs in the Meno. The distinction rests on an analogy that compares the acquisition and retention of knowledge to the acquisition and retention of valuable material goods. But Plato saw the limitations of the analogy and took pains to warn against learning the wrong lessons from it. In this paper, I will revisit this familiar analogy with a view to seeing how