Symposium by Plato. - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub, Kindle for a complete version.

68

Platos Symposium

Let us assume that what you say is true.

was a mighty god, and likewise fair; and she Say rather, beloved Agathon, that you cannot proved to me as I proved to him that, by my refute the truth; for Socrates is easily refuted.

own showing, Love was neither fair nor good.

And now, taking my leave of you, I would re-

‘What do you mean, Diotima,’ I said, ‘is love hearse a tale of love which I heard from Diotima then evil and foul?’ ‘Hush,’ she cried; ‘must of Mantineia (compare 1 Alcibiades), a woman that be foul which is not fair?’ ‘Certainly, ’ I wise in this and in many other kinds of knowl-said. ‘And is that which is not wise, ignorant?

edge, who in the days of old, when the Athe-do you not see that there is a mean between nians offered sacrifice before the coming of the wisdom and ignorance?’ ‘And what may that plague, delayed the disease ten years. She was be?’ I said. ‘Right opinion,’ she replied; ‘which, my instructress in the art of love, and I shall re-as you know, being incapable of giving a reason, peat to you what she said to me, beginning with is not knowledge (for how can knowledge be the admissions made by Agathon, which are devoid of reason? nor again, ignorance, for nei-nearly if not quite the same which I made to the ther can ignorance attain the truth), but is wise woman when she questioned me: I think clearly something which is a mean between ig-that this will be the easiest way, and I shall take norance and wisdom.’ ‘Quite true,’ I replied.

both parts myself as well as I can (compare

‘Do not then insist,’ she said, ‘that what is not Gorgias). As you, Agathon, suggested (supra), I fair is of necessity foul, or what is not good evil; must speak first of the being and nature of Love, or infer that because love is not fair and good he and then of his works. First I said to her in nearly is therefore foul and evil; for he is in a mean the same words which he used to me, that Love between them.’ ‘Well,’ I said, ‘Love is surely 69

Platos Symposium

admitted by all to be a great god.’ ‘By those

‘No.’ ‘What then?’ ‘As in the former instance, who know or by those who do not know?’ ‘By he is neither mortal nor immortal, but in a mean all.’ ‘And how, Socrates,’ she said with a smile, between the two.’ ‘What is he, Diotima?’ ‘He

‘can Love be acknowledged to be a great god is a great spirit (daimon), and like all spirits he by those who say that he is not a god at all?’

is intermediate between the divine and the mor-

‘And who are they?’ I said. ‘You and I are two tal.’ ‘And what,’ I said, ‘is his power?’ ‘He of them,’ she replied. ‘How can that be?’ I said.

interprets,’ she replied, ‘between gods and

‘It is quite intelligible,’ she replied; ‘for you men, conveying and taking across to the gods yourself would acknowledge that the gods are the prayers and sacrifices of men, and to men happy and fair—of course you would—would you the commands and replies of the gods; he is the dare to say that any god was not?’‘Certainly mediator who spans the chasm which divides not,’ I replied. ‘And you mean by the happy, them, and therefore in him all is bound together, those who are the possessors of things good or and through him the arts of the prophet and the f a i r ? ’ ‘ Yes.’ ‘And you admitted that Love, be-priest, their sacrifices and mysteries and charms, cause he was in want, desires those good and and all prophecy and incantation, find their way.

fair things of which he is in want?’ ‘Yes, I did.’

For God mingles not with man; but through Love

‘But how can he be a god who has no portion in all the intercourse and converse of God with man, what is either good or fair?’ ‘Impossible.’

whether awake or asleep, is carried on. The wis-

‘Then you see that you also deny the divinity of dom which understands this is spiritual; all other Love.’

wisdom, such as that of arts and handicrafts, is

‘What then is Love?’ I asked; ‘Is he mortal?’

mean and vulgar. Now these spirits or interme-70

Platos Symposium

diate powers are many and diverse, and one of and anything but tender and fair, as the many them is Love.’ ‘And who,’ I said, ‘was his fa-imagine him; and he is rough and squalid, and ther, and who his mother?’ ‘The tale,’ she said, has no shoes, nor a house to dwell in; on the

‘will take time; nevertheless I will tell you. On bare earth exposed he lies under the open the birthday of Aphrodite there was a feast of heaven, in the streets, or at the doors of houses, the gods, at which the god Poros or Plenty, who taking his rest; and like his mother he is always is the son of Metis or Discretion, was one of the in distress. Like his father too, whom he also guests. When the feast was over, Penia or Pov-partly resembles, he is always plotting against erty, as the manner is on such occasions, came the fair and good; he is bold, enterprising, strong, about the doors to beg. Now Plenty who was the a mighty hunter, always weaving some intrigue worse for nectar (there was no wine in those or other, keen in the pursuit of wisdom, fertile in days), went into the garden of Zeus and fell into resources; a philosopher at all times, terrible as a heavy sleep, and Poverty considering her own an enchanter, sorcerer, sophist. He is by nature straitened circumstances, plotted to have a child neither mortal nor immortal, but alive and flour-by him, and accordingly she lay down at his side ishing at one moment when he is in plenty, and and conceived Love, who partly because he is dead at another moment, and again alive by rea-naturally a lover of the beautiful, and because son of his father’s nature. But that which is al-Aphrodite is herself beautiful, and also because ways flowing in is always flowing out, and so he he was born on her birthday, is her follower and is never in want and never in wealth; and, fur-attendant. And as his parentage is, so also are ther, he is in a mean between ignorance and his fortunes. In the first place he is always poor, knowledge. The truth of the matter is this: No 71

Platos Symposium

god is a philosopher or seeker after wisdom, for from what you say, has arisen out of a confusion he is wise already; nor does any man who is wise of love and the beloved, which made you think seek after wisdom. Neither do the ignorant seek that love was all beautiful. For the beloved is after wisdom. For herein is the evil of ignorance, the truly beautiful, and delicate, and perfect, and that he who is neither good nor wise is never-blessed; but the principle of love is of another theless satisfied with himself: he has no desire nature, and is such as I have described.’

for that of which he feels no want.’ ‘But who I said, ‘O thou stranger woman, thou sayest then, Diotima,’ I said, ‘are the lovers of wis-well; but, assuming Love to be such as you say, dom, if they are neither the wise nor the fool-what is the use of him to men?’ ‘That, ish?’ ‘A child may answer that question,’ she Socrates,’ she replied, ‘I will attempt to unfold: replied; ‘they are those who are in a mean be-of his nature and birth I have already spoken; tween the two; Love is one of them. For wisdom and you acknowledge that love is of the beauti-is a most beautiful thing, and Love is of the beau-ful. But some one will say: Of the beautiful in tiful; and therefore Love is also a philosopher or what, Socrates and Diotima?—or rather let me lover of wisdom, and being a lover of wisdom is put the question more clearly, and ask: When a in a mean between the wise and the ignorant.

man loves the beautiful, what does he desire?’ I And of this too his birth is the cause; for his fa-answered her ‘That the beautiful may be his.’

ther is wealthy and wise, and his mother poor

‘Still,’ she said, ‘the answer suggests a further and foolish. Such, my dear Socrates, is the na-question: What is given by the possession of ture of the spirit Love. The error in your concep-beauty?’ ‘To what you have asked,’ I replied, tion of him was very natural, and as I imagine

‘I have no answer ready.’ ‘Then,’ she said, ‘let 72

Platos Symposium

me put the word “good” in the place of the beau-ceives the name of the whole, but the other parts tiful, and repeat the question once more: If he have other names.’ ‘Give an illustration,’ I said.

who loves loves the good, what is it then that he She answered me as follows: ‘There is poetry, loves?’ ‘The possession of the good,’ I said.

which, as you know, is complex and manifold.

‘And what does he gain who possesses the All creation or passage of non-being into being good?’ ‘Happiness,’ I replied; ‘there is less is poetry or making, and the processes of all art difficulty in answering that question.’ ‘Yes,’ she are creative; and the masters of arts are all po-said, ‘the happy are made happy by the acqui-ets or makers.’ ‘Very true.’ ‘Still,’ she said, sition of good things. Nor is there any need to

‘you know that they are not called poets, but ask why a man desires happiness; the answer is have other names; only that portion of the art already final.’ ‘You are right.’ I said. ‘And is which is separated off from the rest, and is con-this wish and this desire common to all? and do cerned with music and metre, is termed poetry, all men always desire their own good, or only and they who possess poetry in this sense of the some men?—what say you?’ ‘All men,’ I replied; word are called poets.’ ‘Very true,’ I said. ‘And

‘the desire is common to all.’ ‘Why, then,’ she the same holds of love. For you may say gener-rejoined, ‘are not all men, Socrates, said to love, ally that all desire of good and happiness is only but only some of them? whereas you say that all the great and subtle power of love; but they who men are always loving the same things.’ ‘I are drawn towards him by any other path, myself wonder,’ I said, ‘why this is.’ ‘There is whether the path of money-making or gymnas-nothing to wonder at,’ she replied; ‘the reason tics or philosophy, are not called lovers—the name is that one part of love is separated off and re-of the whole is appropriated to those whose af-73

Platos Symposium

fection takes one form only—they alone are said scribed generally as the love of the everlasting to love, or to be lovers.’ ‘I dare say,’ I replied, possession of the good?’ ‘That is most true.’

‘that you are right.’ ‘Yes,’ she added, ‘and

‘Then if this be the nature of love, can you you hear people say that lovers are seeking for tell me further,’ she said, ‘what is the manner their other half; but I say that they are seeking of the pursuit? what are they doing who show neither for the half of themselves, nor for the all this eagerness and heat which is called love?

whole, unless the half or the whole be also a good.

and what is the object which they have in view?

And they will cut off their own hands and feet Answer me.’ ‘Nay, Diotima,’ I replied, ‘if I had and cast them away, if they are evil; for they known, I should not have wondered at your wis-love not what is their own, unless perchance dom, neither should I have come to learn from there be some one who calls what belongs to him you about this very matter. ’ ‘ Well,’ she said, the good, and what belongs to another the evil.

‘I will teach you:—The object which they have For there is nothing which men love but the good.

in view is birth in beauty, whether of body or Is there anything?’ ‘Certainly, I should say, that soul.’ ‘I do not understand you,’ I said; ‘the there is nothing.’ ‘Then,’ she said, ‘the simple oracle requires an explanation.’ ‘I will make my truth is, that men love the good.’ ‘Yes,’ I said.

meaning clearer,’ she replied. ‘I mean to say,

‘ To which must be added that they love the pos-that all men are bringing to the birth in their session of the good?’ ‘Yes, that must be added.’

bodies and in their souls. There is a certain age

‘And not only the possession, but the everlast-at which human nature is desirous of procre-ing possession of the good?’ ‘That must be ation—procreation which must be in beauty and added too.’ ‘Then love,’ she said, ‘may be de-not in deformity; and this procreation is the 74

Platos Symposium

union of man and woman, and is a divine thing; she replied. ‘But why of generation?’ ‘Because for conception and generation are an immortal to the mortal creature, generation is a sort of principle in the mortal creature, and in the in-eternity and immortality,’ she replied; ‘and if, harmonious they can never be. But the deformed as has been already admitted, love is of the ever-is always inharmonious with the divine, and the lasting possession of the good, all men will nec-beautiful harmonious. Beauty, then, is the des-essarily desire immortality together with good: tiny or goddess of parturition who presides at Wherefore love is of immortality. ’

birth, and therefore, when approaching beauty, All this she taught me at various times when the conceiving power is propitious, and diffusive, she spoke of love. And I remember her once say-and benign, and begets and bears fruit: at the ing to me, ‘What is the cause, Socrates, of love, sight of ugliness she frowns and contracts and and the attendant desire? See you not how all has a sense of pain, and turns away, and shrivels animals, birds, as well as beasts, in their desire up, and not without a pang refrains from con-of procreation, are in agony when they take the ception. And this is the reason why, when the infection of love, which begins with the desire hour of conception arrives, and the teeming na-of union; whereto is added the care of offspring, ture is full, there is such a flutter and ecstasy on whose behalf the weakest are ready to battle about beauty whose approach is the alleviation against the strongest even to the uttermost, and of the pain of travail. For love, Socrates, is not, to die for them, and will let themselves be toras you imagine, the love of the beautiful only. ’

mented with hunger or suffer anything in order

‘What then?’ ‘The love of generation and of to maintain their young. Man may be supposed birth in beauty. ’ ‘ Yes,’ I said. ‘Yes, indeed,’

to act thus from reason; but why should animals 75

Platos Symposium

have these passionate feelings? Can you tell me going a perpetual process of loss and reparation—

why?’ Again I replied that I did not know. She hair, flesh, bones, blood, and the whole body are said to me: ‘And do you expect ever to become always changing. Which is true not only of the a master in the art of love, if you do not know body, but also of the soul, whose habits, tempers, this?’ ‘But I have told you already, Diotima, that opinions, desires, pleasures, pains, fears, never my ignorance is the reason why I come to you; remain the same in any one of us, but are al-for I am conscious that I want a teacher; tell me ways coming and going; and equally true of then the cause of this and of the other mysteries knowledge, and what is still more surprising to of love.’ ‘Marvel not,’ she said, ‘if you believe us mortals, not only do the sciences in general that love is of the immortal, as we have several spring up and decay, so that in respect of them times acknowledged; for here again, and on the we are never the same; but each of them indi-same principle too, the mortal nature is seeking vidually experiences a like change. For what is as far as is possible to be everlasting and immor-implied in the word “recollection,” but the detal: and this is only to be attained by genera-parture of knowledge, which is ever being for-tion, because generation always leaves behind a gotten, and is renewed and preserved by recol-new existence in the place of the old. Nay even lection, and appears to be the same although in in the life of the same individual there is succes-reality new, according to that law of succession sion and not absolute unity: a man is called the by which all mortal things are preserved, not same, and yet in the short interval which elapses absolutely the same, but by substitution, the old between youth and age, and in which every ani-worn-out mortality leaving another new and simi-mal is said to have life and identity, he is under-lar existence behind—unlike the divine, which is 76

Platos Symposium

always the same and not another? And in this avenge Patroclus, or your own Codrus in order way, Socrates, the mortal body, or mortal any-to preserve the kingdom for his sons, if they had thing, partakes of immortality; but the immor-not imagined that the memory of their virtues, tal in another way. Marvel not then at the love which still survives among us, would be immor-which all men have of their offspring; for that tal? Nay,’ she said, ‘I am persuaded that all men universal love and interest is for the sake of im-do all things, and the better they are the more mortality. ’

they do them, in hope of the glorious fame of I was astonished at her words, and said: ‘Is immortal virtue; for they desire the immortal.

this really true, O thou wise Diotima?’ And she

‘Those who are pregnant in the body only, be-answered with all the authority of an accom-take themselves to women and beget children—

plished sophist: ‘Of that, Socrates, you may be this is the character of their love; their offspring, assured;—think only of the ambition of men, and as they hope, will preserve their memory and you will wonder at the senselessness of their giving them the blessedness and immortality ways, unless you consider how they are stirred which they desire in the future. But souls which by the love of an immortality of fame. They are are pregnant—for there certainly are men who ready to run all risks greater far than they would are more creative in their souls than in their have run for their children, and to spend money bodies—conceive that which is proper for the soul and undergo any sort of toil, and even to die, for to conceive or contain. And what are these con-the sake of leaving behind them a name which ceptions?—wisdom and virtue in general. And shall be eternal. Do you imagine that Alcestis such creators are poets and all artists who are would have died to save Admetus, or Achilles to deserving of the name inventor. But the great-77

Platos Symposium

est and fairest sort of wisdom by far is that which for the children who are their common offspring is concerned with the ordering of states and fami-are fairer and more immortal. Who, when he thinks lies, and which is called temperance and justice.

of Homer and Hesiod and other great poets, would And he who in youth has the seed of these im-not rather have their children than ordinary hu-planted in him and is himself inspired, when he man ones? Who would not emulate them in the comes to maturity desires to beget and gener-creation of children such as theirs, which have pre-ate. He wanders about seeking beauty that he served their memory and given them everlasting may beget offspring—for in deformity he will glory? Or who would not have such children as beget nothing—and naturally embraces the beau-Lycurgus left behind him to be the saviours, not tiful rather than the deformed body; above all only of Lacedaemon, but of Hellas, as one may say?

when he finds a fair and noble and well-nurtured There is Solon, too, who is the revered father of soul, he embraces the two in one person, and to Athenian laws; and many others there are in many such an one he is full of speech about virtue and other places, both among Hellenes and barbarians, the nature and pursuits of a good man; and he who have given to the world many noble works, tries to educate him; and at the touch of the beau-and have been the parents of virtue of every kind; tiful which is ever present to his memory, even and many temples have been raised in their honour when absent, he brings forth that which he had for the sake of children such as theirs; which were conceived long before, and in company with him never raised in honour of any one, for the sake of tends that which he brings forth; and they are his mortal children.

married by a far nearer tie and have a closer

‘These are the lesser mysteries of love, into friendship than those who beget mortal children, which even you, Socrates, may enter; to the 78

Platos Symposium

greater and more hidden ones which are the tuous soul have but a little comeliness, he will be crown of these, and to which, if you pursue them content to love and tend him, and will search out in a right spirit, they will lead, I know not and bring to the birth thoughts which may im-whether you will be able to attain. But I will do prove the young, until he is compelled to contem-my utmost to inform you, and do you follow if plate and see the beauty of institutions and laws, you can. For he who would proceed aright in this and to understand that the beauty of them all is matter should begin in youth to visit beautiful of one family, and that personal beauty is a trifle; forms; and first, if he be guided by his instructor and after laws and institutions he will go on to aright, to love one such form only—out of that he the sciences, that he may see their beauty, being should create fair thoughts; and soon he will of not like a servant in love with the beauty of one himself perceive that the beauty of one form is youth or man or institution, himself a slave mean akin to the beauty of another; and then if beauty and narrow-minded, but drawing towards and of form in general is his pursuit, how foolish contemplating the vast sea of beauty, he will cre-would he be not to recognize that the beauty in ate many fair and noble thoughts and notions in every form is and the same! And when he per-boundless love of wisdom; until on that shore he ceives this he will abate his violent love of the grows and waxes strong, and at last the vision is one, which he will despise and deem a small revealed to him of a single science, which is the thing, and will become a lover of all beautiful science of beauty everywhere. To this I will pro-forms; in the next stage he will consider that ceed; please to give me your very best attention: the beauty of the mind is more honourable than

‘He who has been instructed thus far in the the beauty of the outward form. So that if a vir-things of love, and who has learned to see the 79

Platos Symposium

beautiful in due order and succession, when he beauty, is not far from the end. And the true or-comes toward the end will suddenly perceive a der of going, or being led by another, to the things nature of wondrous beauty (and this, Socrates, of love, is to begin from the beauties of earth is the final cause of all our former toils)—a na-and mount upwards for the sake of that other ture which in the first place is everlasting, not beauty, using these as steps only, and from one growing and decaying, or waxing and waning; going on to two, and from two to all fair forms, secondly, not fair in one point of view and foul in and from fair forms to fair practices, and from another, or at one time or in one relation or at fair practices to fair notions, until from fair no-one place fair, at another time or in another re-tions he arrives at the notion of absolute beauty, lation or at another place foul, as if fair to some and at last knows what the essence of beauty is.

and foul to others, or in the likeness of a face or This, my dear Socrates,’ said the stranger of hands or any other part of the bodily frame, or Mantineia, ‘is that life above all others which in any form of speech or knowledge, or existing man should live, in the contemplation of beauty in any other being, as for example, in an animal, absolute; a beauty which if you once beheld, you or in heaven, or in earth, or in any other place; would see not to be after the measure of gold, but beauty absolute, separate, simple, and ever-and garments, and fair boys and youths, whose lasting, which without diminution and without presence now entrances you; and you and many increase, or any change, is imparted to the evera one would be content to live seeing them only growing and perishing beauties of all other and conversing with them without meat or drink, things. He who from these ascending under the if that were possible—you only want to look at influence of true love, begins to perceive that them and to be with them. But what if man had 80

Platos Symposium

eyes to see the true beauty—the divine beauty, I his ways, and exhort others to do the same, and mean, pure and clear and unalloyed, not clogged praise the power and spirit of love according to with the pollutions of mortality and all the the measure of my ability now and ever.

colours and vanities of human life—thither look-The words which I have spoken, you, Phaedrus, ing, and holding converse with the true beauty may call an encomium of love, or anything else simple and divine? Remember how in that com-which you please.

munion only, beholding beauty with the eye of When Socrates had done speaking, the com-the mind, he will be enabled to bring forth, not pany applauded, and Aristophanes was begin-images of beauty, but realities (for he has hold ning to say something in answer to the allusion not of an image but of a reality), and bringing which Socrates had made to his own speech, forth and nourishing true virtue to become the when suddenly there was a great knocking at friend of God and be immortal, if mortal man the door of the house, as of revellers, and the may. Would that be an ignoble life?’

sound of a flute-girl was heard. Agathon told the Such, Phaedrus—and I speak not only to you, attendants to go and see who were the intrud-but to all of you—were the words of Diotima; and ers. ‘If they are friends of ours,’ he said, ‘in-I am persuaded of their truth. And being per-vite them in, but if not, say that the drinking is suaded of them, I try to persuade others, that in over.’ A little while afterwards they heard the the attainment of this end human nature will voice of Alcibiades resounding in the court; he not easily find a helper better than love: And was in a great state of intoxication, and kept therefore, also, I say that every man ought to roaring and shouting ‘Where is Agathon? Lead honour him as I myself honour him, and walk in me to Agathon,’ and at length, supported by 81

Platos Symposium

the flute-girl and some of his attendants, he found led in by the people who were with him; and as his way to them. ‘Hail, friends,’ he said, appear-he was being led, intending to crown Agathon, ing at the door crowned with a massive garland he took the ribands from his own head and held of ivy and violets, his head flowing with ribands.

them in front of his eyes; he was thus prevented

‘Will you have a very drunken man as a compan-from seeing Socrates, who made way for him, ion of your revels? Or shall I crown Agathon, which and Alcibiades took the vacant place between was my intention in coming, and go away? For I Agathon and Socrates, and in taking the place was unable to come yesterday, and therefore I am he embraced Agathon and crowned him. Take here to-day, carrying on my head these ribands, off his sandals, said Agathon, and let him make that taking them from my own head, I may crown a third on the same couch.

the head of this fairest and wisest of men, as I By all means; but who makes the third part-may be allowed to call him. Will you laugh at me ner in our revels? said Alcibiades, turning round because I am drunk? Yet I know very well that I and starting up as he caught sight of Socrates.

am speaking the truth, although you may laugh.

By Heracles, he said, what is this? here is But first tell me; if I come in shall we have the Socrates always lying in wait for me, and always, understanding of which I spoke (supra Will you as his way is, coming out at all sorts of unsus-have a very drunken man? etc.)? Will you drink pected places: and now, what have you to say for with me or not?’

yourself, and why are you lying here, where I The company were vociferous in begging that perceive that you have contrived to find a place, he would take his place among them, and not by a joker or lover of jokes, like Aristophanes, Agathon specially invited him. Thereupon he was but by the fairest of the company?