Symposium: Aristophanes And Socrates On Eros
Plato’s Symposium features Eros in the speeches of Aristophanes and Socrates. In the speeches featured herein, Eros is seen as having a divine origin, where Genesis ‘devised Eros’ (178c). The events discussed in Symposium are the result of a rather unique turn of events, where a gathering prepared to honor the victory of Agathon turned to void of drinking. Instead, the members gave praise to Eros, a god. Love; thus, becomes the theme of the gathering, and Symposium is founded on the insights offered at Agathon’s place. The depictions of Eros offered herein are the point of interest in this paper, since they offer a foundation for the understanding of the concept, as well as the different interpretations of the same. Due to the time of its writing, Symposium reflects a society much unlike that of contemporary times. In this respect, the conception of love was different then than it is now. Currently, love and Eros are defined as two distinct phenomena. During the time of Plato, Eros denoted a direct translation of love. The interesting bit about Eros in Symposium is the Socratic philosophy. Understanding Socrates is often elusive since his philosophy depicts him as an individual of modest tendencies. In multiple occasions, it would appear as if Socrates is was denying his wisdom. However, in the actual definition of wisdom, he was only acknowledging how much he is yet to know. At Agathon’s place, Socrates flatters the former as being fuller of wisdom, and him emptier (175d). The discussion regarding the concept of Eros commences after Eryximachus mentions the failure of poems and hymns to capture the greatness and importance of Eros, despite its significance in human life.
Eros, the god, is revealed to be the oldest among gods and men, so much that his parents ‘neither exist nor are they spoken of by anyone’ (178b). At the very start, it is apparent the regard to which people in the period covered in Symposium held Eros. Although the meaning is somewhat lost through time, Eros is still a relevant aspect of modern life, even though it may not receive as much attention. Aristophanes depicts Eros as an epitome of goodness through the facility of love. Herein, the speaker states that love is the only element in human life that can bind them and driving them towards great accomplishments (178d). The example of Alcestis is given to support the powers of Eros in human life, as in the case where she - the daughter of Pelias - was ready to give her life for the sake of her husband’s (179b). The appeal of Eros is so captivating that it leaves both gods and men in awe. Something done in the name of love is seen as the greatest of deeds since it derives from true emotion. In the Symposium, there are numerous accounts of virtuous deeds that were rewarded by gods due to the portrayal of love. Humans have partaken in endeavors where they impress the gods through their acts of love. It is for this reason that Eros is perceived as a connection between the gods and humans. While love is two-way, the gods esteem lovers more than the beloved, since it is the lovers that have god within them. The rationale behind the poorly recognition of Eros is made apparent in the speeches.
Eros, in itself, is not noble or worthy of praise and recognition (181a). It is only when the act of love is practiced, and with genuine emotion, that Eros becomes a notable phenomenon. The nobility of love goes beyond what the eye can see. The speaker deems it stupid to love with the body since it is only the soul that is capable of true love. Eros facilitates a level of grace that makes it possible for people to act and not face consequences. If people were to partake in other activities in a similar manner they do with love, they would be admonished by society due to the oddity that would result. Here, the power of Eros is yet again seen as a source of perspective on issues concerning love. Acts of love, regardless of how stupid they may seem, do not bring shame to the actor (183b). Through love, the essay indicates, it is possible for people to commit to the service of others devoid of intentions other than bettering themselves. The motivation behind acting as such is not to gain favors from the recipient of such actions, nor is it flattery. Instead, is aimed towards improving the actor. Eros is hereby, depicted as a powerful transformational element in human life, and one that can elicit strong emotions among them such that living is no longer a priority. It is for this reason; thus, the recognition of Eros becomes relevant. The reach of Eros is not limited to human beings. It applies to other forms of life as well, including animals and plants (186a). Eros occurs in the differences and similarities of things in life.
There must be an agreement in the contrasting forms of Eros, lest it leans on one side more than the others and causes problems. It is a law that underwrites the erotic nature of the human environment. An example is given, of how things could go awry if one of the Erotes manifests at the expense of the other. The absence of balance creates destructive forces since the other Erote is not present to keep things in check. The divine; thus, is concerned with the preservation of a state of balance in Eros, and human beings intervene through sacrifices to the gods (188b,c). The power of Eros lies in its capacity to accord humans with the proper emotions and feelings, so long as it is cultivated. In the account of Aristophanes, Eros is the most powerful of gods. It is capable of according humans with the greatest happiness. At the same time, humans are ignorant of the nature of Eros, and all the goodness that can be bestowed upon them if they gained a due understanding of its powers. Aristophanes acknowledges the role of Eros in his life, given that he had just healed his hiccups via sneezing, as advised by Eryximachus. In that scenario alone, the speaker creates a laughable situation by comparing the role of the sneeze in canceling the hiccups as a sign of Eros at work in the life of humans. According to Aristophanes, Eros brings humans together for the purpose of generation of offspring, and the subsequent propagation of the race. The Eros in human beings can be reflected in nature, where the sun takes the role of the male and the earth that of the female.
Aristophanes offers a due depiction of Eros, in that his explanation reveals the origin of the human genders and the roles they have served over time. Further, Eros allows humans to act in obedience to the gods because the latter would change their form otherwise. The transformation human beings have undergone over time have been the result of their arrogance and failure to acknowledge the role of gods in their lives. Through Eros, the gods give humans what they want, and take away from them in its absence. The case offered to explain this is that, according to Aristophanes, humans were once globular. They possessed four sets of limbs and two faces. Through their attempt on the gods; however, they were denied the features that had resulted in their feeling that they could oust the gods (190a). For this reason, the god took from them these features that made them complete. It was meant as a punishment for their arrogance, and to keep them in check. Through this, different human races resulted. Instead of being complete, humans had to rely on others to propagate their generations. It is from here that the idea of the male and the female results. There are conditions to this status, however. The gods are displeased with signs of promiscuity among humans since Eros is not about that form of expression. It is about the desire that stems from true love and is exchanged evenly and with caution among humans. In the absence of the necessary balance, these expressions become risky for the people involved. The resulting wickedness is what brings the repercussions from the gods since it compromises the relations between humans and gods.
A depiction of Eros is further indicated in the relationship between humans and the gods. Aristophanes reveals that, after Zeus and the other gods thought of how to deal with the impious nature of human beings, they came to the conclusion that killing off humans was not an option since in so doing, the honors and sacrifices by humans to the gods would vanish as well (190c). In this depiction, it becomes apparent that the speaker’s notion of Eros is that of a force that links opposite elements together. These elements exist in balance, and any attempt to cause disorder brings about huge compromises. The inextricable nature of these elements makes it paramount that a balance is struck between all things linked together through Eros. Achieving balance in Eros is the only way to ensure that humans achieve all the benefits available to them through this power, as can be seen in the case where humans and the gods are co-dependent (191a,b). In the absence of this balance, the humans grow haughty and start contemplating dethroning the gods, and subsequently, the gods start considering eliminating human beings. Either way, the absence of balance within Eros has catastrophic consequences for all the parties involved. Aristophanes cannot stress the importance of Eros enough and uses these illustrations to indicate ways in which Eros is a vital component of human life. In this speech, the speaker also makes it plain that Eros is not limited to carnal expressions of love. Instead, it has to accommodate the needs of the soul as well. There is no point in the body wanting one thing and the soul another.
Aristophanes views Eros as a source of unity among human beings. It is through this passionate love the male and the female desire one another. In so doing, the race of humanity prospers through subsequent generations. Thus, Eros cannot be taken for granted. Eros, the god, is the happiest of all gods because the power of love sustains his youth (195a). Eros dwells in harmony. It is through this calmness that it accords humanity of the innumerable gifts of passionate love. Further, Eros is present in the soft souls, since it is not accustomed to hardness being soft itself. While the speakers at Agathon’s had a similar perception of Eros, Aristophanes included, Socrates, varied in thought. Although he was not opposed to their line of thought, he asked questions that admitted for a fact, that people did not understand Eros as much as they thought they did. The erotic method of Socrates becomes relevant following his admission that he does not know yet, the true nature of Eros. The insights offered by Socrates are in opposition to the wisdom shared in the gathering, but they are not. Socrates’ approach is one founded on refuting someone by proving to them they do not know what they think they know. In so doing, the person who is refuted benefits from the enlightenment. Socrates; thus, exposes the absence of knowledge, eliciting within the individual, a yearning for knowledge. According to Socrates, desire stems from necessity, and people typically desire that which they do not have in their possession yet (200a). Socrates’ speech varies from that given by Aristophanes in this regard.
Agathon and other members of the gathering admit their ignorance in the light of the revelations made by Socrates. Unlike Aristophanes who argues that Eros is beautiful, Socrates argues that Eros would not yearn for beauty, was it beautiful. In other words, Socrates argues that Eros is devoid of everything that it desires since it can only desire that which it is not and does not have in its possession. Socrates even references Diotima of Mantinea, the lady who taught him erotics. Through Diotima, Socrates learned that Eros was not beautiful and good. Nonetheless, that is not to say that Eros was bad and ugly (201e). Diotima goes to the details of an intermediary that exists between all things of contrast. The absence of one does not necessitate the presence of the other in its place. Socrates’ speech further reveals the likelihood that Eros is not a god at all. Truly, he is the embodiment of not beautiful and not good; therefore, lacks two of the utmost qualities among gods. Through this speech, it is understood that Eros is neither god nor human, but exists as an intermediary between the two, a daemon (202e). As such, Eros links gods and humans and communicates to the gods the messages of humankind, and to the humans the messages of the gods. Essentially, Eros completes two halves of the same thing. Otherwise, gods and humans would entail two separate entities. The nature of Eros stems from his birth, being born of resource and poverty (203b). In effect, Eros is the desire for that which is beautiful and good, since these are the two factors that underlie happiness.
Eros takes different forms, depending on what people desire. The desire for love is classified under Eros, but the desire for other things is not. All the same, other forms of desire do not stop being Eros even when they are not called so. That way, Eros is what brings about the beautiful, and is not in itself beautiful. The reason behind the significance of Eros in the life of human and beast is the generation that comes as a result of the passionate love between beings. The living, which is often mortal, persistently purses immortality. The only way for doing this is to bring forth offspring, and these are the result of passionate love. Eros attends to the sake of immortality and does so zealously (208b). The vast differences between the depiction of Eros as presented by Aristophanes and Socrates are that the former speaks of an Eros that possesses beauty and good, while the latter discusses one that is devoid of these qualities and therefore seeks them. While the two depictions of Eros are equally convincing to the readers, the Socratic erotic method prompts contemplation into the matter. Socrates provokes the line of thought eventually informs the gathering at Agathon’s place. Eros is not a mean thing portrayed in the depictions of Aristophanes and the other speakers. It is a thing of greatness, not in itself, but in its capacity to drive human beings towards accomplishment. It is for this drive towards immortality that all things with life would risk it to ensure that they earn a place in subsequent generations. The depiction offered by Aristophanes is by no means wrong. However, it is ill-informed and the product of naivety. Socrates, on the other hand, asks the hard questions, and in so doing, offers an unquestionable depiction of Eros.
Work Cited:
- Benardete, Seth. 'Plato's Symposium: A Translation by Seth Benardete with Commentaries by Allan Bloom and Seth Benardete.' (2001).
