How can we benefit by reflecting on Four Platonic Dialogues on Love: Lysis, Alcibiades, Symposium, and Phaedrus? How similar are they? Was it possible for men and women, and husbands and wives, to be friends in ancient Greece and Rome? Did the Platonic dialogues on love condone or encourage homosexuality […]
Socrates wants his students to think for themselves, so we cannot assume that Socrates really believes that virtue cannot be taught. After all, at the end of the dialogue, Socrates asserts that true knowledge leads to virtue. Perhaps he seeks to dissuade the youths in Athens from studying under the Sophists, who claim to be able to teach anything, for a fee, a generous fee, of course.
What example comes to mind if we assert that virtue can be taught? We need to go no further than the Book of Judges, which is filled with horrible stories that atheists love to parade as proof that God is not a loving god. We must keep in mind the constant theme of the Book of Judges: Everyone in Israel did what was right IN HIS OWN EYES. Which is the slogan of the Sophists. […]
Protagoras begins one of his works with “Man is the measure of all things, of things that are, that they are, and of things that are not, that they are not.”
The ancient author Sextus Empiricus also quotes this fragment, continuing the quote from Protagoras: “And for this reason he posits only what appears to the individual, thus introducing relativity.” “What Protagoras states then is this–that matter is in flux,” “and the senses are transformed and altered according to the times of life and to all other conditions of the bodies.” […]
In antiquity through the Renaissance, Alcibiades I was a highly regarded Platonic dialogue, and was often the first dialogue serious students of philosophy studied. However, many modern scholars deprecate this dialogue, arguing that it was not written by Plato. We demur, we tend to side with the ancient, medieval, and Renaissance scholars in such judgments, who tend to be inclusive, whereas modern scholars tend to be exclusive, demanding absolute certainty of proof. Our translator agrees with us, he says that the German scholar Schleiermacher first doubted its authenticity based on scholarly taste and a superficial reading. IMHO, although it does appear to differ from his other earlier dialogues, Alcibiades I was likely either written by Plato, or maybe by one of his brightest students, with his input. […]
SOCRATES asks whether “only good men can be friends with one another? Can true friendship exist between a bad man and either a good man or another bad man?” (214d) The response of St John of the Cross would likely be that friendship with a bad man will draw you further away from the Love of God, poisoning your soul, leading you away from salvation. Friendship with a good man leads you to love and compassion, friendship with a bad men leads you to hatred and cruelty. […]
In his memorable metaphor for the nature of the soul, Socrates describes “a pair of winged horses and a charioteer. Now the winged horses and the charioteers of the gods are all of them noble and of noble descent, but those of other races are mixed; the human charioteer drives his in a pair; and one of them is noble and of noble breed, and the other is ignoble and of ignoble breed; and the driving of them of necessity gives a great deal of trouble to him.” […]
Although Socrates does not condemn homosexual love in either dialogue, he is also depicted as being above carnal love, only capable of a philosophical divine love that is only concerned with the goodness of the soul. In the Symposium, the rowdy Alcibiades crashes the dinner party quite drunk, proclaiming how though he and Socrates were the best of friends, even saving his life in the thick of battle, in the end Socrates refused to become his lover. […]
Both of these commandments are the Divine Love that Plato describes in the Symposium. Like the country song suggests, If you don’t love your neighbor, you don’t Love God. As we learned from St John of the Cross, if our love for our neighbor or our love does not increase in us our Love of God, then it is not love at all. Which means that you cannot talk about two types of love, one mortal, one divine, as do the speakers like Agathon in the Symposium, though you could talk about love and lust, love being unselfish, and lust being selfish, caring only about yourself, not caring about the well-being of your partner or friend. […]
When reading these dialogues, keep in mind that the speeches by the guests preceding Socrates are either simplistic or flawed, or both, and they often describe sensual love, which can be partially noble, which are contrasted to the purely noble and Divine Love described by Socrates. […]
After the end of the Peloponnesian Wars, the victorious Spartan commander Lysander insisted that, as part of the terms of peace, the Athenians set up an aristocracy under the rule of the Thirty Tyrants. Although the previous tyrants in the sixth century BC were benevolent tyrants, the Thirty were Tyrants of the worst kind, dominated by the vicious Critias, a tyranny that quickly descended into an orgy of bloodshed directed first against their enemies, and then against their fellow aristocrats so they could seize their property. This misrule preceded the reestablishment of the Radical Democracy of Athens, and the events of the Thirty Tyrants cast a long shadow over Athenian history and the Platonic dialogues. […]
Copyright 2017
