The true meaning of love is a topic that has been debated about since ancient times and Plato’s Symposium is one text that deals with the problem of defining love. In Plato’s “Symposium”, seven Greek philosophers take turns debating the meaning of love at a dinner party. Each philosopher has a different point of view and opinion of what love is and why we desire love. This text is extremely influential still to this very day, as it raises important questions about love that are significant to modern readers (Gill, 1999). Although “The Symposium” is considered an important and unavoidable text to read when discussing the philosophical meaning of love, it is not without its faults. This assignment will be focusing only on the speech of Aristophanes
…show more content…
However Diotima is not at the dinner party, therefore we rely on Socrates to tell us what her opinion of love is. The majority of philosophers consider Diotima’s speech to be the highest point of the symposium dialogue, while Aristophanes speech is discredited as a comical view of love (Nussbaum, 1979). Diotima and Aristophanes speeches are very different and in some aspects they even contradict each other, especially when they are describing what love is. Aristophanes believes love is a powerful unappreciated God that we should build temples for. (188c). He explains just how powerful love is by relating it to our human nature. Diotima however rejects the idea of love as a God. According to Diotima love is an intermediate, it is never solely one thing, therefore love is a spirit because it is between being mortal and immortal. Diotima reinforces this point of view by using the myth of love being conceived by Poverty and Resource (203d). One can argue however that love can’t be defined and because of this it is clear from both speeches that Diotima and Aristophanes struggle to explain what love is. That being said, Diotima’s definition of love is more relatable to modern readers than any other definition given by the debaters in the
However Diotima is not at the dinner party, therefore we rely on Socrates to tell us what her opinion of love is. The majority of philosophers consider Diotima’s speech to be the highest point of the symposium dialogue, while Aristophanes speech is discredited as a comical view of love (Nussbaum, 1979). Diotima and Aristophanes speeches are very different and in some aspects they even contradict each other, especially when they are describing what love is. Aristophanes believes love is a powerful unappreciated God that we should build temples for. (188c). He explains just how powerful love is by relating it to our human nature. Diotima however rejects the idea of love as a God. According to Diotima love is an intermediate, it is never solely one thing, therefore love is a spirit because it is between being mortal and immortal. Diotima reinforces this point of view by using the myth of love being conceived by Poverty and Resource (203d). One can argue however that love can’t be defined and because of this it is clear from both speeches that Diotima and Aristophanes struggle to explain what love is. That being said, Diotima’s definition of love is more relatable to modern readers than any other definition given by the debaters in the