“It’s obvious that the soul of every lover longs for something else; his soul cannot say what it is, but like an oracle it has a sense of what it wants, and like an oracle it hides behind a riddle.” (28; 192D) Love is a concept familiar to all and yet it is one of the most, if not, the most difficult term to define. Of all the notions that evolve over time, such as the revelation of the divisibility of the atom, love has been a concept of relative consistency. This is not to say that there is a definitive explanation of love, in fact, the spectrum ranges so extreme that condensing all beliefs into one would be utterly impossible. However, there are specific beliefs that have become fundamental and prove to be ageless despite the hands of the
…show more content…
Alike Aristophanes’ tale, falling in love cannot be justified and neither can the symptoms that accompany the condition. Attempting to justify love with logic and science as one would with other concepts can only result in confusion and failure. Instead, it is wise to come to terms with unattainable goal of a definitive description. The key is rather to embrace love – irrationality and all. To fully appreciate the conception, one must willingly suspend all disbeliefs, a phrase coined by Samuel Taylor Coleridge and practiced when reading any work of fiction. This is necessary because myths like that of Aristophanes are not to be taken literally but contextually. Due to the varying ideas of love, it is fair to say that the most suitable and fitting theory in Symposium should be the one of most pertinence as it must be relatable to each individual. Taking the mythical route ensures that his theory is open to interpretation and does not clash with alternative perspectives. The subjectivity of it is significant because love is, evidently, highly subjective. To attempt to classify love under such narrow understandings when there are a myriad of plausible explanations is both inefficient and senseless. Although myths and fables are often overlooked, they have much to offer. They are the foundations in which many rudiments have been built. Despite its illegitimacy, …show more content…
Whereas, other members at the party spoke in favour of relations only between boy and man. It can be disputed that failure to mention all combinations of lovers is understandable since it was the most customary of the time. On the contrary, that argument only strengthens Aristophanes’ speech. In comparison, it affirms Aristophanes’ perspective to be futuristic and advanced in its inclusion of all classes of relationships. Most important to consider is the fact that Aristophanes does not assert sexual orientation as a choice. He suggests that the gender a person is drawn towards is not within his/her control, which is a view society has always and still struggles with
Alike Aristophanes’ tale, falling in love cannot be justified and neither can the symptoms that accompany the condition. Attempting to justify love with logic and science as one would with other concepts can only result in confusion and failure. Instead, it is wise to come to terms with unattainable goal of a definitive description. The key is rather to embrace love – irrationality and all. To fully appreciate the conception, one must willingly suspend all disbeliefs, a phrase coined by Samuel Taylor Coleridge and practiced when reading any work of fiction. This is necessary because myths like that of Aristophanes are not to be taken literally but contextually. Due to the varying ideas of love, it is fair to say that the most suitable and fitting theory in Symposium should be the one of most pertinence as it must be relatable to each individual. Taking the mythical route ensures that his theory is open to interpretation and does not clash with alternative perspectives. The subjectivity of it is significant because love is, evidently, highly subjective. To attempt to classify love under such narrow understandings when there are a myriad of plausible explanations is both inefficient and senseless. Although myths and fables are often overlooked, they have much to offer. They are the foundations in which many rudiments have been built. Despite its illegitimacy, …show more content…
Whereas, other members at the party spoke in favour of relations only between boy and man. It can be disputed that failure to mention all combinations of lovers is understandable since it was the most customary of the time. On the contrary, that argument only strengthens Aristophanes’ speech. In comparison, it affirms Aristophanes’ perspective to be futuristic and advanced in its inclusion of all classes of relationships. Most important to consider is the fact that Aristophanes does not assert sexual orientation as a choice. He suggests that the gender a person is drawn towards is not within his/her control, which is a view society has always and still struggles with