Download - GREGORY, Φιλοσοφία ἄφθονος (Plato, Symposium 210d)

7/28/2019 GREGORY, Φιλοσοφία ἄφθονος (Plato, Symposium 210d)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/gregory-plato-symposium-210d 1/8

Φιλοσοφία ἄφθονος (Plato, Symposium 210d)

Author(s): Justina Gregory and Susan B. LevinReviewed work(s):Source: The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 48, No. 2 (1998), pp. 404-410Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/639831 .

Accessed: 30/03/2012 23:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to The Classical Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classical

http://www.jstor.org/stable/639831?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/639831?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classical

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup



ClassicalQuarterly8 (ii)404-410(1998)Printed n GreatBritain 404

PIAOZOIA 100O NOZ (PLATO, SYMPOSIUM 210d)

Near the climax of the ascent passage of the Symposium, Plato describes how the

lover turns to gaze at the great sea of the beautiful and7roAAo,,s

KacLKaAov~sA'yovs

KaL VEyaao7rpOETELsLKT?7KalL qLaVOj7a EVE~LAouol~la o0dvo. While the phraseEvv q~10ouoq0la &dOd'vp has been variously interpreted by commentators and

translators, none has regarded it as particularly significant. In what follows we

examine the contribution that the immediate context makes to the meaning of the

phrase and take note of the link between the adjective64Bovos and two subsequentuses of

qBovEow,both with reference to Alcibiades. We conclude that in the two final

scenes of the dialogue the repetition of 6&0Oovosnd qBovE'whas the same effect asthe repetition of the well-studied adverb 4lat kv-ls. By virtue of these contextual

associations, we suggest, the prepositional phrase acquires a new significance.Furthermore, on the interpretation developed here the dialogue's two final scenes

encapsulate the view of the incompatibility of jealousy and philosophy that Plato

sets forth more explicitly and at greater length in the Phaedrus and Republic.

I. TERMINOLOGICAL BACKGROUND

6dOovosis one of those compound adjectives that can be either active or passive in

sense.1As Bury explains ad loc., the adjective 'is used alike of fruits (Polit. 272a) andof soils (Soph. 222a), thus meaning both "abundant"and "bountiful"-"unstinted"

and "unstinting" '.2 While Robin ('dans l'inepuisable aspiration vers le savoir') optsfor the passive,3the English versions we have consulted prefer the active sense. Thus

Groden translates 'in a fruitful philosophy', Nehamas and Woodruff 'in unstintinglove of wisdom', and Cobb 'in a magnanimous philosophy'.4 In point of fact

the dividing line between the active and passive senses of &dfOovoss not clear-cut.

Dover illuminates the connection between them when he glosses the adjective as

'"ungrudging", hence "unlimited" '.'

The rendering of 6d`Oovosat Symp. 210d6 as 'unstinting' or 'unlimited' seems to

commend itself because Plato habituallyuses the adjectiveto emphasize the relative orcomplete absence of boundaries or limits with respect, for example, to water, and, and

wealth.6 However, while these sorts of entities are material and observable, at Symp.210d6 &•6ovos modifies the abstract noun q0tAouola-a fact that should give us

pause.

1 See LSJ s.v. For discussionof such adjectives ee W. S. Barrett,Euripides:Hippolytos(Oxford, 19662),ad 677-9.

2 R. G.Bury,TheSymposium f Plato(Cambridge,932),p. 127.L. Robin, Platon: (EuvresComplktes,vol. 4 (Paris, 1929).

4 S. Q. Groden,TheSymposium f Plato (Amherst,1970);A. Nehamasand P. Woodruff,

Plato: Symposium (Indianapolis, 1989); and W. S. Cobb, The Symposium and the Phaedrus:Plato's Erotic Dialogues (Albany, 1993). d&lOovosigures in a description of the abundance

spontaneouslyenerated ythe earthduring he GoldenAgeat Hes.Op.118; f.Aesch. r.196.5Radt.Perhapswiththese associationsn mind,M. Joyce Plato'sSymposium London,1935])translates: turninghis eyes towards the open sea of beauty,[the lover]will find in suchcontemplationhe seedof themost fruitfuldiscourse nd the oftiest hought,andreapa goldenharvestof philosophy'.

5 K. Dover,Plato:SymposiumCambridge,980),adloc.6 See,e.g.,Pit.272bl,Phlb.40a10,Leg. 677e8,736d5,and 761c2.



PLATO, SYMPOSIUM 210d 405

To do full justice to the sense of 6d40ovoswe must take its etymology into account.7After all, the verb

0OovE'•and noun 0Odvogave most fundamentally to do with

possessiveness or jealousy.8 The adjective d0Oovos hus has as its primary meaning

'free from possessiveness'; the other senses of the term are derivative and meta-

phorical. Furthermore, it is worth recalling that privative terms have the function of

drawing the audience'sattention to the absence of what they would typically assume

to be present.9 On the basis of these linguistic considerations, one might anticipatethat the reader'sinitial response to 6&10ovost 210d6-where its appearance is quite

unexpected-would be to think of the term'spositive cognates. This association will

impose itself, however,only if it receivessupport from the context. As we shall see, the

context does indeed confirm the implicit connection with 0ovd'wand 8Odvosy

suggesting what kind of jealousy or possessiveness is so conspicuously absent from

philosophy.

II. THE SYMPOSIUM

As noted above, the prepositional phrase 'v

q0LAouO,'a

068Odvwollows immediately

upon Plato's evocation of TrrroA rrEAayor... 70o KaAov t 210d4. More importantthan this brief image in establishing its context, however, is a contrast that is

developed at some length in the course of the ascent passage. As part of her mysticalrevelation to Socrates (cf. 210al), Diotima makes a distinction between the lover's

earlier preoccupation with individuals (210b5-6, 211d3-8) and an elevated form of

attraction which is far more abstract and general in character (210e3-211b5,

211c6-d3, d8-e4). In the immediate vicinity of the prepositional phrase, Diotima has

recourse to the vocabulary of slavery to reinforce the adverse connotations of

attachment to particular individuals: she describes the lover whose attention is fixedon them as JaOr" WK777•r .. . SovAEV'w(210dl-3). Alcibiades subsequentlyelaborates on the implications of this phrase when he describes his consciousness of

his slavish situation (dv6parro6wc 3 tLaKELtELvov,215e6-7); recounts how he is wont

to flee from Socrates like a runawayslave(parrErEv'w . . .

arOV Kacl cEV)yW,216b5-6); and finally confesses his perplexity at being 'enslaved by [Socrates] as no

man has ever been enslavedby

another'(KaraGESovAwooE'vo3.... Orro o JvOpcwrrov(s OVSELSrr' olVEvOS&AAov,19e3-5).10 The suggestion that the ideal lover will be

free of obsessive attachment to a particular individual receives additional negative

7 Dover'sungrudging'oessomeway nthisdirection y implicitlyinking headjectiveo theverb q0ov'w. Moreover,his version,like those of Nehamas-Woodruff nd Robin,aims to

capture he force of the alpha-privativey means of a negativeprefix.J.D. Moore notes in

passing heetymologicalonnection etween6&kovosnd od'Ovos'Therelation etweenPlato's

Symposium and Phaedrus',in J. M. E. Moravcsik (ed.), Patterns in Plato's Thought [Dordrecht,1973],p. 59).

8 See P Walcot, Envyand the Greeks:A Studyof Human Behaviour Warminster,1978),pp. 3-6and passim. We prefer the translation 'jealousy' to Walcot's 'envy' because our concern here is

primarilywith attempts to retain what one has rather than to acquirewhat is not currentlyone'sown.

9 On this point see J.Wackernagel, Vorlesungen ber Syntax, vol. 2 (Basel, 1924), p. 293: 'der

privativeAusdruck .. wirdda angewandt,wo man das Fehlenvon etwas NormalemoderUblichem festzustellen hat, oder wo eine Erwartunggetiuscht wird'.

10M. C. Nussbaum (The Fragility of Goodness: Luck and Ethics in Greek Tragedy and

Philosophy [Cambridge, 1986], p. 197) takes note of Alcibiades' use of the vocabularyof slavery,but does not connect it to the earlierpassage; indeed, she translatesoIKW'r-q t 210d1 not as 'slave'but as 'servant'p. 180).



406 J. GREGORY AND S. B. LEVIN

support even in passages where the vocabulary of slavery is not present: first at

213dl-2, where Socrates humorously complains that Alcibiades will allow himo;VTE

rTpoUfAE'CoL 'TrE8LaAEXOaL KaAo 0o8' Jvl; again at 214d7-8 where Alcibiades,

pretending that it is Socrates who is the jealous and exclusive lover, assures him that

dycO 06' av &va EAAovdarraLvEauLLuo0 7rapdvroV and lastly at 222d1-3, where

Socrates protests that in Alcibiades' view 6SEVEPE Ev o• OEpcv KaLI 78EVOSlAAov,

Atya6Ova 68 VITrrOo E'pa^auL aL6q'V,'

J6~v &Aov.Having gained a sense of the general context in which the prepositional phrase is

situated, we may consider the term most immediately relevant to its interpretation,

namely the verbT-KT-

(210d5). This verb serves to sustain the metaphor of sexualityand sexual reproduction that Diotima has promoted throughout her speech."Diotima's use of TLKTELv

lends support to the view that 100Oovosrawsattention, not

to the absence of limits on the scope of objects of the lover'sattention, but ratherto

the utter lack of possessiveness, above all of a sexual nature,that characterizes a loverwho has reached this stage of the ascent.12 Diotima's phrase 3pOJs rraLEparTELV(211b5-6)-a shorthand expression for her proposal to place the Athenian institution

of pederasty on the correct footing-presumably makes the same point: to love boys

'properly'means above all not to focus on their individuality.13A number of critics have pointed out that Diotima's speech and the Alcibiades

scene that follows immediately upon it (212c6-223b6) should be read together, with

Alcibiades' performance functioning either as a complement of Diotima's speech14 oras a cautionary tale.15Wehavealreadyseen how Alcibiades echoes and expands on the

contrast between different types of attraction, and the attendant vocabulary of

slavery,that Diotima introduced in the course of her exposition.16It can scarcely be

accidental that in addition to using &q~0ovosin connection with philosophy, Plato

employs qBovEw wice with reference to Alcibiades. In the introduction to Alcibiades'

speech, Socrates complains that

OVKETL EEEUTLV 1LOL OUTE 7TPOUf3AEbaLOWTE aLaAEXO77vaLKaAW o E' ivl oroTUL

qAoTvrrdvLE KaL OovdjvOavaaTard'pya`?ETaLaL,o

LopE-iat TE KaLT) XELPEO7YS

dTrXETraL. (213dl-4)

The two participles combine in a virtual hendiadys, with rlqAorvrJWv-whicharries

strong connotations of sexual possessiveness-serving to demarcate the sense ofOovWv. 7It seems reasonable to conclude that Plato wishes both to underscore the

" Forothersuch uses of TLKTELVbyDiotima,see209b2,c3, 210cl, and212a3.Additionally,sheemploys heverb n anearlierdiscussion f reproduction206c3,4, andd5);roKOS,Withhemeaning givingbirth',appearsnthiscontextat206b7,c6,ande5.

12 On Plato'sistof entities o whichone whohas made heSymposium'sscentwillno longerbe attached renotonlybeautiful oys,butalsogold(211 ).Thisstipulationsinterestingnlightof Rep.5'sprovisionorthe abolitionof privatepropertyn thecase,at anyrate,of rulersandauxiliaries. orthe relation etween heSymposiumndRepublic,eesection V.

'~ For the notion of 'pederasty ombinedwithphilosophy', f.Phdr.

249a2.Forpederastyas an Athenian nstitution, eeD. M. Halperin,Why s Diotima a woman?PlatonicEr6sand

the figuration of gender', in Halperin et al. (edd.), Before Sexuality: The Constructionof EroticExperiencein theAncient GreekWorld Princeton, 1990), pp. 258-9.

14 H. H. Bacon, Socratesrowned',VirginiaQuarterlyReview 5(1959),415-30,atp.428.~5Nussbaumn. 10),pp.167and171.16 For Plato, structuraland dramatic onsiderationsake precedence ververisimilitude.

Alcibiades akesupthemes romDiotima'speech ven houghhe wasnotpresentohear t;withequal mplausibility, iotimaalludes 205d10)o thespeechof Aristophanes.

17 Onoro07vTla

see E. Fantham,ZHAOTYHIA:a briefexcursionntosex,violence,andliterary history', Phoenix 40 (1986), 45-57.




jealousy of Alcibiades and to emphasize the contrast between his state of mind and

that of the ideal lover described by Diotima.18Plato has not said his last word on the subject of Alcibiades and sexual jealousy.

At the conclusion of Alcibiades' speech (222e13-223a2) Socrates tells him:&,AA'Eacov, WCL"LFLVLE,K)LL UV17Uov7U77s 7LELPcKLC VIT0F7OV- E7TaLVEUqtvcLL.

Dramatically speaking, his plea caps a series of interchanges involving mock chargesof possessiveness. These include 213d1-6 (where Socrates pretends that Alcibiades is

inordinately jealous) and 214dl-8 (where Alcibiades flings the same charge back at

Socrates). With his final plea to Alcibiades, Socrates definitivelygets the better of his

younger friend. His words simultaneously, however, recall the uses of qo0ovos and

qBovEw at 210d6 and 213dl-4. That Plato has recourse to the verb BOovywone last

time as the dialogue draws to a close seems to indicate thatjealousy, in his view, is of

specialrelevance to

any investigationof the nature of

'pws9.Much of what Alcibiades says in his encomium of Socratesreveals the depth of his

emotional attachment to him. Alcibiades' emotional responses to Socrates alternate

between, and even combine, positive and negative attitudes; as he himself puts it

(222a7-8), his speech is a mixture of praise and blame. In each instance, however,the

feeling in question is extremely intense, as his auditors recognize (222cl-3).Alcibiades' own understanding of the nature and object of his attraction is markedlyunstable; he shifts back and forth from a clear recognition that his attraction is to

Socrates' soul-combined with at least an intimation of all that this implies-to a

demand for a sexual relationship.If we consider Alcibiades' encomium in the light of

the speech that preceded it, it becomes evident that Plato wishes to contrast the 'pwsof Diotima's ideal lover-which never terminatesin individualsand in any case moves

quickly beyond them-with forms of 'pwsthat give pride of place to our attachments

to individuals as individuals.19

III. AOONOL, #OONEDQ ND EEAIONHE

Commentators have regularly drawn attention to the significant repetition of the

adverb Eiat'0vriSat the end of Diotima's speech and in the Alcibiades scene.20 At

210e4 the lover 'all of a sudden' glimpses the Form of Beauty; at 212c6, in contrast,a 'sudden' tumult at the front door heralds the arrival of Alcibiades, who is takenaback when he 'suddenly' (213cl) becomes aware of Socrates' presence. Most

obviously, the adverb alerts the reader to a change of atmosphere or mood at thedinner party.21 t also, however, underscores both the continuity and the divergencebetween the conceptions of ''pws advocated by Diotima and exemplified byAlcibiades. The term makes a final appearance at 223b2, where the 'sudden'

"8Theparallelsbetween hetwopassages realsounderscoredyPlato'sattentionn 210c-dand213d o theactivities f lookingandspeaking.

'9 Of course, heearlier peeches f Phaedrus, ausanias,ndAristophaneslsocontributeothiscontrast, ince heyemphasizenvariousways henature nd ntensity f lovers' ttachmentsto theindividual bjectsof theiraffection.

20 The recurrencef this termis notedby C. Harder, latons AusgewdhlteDialoge (Berlin,1915),p. 165.Cf.Nussbaumn. 10),pp.182,184,192,and 198.

21 To Nehamasand Woodruff [n.4], p. xxii), the instanceat 212c6suggests hat Plato is'markingexplicitly a reversalin the atmospherewhich Diotima had created by her own reversalof the mood that had prevailedearlier when she introduced the Form of Beauty,which also ...comes "all of a sudden" into view (210e)'.




appearance of a band of besotted revellers marks a further-and even more

radical-departure from the spirit which permeated Diotima's remarks.

Plato's repeated use of E'at0vwrshas been recognized as a lexical device that points

his reader toward an important contrast. We can now see that J8Oovos and q0ovdwOhave the same function. After all, the instances of iat0vwrs and of

6•1Bovo•/dBov•oware similarly distributed between Diotima's speech on the one hand, and the

Alcibiades scene on the other. Moreover, they occur in proximity to one another (forthe groupings in question see 210d6 and e4; 212c6, 213cl, and 213d2; and 223al and

b2). We suggest that by employing two sets of mutuallyreinforcingterms,Plato is able

to signal moments, transitions, and distinctions that he wishes to emphasize more

effectively than would be possible through the use of either on its own.

IV. RELATING THE SYMPOSIUM TO OTHER DIALOGUES

We have argued that Plato uses B0Oovost Symp. 210d6 to emphasize the freedom

from attachment to individuals that characterizes the practitioner of philosophy. He

introduces this point in a highly compressed form, and reinforcesit only obliquely bymeans of subsequent references to jealousy in connection with Alcibiades. For a

more explicit statement of this idea and its implications, one must turn to the

Phaedrus and Republic.The Phaedrusespouses many of the same views as the Symposiumabout the nature

of love and its relation to philosophy. In the speech recited by Phaedrus, Lysiasmaintains thatjealousy is inseparablefrom the experience of loving, and that only the

non-lover can be counted on not to be jealous (06ovEdv, 232d5). In his own firstspeech, Socrates aims to beat the orator at his own game by offering a more

compelling argument in support of the view that it is better for a young man to

associate with a non-lover than with a lover.22Socrates is not merely improving on

Lysias, however,but revertingto his own concerns when he introduces the claim that

thejealous (q0ovEpds, 239a7) loverwill make it impossible for his beloved to engage in

philosophical activity.23Finally, Socrates concludes his speech with the observation

that the younger male should have realizedthat it is far better for him to accommodatethe non-lover, because otherwise

CLvayKaLovEL?)J vaov-vata'LOV

.... 00ovEpp? ... [3Aa[3Ep4?pj'v rpo' , ovIav, 3AafEp? SEC'7rrp3 T-?V TOadoLaTrosLV,roAi' f3Aaf3EPW-or

d•-•O v-q bUX?)aratEvaUv.

(241c2-5)24

In his second speech, his Stesichorean 'palinode', Socrates makes clear that there isa type of 'pwswhich can impel one toward the Forms, but that making this ascent

22 For comparative discussion of the two speeches, see G. R. E Ferrari, Listening to theCicadas: A Studyof Plato's Phaedrus(Cambridge,1987),pp. 95-102.

23 There is clearly a change of perspective at 239a-b, although critics disagree about howradical it is. According to G. J.de Vries (A Commentaryon the Phaedrusof Plato [Amsterdam,

1969], p. 91), 'the Platonic overtones . . . are not entirely absent', while C. J. Rowe (Plato:Phaedrus [Warminster,1986], p. 159) believes that Plato refershere more directlyto 'philosophyin the narrowsense'. On the interpretationof Ferrari([n. 22],p. 101), 'it is no accident that in this

speech we hear for the first time of the ideal of "divine philosophy" . . . since by positing a

struggle in the soul the non-lover has at least made an opening for a philosophically mature

approach to the ethical issues raised by his suit, and a genuine advance on the thesis of Lysias'persona'. All of these commentators acknowledge the presence of at least an allusion to

philosophy in the technical sense,which is what concerns us here.24 Regardinghelover'sealousy, f. 240a5.




necessitates the transcendence of sexual and related affective attachments. He

distinguishes sharply and explicitly between types of love, insisting that no love

properly described as noble leaves room for jealousy (243cl-dl). Plato's use here of

the phrase JAE•OEpovpwo-rao referto love of the superior type (c8) is noteworthy in

light of the vocabulary of slavery n the Symposium,which raises the same issue, albeit

less directly. Attachment to an individual as individual, we may readily infer,

compromises psychic freedom and reduces one to a dependent and slavish condition;in contrast, lovers who have been in the retinue of divinity are oi bOdvv 0o8'

lVEAEvOEpP&8vUtLEVElaP;w/Evot TrpoSd rratrtKd (Phdr. 253b7-8). With regard,

finally, to the absence of jealousy under ideal conditions, we note Plato's insistence

that 0bOdvos-.. ?6w OE(ov Xopov Ura-cat (247a7). Taken together, these statements

from the Phaedrusshow that the abbreviated referencein the Symposiumhas evolved

into an explicit and more complete formulation of the same basic position.

The vocabulary of jealousy makes an appearance in the Republic as well. For

example, Plato uses 6400ovos with reference to an absence of sexual attachment to

individuals; for eugenic reasons, he explains,db80ovEcrE'p•a

q iovalaT'g T•jv

yvVatLKdV UVyKOLtrLGrEwcswill be extended to young men who distinguish themselves

in war or other pursuits (460b2-3). Moreover, the incompatibility of philosophy and

jealousy is underscored in Plato's delineation of the philosopher-rulers' cognitivestate:

0v3 yaptrov

.. aXoAn)W yE•osO;J'n 7rpsoiA oSaL

r7VyLCtLVOLtavXOVTLCTCo

/AErrEtvlV dSvOpW'rWv 7rpaytLaTElag, KaL tIaXdtLEvovVToiLSq dvov"VE

KaL8•VtC.•EVELaS

E'p7rrtLArraOat. (500b8-c2)25

In the Republic, in contrast to the Symposium, Plato situates his concern with

individual attachments in a broad civic context, and his reservations about such

attachments impel him to propose far-reaching social reforms. Most specifically,Plato's proposals regarding privateproperty and the family in Book 5 arise ultimatelyfrom his recognition that a range of desires and emotions-jealousy prominent

among them-fragment the individual and hence society. In fact, Plato's concern

about these sources of fragmentation runs so deep that he formulates his proposals

precisely with a view toward ensuring that attachments which interfere with psychicand communal

well-beingwill have no

opportunityto form.26

In addition, what the Symposium ntimates about the connection between freedom

and rationality becomes in the Republica theory of psychic E'AEvOEpa.As we have

seen, in the Symposiumthe lover whose attention is fixed squarely on individuals is

WcrrEp OLKET7)qS,CaYC'rwrVrc,,aplpOV

KCoAo7v)Opwrrov tLVoS) ETrtL7rlptEt/aTo

vodS, 8ovAcEV'v a•i3Ao.... KacL UtLKpoA'dyos (210dl-3). This implied contrast

between freeand slavish forms and expressions of c!pwcs,which plays an important role

25 For additional relevant passages involving jealousy, see Rep. 580a3, Leg. 679c1, 731a3, 5,863e7, and 934a5.

26 For example,Plato does not merelyrequirethat children born to guardiansbe taken over by

officials chosen for this task (460b7-8) since this arrangementis compatible,at least in principle,with parents'still having some relationshipwith progenythey know to be their own. Plato insiststhat this recognition itself must not take place, prescribingthat 'no parent will know his own

offspring, nor will any child know its parent' (457d2-3). He adds that when nursingmothers are

brought to the creche in which their infants have been placed, the presiding officials 'will go to

great lengths to ensure that they do not learn who their children are' (460c9-dl). For furtherdiscussion of Rep. 5's handling of kinship relations, see S. B. Levin, 'Greek conceptions of

naming: three forms of appropriateness n Plato and the literarytradition', ClassicalPhilology 92

(1997), 52-6.




in the ascent passage, is noteworthy in light of the Republic'sarticulation of a

conception of psychic freedom. There Plato argues that only the harmonious soul,

namely that of the just person, is genuinely free.In contrast, those so-called 'freemen'

able to do as they please lack the psychic harmony that justice ensures (431b-c, cf.557b). Plato stresses that the inner chaos (dvapxla) which prevailsin such individualsis wrongly construed as E'AEOEpla560e), and that people whose lives exhibit no order

(--d(Ls)

make the gravest of errors in deeming those lives to be free (561d). In short,what Plato says in the Symposiumpoints toward the Republic'saccount of freedom,even though that construction is at best only implicit in the earlierdialogue.27

V. CONCLUSION

At a crucial juncture in the ascent passage, Plato introduces an unassuming

prepositional phrase which does important philosophical work. It implies that acertain emotional detachment is requisite to philosophy; at any rate, the philosopherwill not manifest the jealous possessiveness in his human relationships that isexhibited by Alcibiades. Thus construed, the phrase can be enlisted as evidence in the

long-standing controversy over the Symposium's view of love for individuals asindividuals. In a classic article, Moravcsik distinguishes between 'inclusive' and

'exclusive' interpretations of the lover's ascent.28On the 'inclusive' interpretation,

our eros widensas we makeprogress romstageto stage;we do not abandonphysicalandaesthetic oveforthelove of spiritualbeauty,nordo wejettison helatter nfavorof love of thesciences.Weenrichourappreciationsccordingo this viewbykeeping heformernterests nd

adding o thesenewerones.

As Moravcsik has noted, this interpretation does not do justice to the presence of

'negative E-steps' (i.e. negative attitudes such as disdain that are directed toward

objects which previously consumed one's attention).29 Considerations of this typesupport the view that a version of the 'exclusive' interpretation must be correct. Thisneed not mean that all attraction to individuals dissolves. Based on the argument ofthis article, however, it seems an inescapable conclusion that Vlastos is right tocontend that Plato advocates renouncing all love for the individual, 'in the

uniqueness and integrity of his or her individuality', because any such attachmentwill

unavoidably bringharm

to the soul.30

Department of ClassicalLanguages JUSTINA GREGORYand Literatures [email protected]

Department of Philosophy, SUSAN B. LEVINSmith College,Northampton,MA [email protected]

27 In particular,a full treatment of E'AEOpl'a is only possible in light of the articulation ofsoul,andspecifically f voOis,resentedn Rep.4-7.

28 J.M. E. Moravcsik,ReasonandEros n the "ascent"-passagef theSymposium',n J.P.Anton and G.L. Kustas edd.),Essays nAncientGreek hilosophyAlbany, 971),p.293.

29Ibid.,p. 293.

30 G. Vlastos, Theindividual s an objectof love in Plato', n PlatonicStudies Princeton,19812), p.31.

Download - GREGORY, Φιλοσοφία ἄφθονος (Plato, Symposium 210d)

Top Related