184-5 and 193).
Course Hero is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university. Prot.  In fact, it is the didactic form, not the content, of Diotima’s speech that is sophistic. Since Socrates declares that, thanks to Diotima, he has become “expert in matters of love alone” (οὐδέν φημι ἄλλο ἐπίστασθαι ἢ τὰ ἐρωτικά, 177d) we must consider that, in spite of appearances, despite his modest confession (“I didn’t know anything”) and Diotima’s claim (“I will teach you everything”), the young man already carried in his soul, even unconsciously, this empirical knowledge of eros.  In this respect, the sophistic nature of Diotima’s speech is relative to the nature and the attitude of her public. Erler, M 2003, ‘To Hear the Right Thing and to Miss the Point: Plato’s Implicit Poetics ‘, in AN Michelini (ed), Plato as Author. Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U von 1919, Platon I, Weidmann, Berlin. Similarly, we can see each speech, with a few exceptions, as coming closer and closer to the truth.  That is, the contemplation of the idea of beauty. Rutherford, RB 1995, The Art of Plato, Duckworth, London.  However, within the limits of this paper I cannot discuss the content of Diotima’s speech in the depth it deserves. As such, each deserves a separate discussion: see "Main Ideas" for an exploration of the two concepts and their relation to the Symposium overall. See Sayre 1992, p. 231.  By the way, as he congratulates Diotima’s on her myth, he doesn’t say “ὀρθῶς” or “ἀληθῆ λέγεις” but “καλῶς γὰρ λέγεις” (204c). Accessed November 3, 2020. https://www.coursehero.com/lit/Symposium/. 277-93. Lesher, J, Nails, D & Sheffield, FCC 2006, Plato’s Symposium. 2 and 13; Sampson 2013, pp. Dixsaut, M 2001, Le Naturel philosophe. In Plato’s dialogues speaking is, as Montaigne puts it, “half his who speaks, and half his who hears”. Diotima is a fictitious prophetess whom Socrates invents in his speech at the symposium. 236d-237a and 241e-242b: Socrates describes himself as the hostage of Phaedrus, the young lover of rhetoric. — 2005 Plato: Phaedrus, Harmondsworth, Penguin. Why a reported dialogue? Everyone pursues love differently, whether through making money, sports, or philosophy; but according to Diotima, only passionate, exclusive love between people is truly called love. 104. Sayre, K 1992, ‘A Maieutic View of Five Late Dialogues’, in JC Klagge & ND Smith 1992, pp. Paper given at the First Latin American Area Conference of the International Plato Society and X Archai International Seminar: “Plato’s styles and characters, between literature and philosophy”, University of Brasília, August 22-2012.
Analysis. See Prot.
8-10. The Rhetoric of Philosophy, Brill, Leiden & Boston, pp.
For, Socrates,” she said, “love is not, as you think, of the beautiful. 33-59. 129-186) demonstrated that the ‘philosophic nature’ is essentially erotic. This may provide important clues to Plato’s literary practice. If only there were a way to start a city or an army made up of lovers and the boys they love. September 20, 2017. The end of the desire of love is finding the person who constitutes our other half, in order to heal the wound created by Zeus.  212a; compare with Prot. Rosen, S 1968, Plato’s Symposium, Yale University Press, New Haven. 124-46. — 1998, Plato: Symposium, Aris & Phillips, Warminster. While Agathon is called to leave his passive position of hearer, the reader is indirectly prodded into leaving the book he or she is currently reading in order to practise philosophy. 23-46. Now, when Socrates expounds the bulk of his theory through the mouth of Diotima, he combines his favourite mode of expression (question and answer), and the methodological choices of his audience (continuous oration). Agathon. Horn, C 2012a (ed), Platon: Symposion, Akademie Verlag, Berlin.  Another point is her attitude to the nature of the supreme idea which the initiate is to behold at the end of the philosophical ascent: the form of Beauty and not the form of Good. This paradoxical view is consistent with Plato’s theories about knowledge expressed in other dialogues (Rep. VI 518b-519a, Theaet. In addition to recognizing that the lover’s total and willing subjugation to his beloved’s wishes is neither servile nor reprehensible, we allow that there is one--and only one--further reason for willingly subjecting oneself to another which is equally above reproach: that is subjection for the sake of virtue. As Diotima herself says, Eros in its very nature is not a god and as such is not beautiful, since he is a desiring agent, the lover and not the object of love, the instrument and not the aim of the search for divine forms, especially the form of beauty (204b-c ). Copyright © 1999 - 2020 GradeSaver LLC. Pourquoi faut-il aimer pour bien penser ? See Brisson 1998, p. 25 and Nails 2006, p. 205. 13. As M. Frede (1992, p. 207) shows, this distinction is primarily one of modes of discourse and of argument, rather than one of style. Introductory Dialogue and The Speech of Phaedrus Summary and Analysis. 71-95.  See Symp.
223c-224e; see Nails 2006, p. 196 and Brisson 2006, pp. While Diotima is the philosopher considered from the poet Agathon’s point of view, the young Socrates is the portrait of the poet as a young philosopher. In his restless, ambitious, seeking quality, Diotima adds, Love has more in common with the unsatisfied lover than with the beautiful beloved.  Hence, there is no cause for postulating the existence of any Idea of love, similar to the Idea of good or virtue, and this explains why the best theoretical account Socrates can give of eros is a mythical description delivered through the mouth of a priestess (203a ff), a mûthos that can convey no more than an orthê doxa. Bury notes that the link between the didactic form of the speech and the characterization of Diotima as a sophist had already been pointed out by Wolf (1782), Hommel (1834), Schleiermacher (1807) and Ast (1816). We may also say that the words of the dialectician have the “dialogical” value Mikhail Bakhtin brought to light in the monologues of Dostoyevsky’s heroes: the discourse integrates with the interlocutor’s viewpoint it conflicts with. The dialectician who wants to communicate the truth must use language, that is to say a set of images (Cratylus 430a-432d), and a good image, a true image, must fit the point of view of the beholder in order to let him catch a glimpse of the truth..