In the speech of Diotima, she questions Socrates way of looking at love, Socrates said that love was something beautiful and good. Diotima describes love as needing happiness in order to have that love fulfilled; She thinks that happiness comes when one has beautiful and good things around them. Diotima describes love at the beginning of her speech, she says love was born when Aphrodite was born, Diotima also says that love is hardship and overcoming that hardship is what brings happiness to ones life. Love is described as a person, a person who has needs and desires, a person who is smart and always on the look out for opportunities. She always describes Love or Eros as being neither mortal or immortal, Love or as it is personified is the
Youths should not be banned from participating in sports such as dodgeball, cheerleading, and football. To begin with, dodgeball teaches physical and mental education. According to the text, ”Rick Hanetho, founder of National Amatuer Dodgeball Association said,” It teaches hand-eye coordination, concentration, and to draw quick conclusions” (171). This proves that youths shouldn’t be banned from dodgeball since it teaches them at a young age and it teaches mental and physical lessons. As for cheerleading, youths shouldn’t be banned because the coaches are trained and certified.
Socrates’ first speech is a better rendition Lysias’s argument. Rather than presenting the benefits of the non-lover, Socrates notes the cons of the lover. Eros or love is a form of madness in which the desire or lust for physical or in this case superficial beauty overpowers the pursuit of truth. The Socrates’ second speech overshadows the previous two speeches in style, length, and content. The most important ideas derive from the Great Speech or the Socrates’ second speech.
Katie Valentine Professor Seth Martin English 102 5 March 2024 Toulmin Analysis and an Addition to the Symposium The Symposium written by Plato is a collection of many speeches given on love. The speech given by Aristophanes was the one I was most interested in and curious about. His speech was distinctly different from the others, and it created a comedic yet still serious claim while looking at the history of love, creating a comedic yet still serious masterpiece. The Toulmin method helped in analyzing Aristophanes' speech and when writing a speech of my own on the same topic.
This relationship was based upon total compassion and love. Socrates was there in his Right’s last moments. He proved to be a loyal friend giving his own, fairly limited, wealth to better Right’s standard of living. This male relationship is different from the other two, in that it has much more vulnerability. Rather than Socrates serving as a mentor or challenger, he is serving as Right’s equal.
Even on his last day of existence, Socrates did not surrender his exploration of the nature of the soul. Using the Socratic Method and the Recollection Argument, he cleverly proved that the soul exists before birth and that it is immortal. In this paper, I will explain Socrates’ line of reasoning by using the words of the philosophers engaged in the discussion recollected in Phaedo and a metaphor of my own. Secondly, I will point out some limitations in the Recollection Argument, such as its exclusive definition of all learning as recollection and the negative perception of the body. Finally, I will assess the strength of Socrates’ premises and the conclusion to reach an overall evaluation of the argument that established a strong foundation
Nonetheless, if Socrates is referring to the body itself, it is absurd for him to claim that the body can die from the living and then be reborn into life again. Since this argument is meant to support the claim of existence of the soul after death, the terms “living” and “dead” may not be the best words to describe or explain such a process since the soul is not dead in any state or world. Instead, better terms such as “integrated/disintegrated” or “embodied/disembodied” can better represent the opposites of the soul within the body during life and the living soul away from the body after
The symposium is a book constructed on Plato’s conceptions around the passionate erotic love. To Plato and others during this time love (eros) was known as a god, with such beauty and goodness that others praise and competing for its entity. As a young boy of royalty older men would advertise themselves for a chance at love (eros). This was an opportunity to raise a boy into a man, teaching all the necessary tools needed for adulthood. Some of these roles as a partner included being sexual active.
All of the speakers speeches about love in the Symposium are important because they each have a unique idea to contribute about what is love and the idea of love. One of the speakers, Pausanias goes after Phaedrus’ speech. When it is his turn to speak he present his speech about love as not a single thing and therefore we shouldn’t praise it since there is more than one. Pausanias states that there are two kinds of love, he claims that since “there are two kinds of Aphrodite, there must also be two loves” (Symposium 13). The first Aphrodite is called Uranian or Heavenly Aphrodite since she is the daughter of Uranus, she is the oldest and has no mother.
The argument is contrary to Cebes and Simmias who argue the soul of an individual is long lasting, it is mortal and is destroyed when the body dies. This paper describes Plato's four arguments for
Surely, you know this much, Socrates? Socrates: I believe I know what you mean. When a man desires a woman, this is love?
The various ideologies of love mentioned by speakers in Plato’s Symposium portrayed the social and cultural aspect of ancient Greece. In the text, there were series of speeches given by Phaedrus, Pausanias, Eryximachus, Aristophanes, Socrates, and Agathon about the idea of love, specifically the effect and nature of Eros. Within the speakers, Agathon’s speech was exceptional in that his speech shifted the focus of the audience from effect of Eros on people, to the nature and gifts from the Eros. Despite Agathon’s exceptional remarks about Eros, Socrates challenged Agathon’s characterization of Eros through utilization of Socratic Method.
I believe when Socrates mentions the soul or “psyche,” he means the soul is an ongoing entity that exists in a body; yet, the body is swayed by the opinions of other people. Socrates was a lover of wisdom and asked questions about the soul that was continuously seeking what the soul desired, not the body. The desire may have been answers, meaning, happiness, knowledge, or wisdom. The soul seeks knowledge for itself and reasons away from feelings and pains that the body feels. Socrates states, “The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance.”
Socrates in the dialogue Alcibiades written by Plato provides an argument as to why the self is the soul rather than the body. In this dialogue Alcibiades and Socrates get into a discussion on how to cultivate the self which they both mutually agree is the soul, and how to make the soul better by properly taking care of it. One way Socrates describes the relationship between the soul and the body is by analogy of user and instrument, the former being the entity which has the power to affect the latter. In this paper I will explain Socrates’ arguments on why the self is the soul and I will comment on what it means to cultivate it.
In Plato’s The Phaedo, Plato recounts Socrates’ last days. Socrates’ road to death leads him into an exchange of ideas about the concept of an afterlife. Socrates develops several arguments regarding the immortality of the soul. This was to prove that death is not the dying of body and soul jointly, but when the body dies the soul still exists. The weakest argument Socrates presents is The Argument of the Movement of Life and Death (70b-72a), which the soul is fixed and external.
