(posted by Prof. Cohen because of technical glitches)
Socrates Razzle-Dazzles ‘Em
When reading Symposium, you can never be sure who Plato is using for a mouthpiece. There are simply too many possibilities to narrow it down. However, by looking at the styles of presentation, you can guess which views on love are his favorites. At the very least, you can guess which are the most appealing to him. My personal guess is that the dialogue between Diotima and Socrates is one of his favorites, simply because it is so vastly different than the others.
Socrates’ dialogue explaining his view of love is interesting because it is, in fact, a dialogue. Up until this point, all the other opinions on love have been displayed through speeches. Plato turns Socrates into an entertainer, a showman, by having him switch up the literary styles. Socrates even sets the stage by engaging in a dialogue with Agathon before starting his own personal view. It is such a drastic change from the dry, straightforward speeches of his peers that Socrates immediately has our attention, drawing us in almost like a car salesman.
Also, the fact that Socrates does not have the role of the “teacher” in the dialogue is surprising. Socrates is usually portrayed as the sage that is trying to impart some piece of wisdom or understanding, so this is a complete role reversal. Not only that, but the “teacher” is a woman! To really appreciate the shock factor of this, you have to understand that in Ancient Greece women had next to no education and were generally dismissed as having very little importance. Additionally, almost every speech previous proclaimed the virtues of love between the minds and souls of men and denounced the base, carnal love between men and women. Socrates being taught about love by the woman Diotima is an incredibly drastic change that yet again brings more emphasis and attention to what view of love Socrates is trying to convey.
All in all, Plato turns Socrates into a showman-cum-salesman that greatly differs from the almost supercilious orators that came before him. The level of entertainment in the dialogue between Diotima and Socrates pretty much screams “Look at me,” drawing the attention of the readers. If Plato did not find at least some parts of that particular view appealing or interesting, he would not have used so many techniques to place a spotlight on it.
This makes me want to Plato a lot more than I have...which so far was that one time we had a joint class. I love the way you call this a "razzle dazzle" sort of dialogue. Not only is the dialogue unique in Socrates not being the "teacher", but the teacher is a woman! I would need to actually read it before making more conclusions, but this certainly has me intrigued.
ReplyDeleteIn relation to pragmatism, all I can think is that Plato and James follow similar lines. James is often breaking apart from the monotony of his peers essays by engaging the reader. Not only does he - the big flirt - often compliment the reader of being so much more advanced than others in the field of philosophy, he also tends to open up his essays in interesting ways. For example, in the first essay we read in Pragmatism "What Pragmatism Means", James opens the essay with a story of how some colleague were intrigued by a squirrel. Essentially, their predicament is if the squirrel is constantly about the tree in a circular motion as the man circles the tree in an attempt to see it, is the squirrel moving around the tree or around the man? Now granted the mere issue of a squirrel going around a tree may be pretty trivial, but it still grabs our attention, particularly because everyone's next question is "What does James think the answer is?!"
Yeap, definitely need to start reading more Plato.