Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
[Socrates is not alone in failing to understand Diotima’s teaching at this point. If Diotima’s suggestion of continuity between sexual desire and desire for the good has perplexed scholars, even more disconcerting has been her abrupt abandonment of “the good” and return to beauty. Are “good” and “beauty” no more than different names for the same thing? Do the two categories overlap with some things both beautiful and good, and others beautiful but not good, or good but not beautiful? Is it a question of genus and species with the “good” the more general category and “beauty,” along with virtue and justice, one of the concepts that fall under it? But even stranger than mixing beauty with good has seemed the introduction of generative language. “Bringing forth,” “τóкoς,” a word referring both to the birth and the siring of children, both to the reproductive act and its resulting offspring, to desire and action? Was Plato confused, putting words into Socrates’s mouth that make no sense? 1]
Published: Dec 1, 2015
Keywords: Sexual Desire; Small Thing; Physical Beauty; Erotic Arousal; Erotic Desire
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.