Reflections after reading refers to reading a book, an article, a paragraph, a few famous quotes, a piece of music, and then writing an article based on the feelings and revelations obtained. Below is a sample review essay I compiled for the Symposium. You are welcome to share it. Thoughts after reading the Symposium Chapter 1
What is "love"?
People can generally tell a thing or two about this ancient but not obsolete topic. Maybe it’s love at first sight, maybe it’s the love of staying together forever, or maybe it’s the accumulation of emotions in ordinary life. In that era of ancient Greece, people had various views on what "love" was. In the book "Symposium", Phaedrus defines "love" in his first speech at the beginning. He believes that "love" is a kind of "character", which is the emotion shown by the loved person to the person who loves him, and this emotion will definitely "lead people to have virtue and blessing during life and after death."
What kind of "love" is "true love"?
Pausenius saw the loopholes in Phaedrus' definition of "love". He further added that there are two kinds of "love", one is "celestial" and the other is "love". The species is "of the people." According to Pausanias, if one party in love is keen on the other party's money, appearance or physical pleasure, although this can make him feel physically and mentally satisfied and blessed, this is not "true love" because This kind of emotion based on material form is "people's". This kind of love "will stop him no matter whether he is a friend or an enemy. The enemy will call him vulgar and cheap, and the friend will blame him and feel embarrassed for him."
According to Pausanias, true love is first of all the love between men, which is related to ancient Greece’s advocating for gay men and the low status of women. Secondly and most importantly, the object of love is not the body. Or the appendages of the body, such as money, appearance, official position, etc., but should be the "soul". Such a kind of love must be single-minded and will not fly away just because "the body of the loved one is like a flower withered", nor will "all the words and oaths made before be counted." True love must be " A lover should be diligent and kind to a partner who is obedient to him, and the lover should be obedient to the lover." At the same time, "the lover should wholeheartedly support his lover in terms of mental wisdom and other qualities, and the lover should be eager to receive this aspect. of discipline and the acquisition of other wisdom.” Only when "commitment" and "wisdom" are combined into one, such love is "true love".
"Love" should be controlled and coordinated
"It is a good thing to fall in love with a good person, but it is a bad thing to fall in love with a loose person", "Although it brings pleasure to people , but it will make people unrestrained." This is the speech made by Erichimachus as a doctor from a health perspective and an emotional perspective. At the same time, he also believes that "healthy" love should be coordinated with each other. , just like reconciling cold and heat, bitter and sweet, dry and wet, high pitch and low pitch, "making them produce a moderate intersection and blending of yin and yang". According to modern people's words, two people are complementary emotionally.
Our “lover”
Aristophanes told an interesting story in his speech. He said that in the beginning there were men and women. There are three genders, male and female, and they all have round bodies, but later they were split in half by Zeus because they believed in their strength and wanted to challenge the true god. So the two halves that were separated kept looking for and lost. The other half of Aristophanes is looking for the "lover" who should belong to him. From the above analysis, we can easily see that the object of Aristophanes' love focuses on the human body. Aristophanes' entire mythology emphasizes the body. From the splitting of the ball man's body to the tight embrace between him and his significant other, what his lover is looking for is the "person" who has always been dreaming about him, and is the "person" created by heaven, not this person. Something else, this is inconsistent with Socrates' view
Do we "love others" or love "what we love"
What is the object of love? Aristophanes and Socrates disagreed. Aristophanes believed that the essence of love lies in the embrace of individuality and the pursuit of our lost partner. Socrates believed that "eros lies entirely in the deep structure of oneself." "Operation in", long before the God of Love is preset to form a relationship with something and how to be in this relationship, he is destined to have an object. In Socrates' view, the object of love is goodness. It can be seen from this that Ali The love of Strophin is "loving our beloved", and the "love" of Socrates is "loving what we love". Socrates believes that the body of "lover" will eventually dissipate, and the "goodness" we love is. But it can exist eternally. This kind of "beauty" or "soul" is what we should pursue most.
The whole "Symposium" talks about "love God". It tells the story of "love", but when we read the dialogues of several (great) philosophers in the book, if we just think that this historical work is talking about the love between men and women or even the more "noble" love between men, then This understanding is too shallow.
In ancient Greece, in the era of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, all people who thought they were smart were pursuing the same thing—wisdom, which was recognized as the highest level at that time. Wisdom is political "knowledge", which involves the type of government, the construction of city-states, the governance of people in city-states, and other issues. In "The Symposium", the "good" Socrates talks about is to a large extent the kind of political "intellect" mentioned above. At the same time, we also know that in Plato's view, it is impossible for people to obtain complete wisdom, so the word philosophy means "pursuit of wisdom" and "love of wisdom". Therefore, so far, we can find that Socrates told us that there is such an eternal, immortal soul-like thing as "good", and Plato warned us that although this "good" is eternal, However, it is never a certain number. We need to keep chasing its footsteps. What we need is not to obtain a physical or physical "result", but to enjoy the process of pursuing our "love" , and this is the philosophy of "love".
However, this philosophy of "love" is still an "elite" advanced theory after all. We cannot expect ordinary people to read it and understand it, just like the people in Athens failed to understand Socrates and eventually sentenced him to death. Therefore, it is of urgent significance to present philosophy in the form of poetry rather than in the form of a collection of profound essays. Because the philosophical form in the traditional sense has no ability to persuade or attract the public, only by adopting an easy-to-understand poetry form may we be able to avoid the recurrence of Socratic tragedy again. This is why "Symposium" is better than "Symposium" Deeper reasons for better fit. Although there is some helplessness in compromising, it also respects the "public opinion" in a wider range and avoids the high-minded "self-admiration". After-reading the Symposium Chapter 2
In Plato's wonderful "Symposium", Apollodorus recounts the wonderful speeches made by everyone at the banquet when Aristodemus participated in the banquet, explaining it from simple to profound. It addresses the two major issues of "the nature of love" and "the impact of love on people". This chapter is not only easy to understand and fascinating, but also gradually reveals the hazy veil of the God of Love through everyone's praise of the God of Love - she is so broad and persistent; and at the end of Socrates' speech, he used the truth Telling everyone about it has also brought my understanding of love to a higher level - "Love is the immortal's hope for immortality." Of course, this kind of dialogue not only gave me a deeper understanding of love in philosophy, but also gave me a more relevant understanding of love in real life.
Agathon's banquet was so wonderful. It changed the boring atmosphere of drinking in the past and replaced it with praise to the God of Love. The participants at the symposium had the attitude of "all the talents have gathered together", and their impromptu speeches were endless and exciting. This somewhat made me impatient to recall those wonderful arguments.
The first person to sing praises to the God of Love was Phaedrus, the initiator of singing the praises of the God of Love. "He begins with the argument that love is a great god, equally miraculous to gods and humans." Why is it so "miraculous"? First of all, because "the God of Love has no parents" and "love is the oldest god", it is believed that love "is the source of all the highest happiness for human beings"; in addition, love can inspire people's extremely powerful enthusiasm and courage, even if God cannot Endless respect, because "love can make people sacrifice themselves to save the lives of others", this is true for people, and it is true for the undead, Achilles is an example. He concluded his argument by saying: "Love is the oldest god, the most glorious of the gods, the giver of all good deeds and happiness to mankind, both to the living and to the dead."
Phaedrus was followed by Mr. Pausanias. Although the previous speech would limit the scope and depth of the latter's speech, it could often serve as a critical model for the latter. Pausanias begins by criticizing the irrationality of Phaedrus's praise of the God of Love - because there is no distinction between different kinds of love. At least, in Pausania's view, love can be divided into heavenly love and underground love, and these two kinds of love represent nobleness and evil respectively. Underground Aphrodite - what we call underground love, is "a very worldly love that works in a random way." Because this kind of love pursues the satisfaction of lust, physical enjoyment, and even more despicably, it uses unscrupulous means to obtain money, power, and position. This kind of love is evil love. On the contrary, the heavenly Aphrodite, "her nature is entirely male", her love inspires people to pursue "strong and wise" men, that is, to pursue strength and wisdom, so this kind of love is noble . In addition, Pausanias mentioned the laws of Athens many times and constantly praised their superiority-"giving great freedom to those who love, not only allowed by mortals, but also recognized by the gods", but perhaps Give too much freedom, and base love will always exist alongside noble love. Therefore, he suggested: "Athenian law was formulated to make a clear distinction between love that should be encouraged and love that should be prohibited."
After Pausanias stopped, it was the respected doctor Eryximachus who spoke. Of course, "Three words should not be separated from the profession" - however, discussing it from a medical perspective can produce unexpected results. He believes that "the power of love is great, magical, and all-encompassing."
In order to discuss this point, he started from medicine - the desire of the human body includes two parts, "the desire for health is one thing, and the desire for disease is another thing", and "what medicine studies is desire", that is, "the study of What the body loves”, therefore, medicine is guided only by the god of love. Then, he extended Cupid to the fields of sports, agriculture, music, four seasons, biological health and reproduction, etc., to prove that "the power of love is complete, multifaceted, powerful, and even omnipotent." "Inclusive", but at the same time, he also believes that "its operation is just, temperate, and for the purpose of good", which is what he calls the "normative principle of love", thereby making nature harmonious and orderly. Combine and give all kinds of happiness to mankind.
Now it’s Aristophanes’ turn to speak, and I have to admit that his new angle of argument is refreshing. He said that there are three types of human beings - male, female, half-man and half-female. And the first people were half men and half women - "The first people were spherical, with round backs and sides, four arms and four legs, and two identical faces", "There were four Just ears and a pair of genitals.” However, the original humans were too ambitious - "They actually wanted to fly to heaven and rebel against the gods", so Zeus was very angry. In order to weaken humans without annihilating them all, he split humans in half. , eventually formed the current two genders of men and women. What a fascinating story! However, the following discussion is even more intoxicating. When a person is split in half, the person who is split in half misses his/her other half very much. Perhaps this is the origin of modern people's "other half". And "the so-called love" "is the pursuit of this original integrity" - finding one's other half and becoming one. "Love is the God who achieves this kind of merit and deserves our praise." He "makes us return to the original state and live in happiness and joy."
Tragedy poet, beautiful man - Agathon's praise makes people have to admire the gorgeousness of his language. The praise of love as God seems to have reached its peak. "First of all, Love is the youngest, secondly, he is the most delicate in the world, and thirdly, we also find him to be the most tender." At the same time, "Love is not only righteous, but also has complete self-control" and has extraordinary courage. . In the words of the beautiful man, we hear an almost perfect tribute to the God of Love.
From previous discussions, we have seen that the nature of love is so perfect, just, and full of courage. Love is all-encompassing and the source of all happiness and joy for human beings.
When things are almost perfect, there will often be a turning point, leading things to a new world.
And it was Socrates who created the miracle. In the simple dialectic of Socrates, we come closer to the nature of love, when he tells us that "first, love is the love of something; second, someone loves something for which he lacks." As for the nature and origin of love, the God of Love, as the product of the intercourse between the God of Resources and the God of Poverty, has both the poverty of his mother, the God of Poverty, and the "brave, bold, experienced and energetic" father of the God of Resources, and "he was born full of Desire, also very smart, pursuing wisdom throughout his life", so his existence is in an intermediate state - "will not be completely in poverty, nor will it be completely out of poverty; in an intermediate state between ignorance and wisdom"; at the same time, it is very important The most important point is that love is not the beloved, but the lover. The lover longs for happiness and goodness. She pursues beautiful souls, beautiful laws, systems, beautiful knowledge and wisdom, and even beauty itself. All these are what love lacks. However, "love is not the expectation of beauty itself, but the expectation of procreation under the influence of love", and the goal of procreation is immortality; but the most important immortality is the immortality of the soul, the immortality of wisdom and virtue, so Those spiritual products, whether they are poetry, law, or philosophy, can make people immortal. Therefore, "love is the hope of the immortal for the immortal." This is the influence of love on people. In short, Socrates' discussion is full of wisdom and philosophy. He told us three major questions: what is the nature of love, what is the object of love, and what impact does love have on people? They are worth thinking about.
I am amazed by Socrates' wonderful dialectics and high-level arguments. However, despite this, I still have a lot of doubts.
First of all, is the impact of love on people really "the immortal's hope for immortality"? Among them, he gave an example: King Cordus of Athens would rather sacrifice himself to preserve the unborn heir to the throne. He analyzed that the reason for doing so was to gain immortal wisdom.
I am full of doubts about such examples. It seems that love is the driver of utilitarianism, which makes people willing to give up their lives in pursuit of utilitarianism. When people are called prisoners of utilitarianism in love, they will do whatever it takes to achieve utilitarianism. Such love is still worth it. Shall we sing praises? In my opinion, love at least has a selfless side. From the perspective of God, knowing that everything created by God comes from God, then, although all gods are not perfect, I think there are always God can have a selfless spirit! Then there will be people who have a selfless spirit! Then people will naturally have selfless love, and selfless love does not matter the pursuit of decay or immortality; if poets write poems simply to leave a name in history, and do not include cultivating their own sentiments, then why do they still Will there be poets who live in seclusion in the mountains and forests and continue to write poems? If dramatists write plays for the sake of immortality, rather than out of a selfless love for drama, then why do dramatists continue to write after writing amazing scripts and achieving the goal of immortality? It can be seen that love can also make people selfless and indifferent to fame and fortune. I don't object to love making people long for immortality, but love can also make people ignore mortality and immortality.
Then, Socrates believed that "the object of someone's love is what he lacks." Again, I'm skeptical. There are two reasons. First, the object someone loves is not necessarily what he lacks. We know that people have the bad habit of greed. When a person possesses a lot of wealth, he will still try to get more wealth, but in fact, he is not short of wealth; when a person has three wives and four concubines, he still wants to Possess more beauties. I don’t think I need to give examples of such people. Anyone with common sense will admit this. So, what someone loves is not necessarily what he lacks. Second, the object of love does not even matter whether it is lacking or not lacking. A person loves rivers and mountains, but can you say that he lacks these? A person loves thinking and debating, just like Socrates, but can you say that he lacks these things? I believe that love is to satisfy one's own desires, and the object of love can realize one's desires. People who love mountains and rivers can broaden their minds or relax their body and mind after enjoying the mountains and rivers; people who love thinking and debating can satisfy the pleasure of indulging in thinking and debating through thinking and debating; poets can make themselves happy physically and mentally by writing poems, and dramatists can make themselves happy by writing poems. Writing can fulfill the desire for self-expression and self-realization.
Finally, I would like to return to the question of the nature of love. The nature of love, related to the speakers before Socrates, is almost one version per person. Some people say "love has no parents", others say "love has two in heaven and on earth", and some say that love is a combination of poor gods and There are various sayings about the son of the resource God. Of course, they serve their own discussion. Whose discussion is the most reasonable, then who said the essence of the God of Love. There is no single ** for such essence and source. It is really unconvincing for everyone to say different things based on the same knowledge base.
Here, I would like to reiterate that I am still full of admiration for Socrates, although I have many doubts. I hope that my doubts are unnecessary, and I also hope that these doubts will disappear through in-depth reading. Thoughts after reading the Symposium Chapter 3
Original intention and action: The outcome of each action depends on how it is implemented, not its original intention. Because selfish intentions may also bring about good results. It is said that one should not judge one’s heart based on one’s deeds. Since one’s mind cannot be guessed, it is obviously more fair to judge by results.
Love and Gender Relationship: Originally, human beings were a sphere and were divided into three types: men, women and hermaphrodites (half man and half woman). Fearing that the gods were threatened, Zeus split the orbs in two. Therefore, in order to become one with the other part of the past self, a person spends his life looking for his other half, and whether this other half is the same sex or the opposite sex depends on whether he was originally a man, a woman, or an intersex person.
Learning: When we say we are learning, what we really mean is that our knowledge is dying. Because our knowledge disappears, we say we have forgotten, and we must supplement the forgotten knowledge through learning so that our knowledge status looks the same as before. (It seems easy to overturn now. People are not born wise.)
Discussion on love:
Love is the child of the God of poverty and the God of resources. Because he was born on the wedding day of Venus, he was a follower of Venus, the goddess of beauty.
Love hopes that good will always be his own good.
Wisdom is the most beautiful of things, and love takes beautiful things as the object of his love. Therefore, love must be a lover of wisdom.
Love pursues truth, goodness and beauty.