This might account for traditions which placed the eponymous founder, Makedon, near Pieria and Olympus.
Literary form[ edit ] The Symposium is considered a dialogue — a form used by Plato in more than thirty works — but in fact it is predominantly a series of essay-like speeches from differing points of view.
With dialogue, Socrates is renowned for his dialectic, which is his ability to ask questions that encourage others to think deeply about what they care about, and articulate their ideas. In the Symposium the dialectic exists among the speeches: The characters and the settings are to some degree based on history, but they are not reports of events that actually occurred or words that were actually spoken.
There is no reason to think they were not composed entirely by Plato. The reader, understanding that Plato was not governed by the historical record, can read the Symposium, and ask why the author, Plato, arranged the story the way he did, and what he meant by including the various aspects of setting, composition, characters, and theme, etc.
It was thought that what Socrates said was what Plato agreed with or approved of. Then in the late 20th Century another interpretation began to challenge that idea. This new idea considers that the Symposium is intended to criticize Socrates, and his philosophy, and to reject certain aspects of his behavior.
It also considers that Socratic philosophy may have lost touch with the actual individual as it devoted itself to abstract principles.
Arieti suggests that it should be studied more as a drama, with a focus on character and actions, and less as an exploration of philosophical ideas. This suggests that the characters speak, as in a play, not as the author, but as themselves. This theory, Arieti has found, reveals how much each of the speakers of the Symposium resembles the god, Eros, that they each are describing.
It shows how an oral text may have no simple origin, and how it can be passed along by repeated tellings, and by different narrators, and how it can be sometimes verified, and sometimes corrupted. Apollodorus was not himself at the banquet, but he heard the story from Aristodemus, a man who was there.
Also, Apollodorus was able to confirm parts of the story with Socrates himself, who was one of the speakers at the banquet.
Dionysus is engaged to be the judge, and decides the outcome, not based on the merits of the two tragedians, but based on their political stance regarding the political figure, Alcibiades.
Since Aeschylus prefers Alcibiades, Dionysus declares Aeschylus the winner. That contest provides the basic structure on which the Symposium is modeled as a kind of sequel: In the Symposium Agathon has just celebrated a victory the day before, and is now hosting another kind of debate, this time it is between a tragedian, a comic poet, and Socrates.
So the character, Alcibiades, who was the deciding factor in the debate in The Frogs, becomes the judge in the Symposium, and he now rules in favor of Socrates, who had been attacked by Aristophanes in The Frogs.
The Symposium is a response to The Frogs, and shows Socrates winning not only over Aristophanes, who was the author of The Frogs, but also over the tragic poet who was portrayed in that comedy as the victor.
Hamilton remarks that Plato takes care to portray Alcibiades and Socrates and their relationship in a way that makes it clear that Socrates had not been a bad influence on Alcibiades. Plato does this to free his teacher from the guilt of corrupting the minds of prominent youths, which had in fact earned Socrates the death sentence in BC.
This section previews the story of the banquet, letting the reader know what to expect, and it provides information regarding the context and the date.
The banquet was hosted by the poet Agathon to celebrate his first victory in a dramatic competition: Apollodorus was not present at the event, which occurred when he was a boy, but he heard the story from Aristodemuswho was present.The Sophists (Ancient Greek) The sophists were itinerant professional teachers and intellectuals who frequented Athens and other Greek cities in the second half of the fifth century B.C.E.
until he was corrected on the point by Diotima's demonstration that Love A third mistake made by both Agathon and the young Socrates was to is in fact neutral between beauty and ugliness (e): assume that Love, the power which causes individuals to love, is a god.
Heidi Conejo 2/18/16 Comparing Speeches of the Symposium In "The Symposium" by Plato, speeches were made at a party by different speakers on their believed to be the definition of love. I will talk specifically, of two speeches made by Agathon and Socrates who had a similar idea to start with, but different ways of thinking.
The Symposium is a dialogue written by Plato (no later than B.C.) that discusses the events of a ‘symposium’ or a formal drinking party held in honor of Agathon in B.C., a tragedian who had just successfully produced his first victorious tragedy.
It was one of the rules which, above all others, made Doctor Franklin the most amiable of men in society, "never to contradict anybody." If he was urged to announce an opinion, he did it rather by asking questions, as if for information, or by suggesting doubts.
Agathon speaks next, giving an elaborate and flowery speech about Love, which he describes as young, sensitive, beautiful, and wise. All our virtues are gifts that we receive from this god. Socrates questions Agathon, doubting his speech and suggesting that Agathon has described the object of .