15.2 Socrates’ Encomium of Love

Last but not least, we hear from Socrates.[1]  He complains that he had thought the rules of the contest would involve ascribing true qualities to Love in an appropriate speech.  But, it turns out, the speakers felt free to say whatever sounded most favorable, whether true or not.  But Socrates will not play that game, but will try to give a true account of Love. 

            Socrates begins by asking whether love is a love of nothing or of something.  Of something, surely.  And love is a desire of something which one needs.  And love would be a desire for beauty?  Yes.  Then Love itself cannot be beautiful, since it has need of beauty.  And then, if beautiful things are good, Love will have need also of good things?  Yes.          

            At this point, Socrates recounts a speech by a wise woman from Mantinea, Diotima.  She is the one that taught Socrates that Love is not beautiful or good, since it seeks beauty and goodness.  So is Love ugly then? Socrates asks.  Diotima points out that things that lack beauty are not necessarily ugly, but may be found between beauty and ugliness, just as true judgment lies between knowledge and ignorance. 

            But how could Love be a god, if he lacks beauty and goodness? Socrates asks.  Love is found between the mortal and the immortal.  Diotima tells a myth about his birth.  Poros, “Resource,” was seduced by Penia, “Need” or “Poverty,” who became pregnant with Love.  As a result of his pedigree, Love is always needy, but resourceful.  Neither mortal nor immortal, neither ignorant nor wise, he seeks for what he lacks.  Philosophers in fact are those who love (philein) wisdom (sophia) because they lack it, and Love must be a philosopher. 

            Now the lover of beautiful things desires that they become his own, and ultimately he desires to be happy (eudaimōn).  People may seek happiness in different ways—through moneymaking, athletics, or study.  But desire for happiness is common to all humans, so that everyone desires the good.  So ultimately, everyone desires the good.  People want the good to be theirs, and not only that, but they want it to be theirs forever.   

            So what is the object of love?  It is “to give birth in beauty, both in body and soul.”  But what does that mean?  Here Diotima switches from a masculine to a feminine perspective: everyone is pregnant, both in body and soul.  When we come of age, we want to give birth.  In the presence of beauty they are able to do so.  What Love wants, to be precise, is give birth in beauty.  And because Love wants to the good forever, it seeks immortality. 

            Birth, that is, the natural process of childbearing, produces an offspring that is like the parent, but not identical with him or her.  Both in body and in soul the offspring is similar but distinct.  In this way, the mortal parent participates in immortality.  In the same way, a man who is pregnant in soul desires to share his wisdom with a young man, and thus to make his virtue immortal. 

            And now, it appears, Diotima has explained both biological reproduction and pedagogical bonding as instances of mortal beings pursuing immortality through love in the presence of beauty. 


[1] Plato Symposium 199c-212c.