Was socrates gay

On the one hand, Plato is often considered the first feminist in ancient philosophy. While he is no prude, Socrates is as self-controlled as Gandhi and as rigid in his ethics as St. Paul. In the dialogue called Gorgias, Socrates declares that he is against all kinds of excessive sexual acts, and in Plato's main work, The State, Socrates even rejects all kinds of physical contact as some sort of unbridled behavior: the good lover treats his beloved one as a father treats his son.

But would it be correct to say that Platonic love is the same as the love described by Plato in Symposium and Phaedrus? Aeschylus in the tragedy Myrmidons made Achilles the erastes since he had avenged his lover's death even though the gods told him it would cost his own life. A notable complexity lies in the variations and developments in his ideas across different texts. For instance, the construction of the cosmos is addressed differently in Phaedrus and Timaeuswith each dialogue offering a distinct perspective.

So, what is going on? She describes love as a dynamic force that begins with physical attraction to a beautiful body but gradually transcends it. Moreover, the speech of Diotima is presented through the speech of Socrates, so it complicates the distinction even further. Diotima challenges the notion of love as merely the desire of the other body.

Plato's Socrates' adherence to (that strict and austere) reason as guiding the polis, leaves no room for passion and eros, except as some form of duty to the city's needs and as platonic love. To avoid ambiguity, I will refer to Plato and Socrates interchangeably as in this context there seem to be no relevant differences and to Diotima separately. Sexual conduct is not for him as it is for his contemporaries were socrates gay what he can get away with, but about what he can justifiably do.

Almost everyone mentions how great male homosexuality is, especially between older and younger men, and there's an awesome speech about how straight, gay and lesbian orientations were caused by the gods messing with a three gender system. The main query is whether Plato believed that womentoo, could reach the Form of Beauty through exercising love eros. Aeschylus in the tragedy Myrmidons made Achilles the erastes since he had avenged his lover's death even though the gods told him it would cost his own life.

And engaging in homosexual relationships, regardless of the context, didn’t exactly denote one as “gay” in the way we would think of gay people today. So it’s not a misunderstanding, exactly, to think of the Ancient Greeks as gay—more that there’s additional context needed to describe Ancient Greek conceptualization of same-sex.

Unlike some other topics, on the topic of love Plato appears to be consistentso the most natural approach would be to consider these works as complementary. In the Platonism revival of the Florentine Renaissance, the high-minded picture of Platonic/Socratic love focused on the spiritual and intellectual perfection of the beloved, but in an alternative ancient tradition Socrates was presented as a sexual enthusiast, with a penchant for attractive boys.

Moreover, it argues that homosexual love, even though explicitly discussed by Plato, is not the only suitable interpretation, but it is also can be stretched to accommodate heterosexual relations. The answer is no. If men and women are to be regarded as equal intellectually and spiritually then the highest form of love is to be reachable for females in heterosexual relations too.

A key challenge in interpreting Plato is determining whether his dialogues should be read as independent works or as a cohesive body of thought. It is true that the discussion on love in both texts is filled with either neutral or homosexual examples. Many scholars while referring to the apparent emphasis on same-sex male relations conclude that the highest stage of eros —reaching the Form of Beauty— is only possible for males and only through homosexual love.

On the other, if we were to look only at the apparent meaning in the texts of the Symposium and Phaedrus we would get an impression that women are not like men. They are not mentioned to be able to go beyond bodily love to the love of the soul. Almost everyone mentions how great male homosexuality is, especially between older and younger men, and there's an awesome speech about how straight, gay and lesbian orientations were caused by the gods messing with a three gender system.

Other ancients such as Socrates argued in Xenophon 's Symposium that Achilles and Patroclus were simply close friends. The ultimate goal is the contemplation of the Form of Beauty itself —pure, eternal, and unchanging—leading the soul to its was socrates gayest fulfilment. In the dialogue called Gorgias, Socrates declares that he is against all kinds of excessive sexual acts, and in Plato's main work, The State, Socrates even rejects all kinds of physical contact as some sort of unbridled behavior: the good lover treats his beloved one as a father treats his son.

Contrasting him with Aristotle who clearly represents women as interior, Plato, in his turn, takes the view which is quite progressive for his time Smith,pp. In the Platonism revival of the Florentine Renaissance, the high-minded picture of Platonic/Socratic love focused on the spiritual and intellectual perfection of the beloved, but in an alternative ancient tradition Socrates was presented as a sexual enthusiast, with a penchant for attractive boys.

Other ancients such as Socrates argued in Xenophon 's Symposium that Achilles and Patroclus were simply close friends. Love as a gift from god, he suggests, is not merely an erotic pursuit but a means of guiding the soul towards something nonmaterial and perfect. Socrates initially argues that love is a kind of madness that leads to irrationality, but he later changes his flow of reasoning, presenting a higher view in which love, when properly directed, acts as a divine force that elevates the soul towards truth and the eternal realm of the Forms.

With this said, here are the two questions we are going to try to answer in this essay 1 are women also capable of achieving this highest form of fulfilment through love and 2 is the same fulfilment possible through heterosexual relations? In his Republic book V, he clearly states that women and men are both capable of being philosopher-kings and ruling the state.