The Ladder of Love: Plato's Symposium

by PhilosophyToons

Platonic Relationship

A platonic relationship is a close friendship between two individuals without sexual or romantic involvement ¹². The term "platonic" comes from the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, who wrote about different types of love in his works ¹. Plato believed that love could be divided into two categories: physical and spiritual ³. He believed that physical love was inferior to spiritual love, which he considered to be the highest form of love ³. Platonic love was one of the types of spiritual love that Plato wrote about, and he believed that it could bring individuals closer to a sacred ideal ³.

In modern times, the term "platonic relationship" is used to describe a relationship that is based on deep love for another person, but lacks romantic or sexual aspects ¹. The relationship is based on emotional connections and mutual interests, without any sexual or romantic involvement ⁴. 

Platonic relationships can be formed between people of any gender and sexual orientation ¹. They can be very fulfilling and provide a sense of companionship and support without the complications of romantic relationships .

Source: Conversation with Bing, 26/10/2023

(1) What Is a Platonic Relationship? - Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-platonic-relationship-5185281.

(2) What Is A Platonic Relationship? - Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/what-is-a-platonic-relationship.html.

(3) What It Means to Have Platonic Love - Psych Central. https://psychcentral.com/relationships/platonic-relationship.

(4) 6 Types of Relationships and Their Effect on Your Life - Verywell Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/6-types-of-relationships-and-their-effect-on-your-life-5209431.

 

What Is the 'Ladder of Love' in Plato's 'Symposium'?

Please see below for an article by Professor Emrys Westacott on Plato's Ladder of Love:

The "ladder of love" occurs in the text Symposium (c. 385-370 BC) by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato. It's about a contest at a men's banquet, involving impromptu philosophical speeches in praise of Eros, the Greek god of love and sexual desire. Socrates summarized the speeches of five of the guests and then recounted the teachings of a priestess, Diotima. The ladder is a metaphor for the ascent a lover might make from purely physical attraction to something beautiful, as a beautiful body, the lowest rung, to actual contemplation of the Form of Beauty itself.

Diotima maps out the stages in this ascent in terms of what sort of beautiful thing the lover desires and is drawn toward.

1. A particular beautiful body. This is the starting point, when love, which by definition is a desire for something we don’t have, is first aroused by the sight of individual beauty.
2. All beautiful bodies. According to standard Platonic doctrine, all beautiful bodies share something in common, something the lover eventually comes to recognize. When he does recognize this, he moves beyond a passion for any particular body.
3. Beautiful souls. Next, the lover comes to realize that spiritual and moral beauty matters much more than physical beauty. So he will now yearn for the sort of interaction with noble characters that will help him become a better person.
4. Beautiful laws and institutions. These are created by good people (beautiful souls) and are the conditions which foster moral beauty.
5. The beauty of knowledge. The lover turns his attention to all kinds of knowledge, but particularly, in the end to philosophical understanding. (Although the reason for this turn isn’t stated, it is presumably because philosophical wisdom is what underpins good laws and institutions.)
6. Beauty itself – that is, the Form of the Beautiful. This is described as "an everlasting loveliness which neither comes nor goes, which neither flowers nor fades." It is the very essence of beauty, "subsisting of itself and by itself in an eternal oneness." And every particular beautiful thing is beautiful because of its connection to this Form.  The lover who has ascended the ladder apprehends the Form of Beauty in a kind of vision or revelation, not through words or in the way that other sorts of more ordinary knowledge are known.

Diotima tells Socrates that if he ever reached the highest rung on the ladder and contemplated the Form of Beauty, he would never again be seduced by the physical attractions of beautiful youths. Nothing could make life more worth living than enjoying this sort of vision. Because the Form of Beauty is perfect, it will inspire perfect virtue in those who contemplate it.

This account of the ladder of love is the source for the familiar notion of "Platonic love," by which is meant the sort of love that is not expressed through sexual relations. The description of the ascent can be viewed as an account of sublimation, the process of transforming one sort of impulse into another, usually, one that is viewed as "higher" or more valuable. In this instance, the sexual desire for a beautiful body becomes sublimated into a desire for philosophical understanding and insight.

Citation: Westacott, Emrys. "What Is the 'Ladder of Love' in Plato's 'Symposium'?" ThoughtCo, Aug. 28, 2020, thoughtco.com/platos-ladder-of-love-2670661.

Plato's Theory of Forms

 

Plato’s Theory of Forms: Key Concepts

from PHILO-notes

Theory of Forms

Plato's theory of forms is a philosophical idea that suggests there are two realms of existence: the visible world and the intelligible world. The visible world is the one we perceive with our senses, and it is full of changing and imperfect things. The intelligible world is the one we access with our reason, and it is composed of eternal and perfect forms. These forms are the essences or ideals of everything that exists in the visible world, such as beauty, justice, goodness, etc. Plato believed that the forms are the only true objects of knowledge, and that we can only approach them through rational inquiry.

One way to illustrate Plato's theory of forms is by using his famous allegory of the cave¹. Imagine a group of prisoners who have been chained in a dark cave since birth. They can only see the shadows of objects projected on the wall by a fire behind them. They think that these shadows are the reality, and they have no idea that there is a world outside the cave. One day, one of the prisoners escapes and sees the real objects that cast the shadows. He also sees the sun, which is the source of light and truth. He returns to the cave and tries to tell his fellow prisoners what he has seen, but they do not believe him and think he is crazy.

Plato used this allegory to show that most people are like the prisoners in the cave, who only see the appearances of things and not their true forms. They are deceived by their senses and opinions, and they do not seek the higher knowledge that comes from reason. Only a few people, like the escaped prisoner, are able to free themselves from their ignorance and reach the intelligible world, where they can contemplate the forms. These people are the philosophers, who Plato considered to be the best rulers for a just society.

I hope this gives you a brief overview of Plato's theory of forms. If you want to learn more about it, you can read some of his dialogues that discuss it, such as Phaedo, Symposium, Republic, or Timaeus. You can also check out some of these links for more information:

• [Theory of forms - Wikipedia]: A detailed article on Plato's theory of forms, with references and sources.

• [Plato's Theory of Forms | Definition, Examples & Analysis - Perlego]: A study guide on Plato's theory of forms, with examples and analysis.

• [Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and Theory of the Forms Explained]: A simple explanation of Plato's allegory of the cave and theory of the forms.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 26/10/2023

(1) Theory of forms - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_forms.

(2) Plato's Theory of Forms | Definition, Examples & Analysis - Perlego. 

https://www.perlego.com/knowledge/study-guides/what-is-platos-theory-of-forms/

(3) Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and Theory of the Forms Explained.

https://factmyth.com/platos-allegory-of-the-cave-and-theory-of-the-forms-explained/

Political Discussion and Philosophical Discussion

Aspasia Conversing with Socrates and Alcibiades

Introduction

Political discussion is about the issues that affect how a society is run, such as laws, policies, rights, etc. It uses evidence, facts, logic, and consequences to persuade or influence others.

Philosophical discussion is about the questions that affect how we understand ourselves and the world, such as ethics, metaphysics, epistemology, etc. It uses analysis, intuition, experiments, and dialectics to clarify or seek the truth.

Political and philosophical discussions can overlap and interact with each other, especially in political philosophy, which deals with the fundamental questions about politics.

Political Discussion

For professional politicians, the motive of political discussion or debate is often about influencing voters and winning votes.

For ordinary people, the reasons for engaging in political discussion or debate are more varied and could range from simply pride to a genuine wish to share ideas and knowledge.

Philosophical Discussion

The following are some features of philosophical discussion from my personal perspective:

1.  Backed by reasons

A philosophical argument should have proper premises and logic so that the argument would be sound. 

2.  It's important

Philosophical discussion should be about important questions.  Whether a question is important or not probably depends on the values a person holds. 

Philosophers often wish to look at the more basic or fundamental questions.  So if a particular issue is based on certain premises, these premises lead to more basic questions.  These basic or fundamental questions are often considered more important by philosophers as they affect a range of issues.

3.  A neutral perspective 

A philosopher should attempt to consider the issue from a neutral perspective similar to what a judge would do when considering a legal case.  The philosopher should avoid being emotionally involved in either side of the argument.

4.  The Platonic world of philosophical ideas

In Professor Roger Penrose's "Three Worlds" model, the timeless and universal mathematical truth belongs in the Platonic  mathematical world.  Similarly we can imagine a Platonic philosophical world where timeless and universal philosophical truth belongs.  The ideas (or truth) that philosophers aim to grasp would be in this Platonic philosophical world.  

This diagram shows a particular way of looking at the differences between philosophical and political discussion, and also about the differences between fact and truth, and between reality and the physical world:  

Political vs Philosophical Discussion

Some suggestions

The following are some suggestions for philosophical discourse:

• Expect people to disagree with us because people are different and have different opinions.

• Expect people to tell you that you are wrong because that is what people do.

• Expect some people to laugh at our ideas because it is said "Low level scholars hear Dao, laugh loudly."[1]

• Do not try to convince others by debating or by using reasons, because: 
• people generally do not change their minds because they lost the debate or have been overwhelmed by reasons; and
• people often decide first before coming up with reasons and arguments to justify their decisions.  So when you debate with them and show them that they are illogical and insufficient in their reasoning, they get upset but would not change their minds. They will try to come up with better reasons; and
• One can learn more by listening and asking questions than by debating; and
• Laozi said "To teach without words, rarely anything can compare" [2]; and 
• Zhuanzi says all theories and opinions are equal [3].

• Do not simply repeat what others said.

• There are times for silence, times for theorising, and times for discussion.  Zhuanzi said "As to what is beyond the Six Realms,[4] the sage admits it exists but does not theorise. As to what is within the Six Realms, he theorises but does not discuss. In the case of the Spring and Autumn,[5] the record of the former kings of past ages, the sage discusses but does not debate. " [6]

References:

1. Chapter 41, Daodejing.
2. Chapter 43, Daodejing.
3. Section 1, Chapter 2, Zhuangzi.  In this section of chapter 2, Zhuangzi uses the allegory of the huge tree that has many hollows and openings, and they make different sounds when the wind blows.  Humans are like the different hollows and openings.  We are all different.  Human theories and opinions are like the sounds of the hollows and openings of the huge tree.  They sound different, but they are all caused by the wind which represents Dao.  All theories and opinions are equal because they react to the same basic cause -- Dao.  However, for practical purposes, some theories and opinions are correct and some are not.  For philosophical discussion though, we are not dealing with practical issues.  Therefore, all theories and opinions can be said to be equal.
4. Heaven, earth, and the four directions, that is, the universe.  The "Six Realms" can be interpreted as the "Six Harmonies" or the "Six Togetherness".  In Daodejing, chapter two, it says "Being and non-being create each other; difficult and easy support each other; long and short define each other; high and low depend on each other; musical notes and tones harmonise with each other, before and after follow each other."  Laozi gives these six situations as examples of how humans group things together and at the same time differentiate them.  Humans create this concept of length and then differentiate long and short.  While long and short are different, they define each other.  Long poles have their use, and short sticks also have their use.  Therefore, the Six Realms can be interpreted as the different situations that we interact with the world around us.
5. Perhaps a reference to the Spring and Autumn Annals, a history of the state of Lu said to have been compiled by Confucius. But it may be a generic term referring to the chronicles of the various feudal states.
6. Burton Watson has a slightly different translation: "As to what is within the Six Realms, he theorises but does not debate. In the case of the Spring and Autumn, the record of the former kings of past ages, the sage debate but does not discriminate."  Note that in debate, the aim is generally to influence the opinions of the debating judges, voters, juries, or judges in courts.  Philosophers aim to find truth and knowledge; so they should not debate.  The Socratic method is a form of argumentative dialogue called dialectic. Dialectic is different from debate in that dialectic is to search for truth and debate is to influence people.   For both translations, Zhuangzi believes that the sage does not theorise about things beyond the Six Realms.  These might be beliefs about what happens after death, about heaven and hell.  For things within the Six Realms, the sage listens and learns and theorises.  In the case of practical issues (which the Spring and Autumn, the record of the former kings of past ages presumably implies),  The first translation in the text above would say Zhuanzi believes the sage discuss practical issues with others but does not try to influence others using debate.  For Watson's translation, Zhuangzi believes the sage would debate with others but does not discriminate which side of the argument is better, similar to dialectic.

Exploring the mental world of the 3 worlds model

 

Are Brain and Mind the Same Thing? | Episode 1005 | Closer To Truth

The 3 Worlds and the 3 Mysteries

The 3 worlds, and the interactions between the 3 worlds, are mysterious.  The video above explores the question "Are the brain and mind the same thing?".  That is a question about the mind, which is the mental world, and the brain, which is part of the physical world.  

The video above discusses the possibility that the mind is an illusion.  If so, what roles do the physical world and the platonic mathematical world play in forming this illusion?

Are the 3 worlds real and do they exist in reality or in our imagination? 

Some more questions on the 3 worlds might be:

• What is the physical world really like and how does it come into existence?
• Am I my mind, my brain or my body?
• How does consciousness come about?
• If there is no physical world, and therefore no mental world, does the platonic mathematical world still exist? 

Does the Platonic Mathematical World exist independently?

The following is an answer from Bing/ChatGBT to the last question above.

There is no definitive answer to it, but I will try to give you some possible perspectives based on the information I found.

One perspective is that the Platonic mathematical world is independent of the physical and mental worlds, and therefore would still exist even if they did not. This is based on the idea that mathematical entities are abstract objects, which are asserted to exist in a third realm distinct from both the sensible external world and from the internal world of consciousness². According to this view, mathematical entities are not affected by any mental or physical activities of human beings, and they have their own intrinsic properties and relations that are discovered by reason. For example, a platonist might assert that the number pi exists outside of space and time and has the characteristics it does regardless of any mental or physical activities of human beings².

Another perspective is that the Platonic mathematical world is dependent on the mental world, and therefore would not exist without it. This is based on the idea that mathematical entities are products of human imagination, creativity, and intuition, and that they have no objective existence outside of our minds. According to this view, mathematical entities are not discovered by reason, but invented by human beings to describe and understand the physical world. For example, a non-platonist might argue that the number pi is a useful concept that we have created to measure the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter, but it has no reality beyond our minds.

A third perspective is that the Platonic mathematical world is dependent on the physical world, and therefore would not exist without it. This is based on the idea that mathematical entities are reflections of the geometry of fundamental spacetime, which supports non-computational thinking. According to this view, mathematical entities are not abstract objects, but concrete structures that are embedded in the fabric of reality. For example, a Penrose-Lucas argument might suggest that the Platonic mathematical world corresponds to the geometry of fundamental spacetime that is claimed to support non-computational thinking³.

These are just some possible perspectives on your question, and there may be others that I have not considered. I hope this helps you to explore this fascinating topic further. 😊

Source: Conversation with Bing, 02/10/2023

(1) Platonism, Mathematical | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://iep.utm.edu/mathplat/.

(2) Penrose–Lucas argument - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose%E2%80%93Lucas_argument.

(3) Platonism - Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonism.

(4) Plato’s mathematics - PlanetMath.org. https://planetmath.org/platosmathematics.

Roger Penrose - 3 Worlds and 3 Mysteries

 

This post is a continuation of the previous post on the topic suggested by marian.

On Roger Penrose

Please see Wikipedia page on Roger Penrose - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose

The 3 Worlds and 3 Mysteries

Symposium: the Road to Reality (22.01.2019), part II - Sir Roger Penrose
UvA Institute for Advanced Study

The 3 Worlds

According to Roger Penrose, the three worlds in his "Three Worlds and Three Mysteries" framework are as follows¹²³:

1. **The Physical World**: This world encompasses objects that exist physically, such as rocks, tables, and humans. It represents the realm of our everyday experiences¹.

2. **The Mental World**: The mental world extends beyond the physical and includes entities that are not physically present. Emotions like anger, which do not manifest themselves in a physical form, are examples of elements found in this world¹.

3. **The Platonic Mathematical World**: The Platonic mathematical world is the most contentious of the three worlds. It refers to mathematical entities that exist outside space and time, being eternal and unchanging.  For instance, a perfect square resides in this world¹.

These three worlds raise intriguing questions about how we perceive and understand reality¹. Penrose suggests that they are interconnected, forming a single unified world, but our understanding of this world remains limited³.

Please note that these descriptions are based on Penrose's framework and may require further exploration for a comprehensive understanding.

Source: Conversation with Bing, 28/09/2023

(1) Three worlds, three mysteries | Rationalising The Universe. https://rationalisingtheuniverse.org/2018/03/27/three-worlds-three-mysteries/.

(2) Penrose's Three Mysteries - Peaceful Science. https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/penroses-three-mysteries/8557.

(3) The theory of the three worlds (Penrose) | Hans Rudolf Straub. https://hrstraub.ch/en/the-theory-of-the-three-worlds-penrose/.

The 3 Mysteries

According to Roger Penrose, a renowned physicist and mathematician, there are three mysteries that arise from the interaction of three different worlds: the physical, the mental, and the Platonic mathematical³. The three mysteries are:

• How can the Platonic mathematical world, which consists of abstract and eternal entities, influence the physical world, which is made of concrete and temporal objects? For example, how can the laws of physics be described by precise mathematical equations?
• How can the physical world, which is governed by deterministic and objective laws, give rise to the mental world, which is characterised by subjective and free experiences? For example, how can the brain, which is composed of neurons and molecules, produce consciousness and thoughts?
• How can the mental world, which is dependent on individual perceptions and opinions, access the Platonic mathematical world, which is independent of any human mind? For example, how can humans discover and invent mathematical truths that are universal and unchanging?

Source: Conversation with Bing, 28/09/2023

(1) Penrose's Three Mysteries - Peaceful Science. https://bing.com/search?q=roger+penrose+3+worlds+and+3+mysteries.

(2) Three worlds, three mysteries | Rationalising The Universe. https://rationalisingtheuniverse.org/2018/03/27/three-worlds-three-mysteries/.

(3) The theory of the three worlds (Penrose) | Hans Rudolf Straub. https://hrstraub.ch/en/the-theory-of-the-three-worlds-penrose/.

(4) Penrose's Three Mysteries - Peaceful Science. https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/penroses-three-mysteries/8557.

Some alternative frameworks 

Roger Penrose’s “Three Worlds and Three Mysteries” framework is one way to conceptualise reality. However, there are other concepts and theories that attempt to explain reality from different perspectives. Here are a few alternatives:

• Idealism: Idealism is the belief that reality is a mental construct, and everything we perceive is a product of our minds. (For more information, see Wikipedia.) 
• Platonic Idealism: The Platonic ideal is the perfect, absolute, and eternal Forms. Everything in the natural world is derived from the Forms but only as an imitation or impression of those Forms. Everything is born from the Realm of the Forms and returns back there after death. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_forms)
• Materialism is a philosophical view that asserts that all facts are causally dependent upon physical processes or even reducible to them. It suggests that the world consists entirely of material objects. (For more information, see https://www.britannica.com/topic/materialism-philosophy)
• Physicalism is closely related to materialism and has evolved from it with advancements in the physical sciences. It explains observed phenomena using concepts from the physical sciences. The terms "physicalism" and "materialism" are often used interchangeably, but they can be distinguished based on their philosophical implications. (For more information, see: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• Dualism most commonly refers to: Mind–body dualism, a philosophical view which holds that mental phenomena are, at least in certain respects, not physical phenomena, or that the mind and the body are distinct and separable from one another. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind%E2%80%93body_dualism)
• Daodejing ch.25 has some discussions that may be relevant.  https://philosophyphorphun.blogspot.com/2023/05/daodejing-chapter-twenty-five.html

ANU's document on the Indigenous Voice

Contribution from Linda

The following link to the Australian National University's website on the Indigenous Voice was sent in by Linda.  

ANU website - responding to concerns about the Indigenous Voice

You can also download a more colourful document from the site.

https://www.anu.edu.au/files/corporate_message/Aboriginal%20and%20Torres%20Strait%20Islander%20Voice-FINAL-PRINT.pdf

The information on this website provides answers to many of the Why questions that I had raised in class. Click Here for the Jamboard of why questions.

The Indigenous Voice - Contribution from marian

Contribution from marian

How much sway should be put on the First People's statement itself - namely the Uluru statement.

Sorry I can't be part of the face to face...

marian

ULURU STATEMENT FROM THE HEART

We, gathered at the 2017 National Constitutional Convention, coming from all points of the southern sky, make this statement from the heart:

Our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tribes were the first sovereign Nations of the Australian continent and its adjacent islands, and possessed it under our own laws and customs. This our ancestors did, according to the reckoning of our culture, from the Creation, according to the common law from ‘time immemorial’, and according to science more than 60,000 years ago.

This sovereignty is a spiritual notion: the ancestral tie between the land, or ‘mother nature’, and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were born therefrom, remain attached thereto, and must one day return thither to be united with our ancestors. This link is the basis of the ownership of the soil, or better, of sovereignty. It has never been ceded or extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown.

How could it be otherwise? That peoples possessed a land for sixty millennia and this sacred link disappears from world history in merely the last two hundred years?

With substantive constitutional change and structural reform, we believe this ancient sovereignty can shine through as a fuller expression of Australia’s nationhood.

Proportionally, we are the most incarcerated people on the planet. We are not an innately criminal people. Our children are aliened from their families at unprecedented rates. This cannot be because we have no love for them. And our youth languish in detention in obscene numbers. They should be our hope for the future.

These dimensions of our crisis tell plainly the structural nature of our problem. This is the torment of our powerlessness.

We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.

We call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.

Makarrata is the culmination of our agenda: the coming together after a struggle. It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.

We seek a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making between governments and First Nations and truth-telling about our history.

In 1967 we were counted, in 2017 we seek to be heard. We leave base camp and start our trek across this vast country. We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

Reference: https://voice.gov.au/about-voice/uluru-statement