Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ο ερωτας στον πλάτωνα
ο ερωτας στον πλάτωνα
B·Û›Ï˘ K¿ÏÊ·˜
K·ıËÁËÙ‹˜ AÚ¯·›·˜ ºÈÏÔÛÔÊ›·˜
TÌ‹Ì· ºÈÏÔÛÔÊ›·˜-¶·È‰·ÁˆÁÈ΋˜
AÚÈÛÙÔÙ¤ÏÂÈÔ ¶·ÓÂÈÛÙ‹ÌÈÔ £ÂÛÛ·ÏÔӛ΢
H ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊÈ΋ Û‡ÏÏË„Ë ÙÔ˘ ¤ÚˆÙ· ÍÂÎÈÓ¿ ·fi ÙÔÓ ¶Ï¿ÙˆÓ· Î·È Û˘Ó¯›˙ÂÙ·È Û fiÏË ÙË Ì·ÎÚ·›ˆÓË Ï·ÙˆÓÈ΋ ·Ú¿-
‰ÔÛË Ì¤¯ÚÈ ÙÔÓ ¶ÏˆÙ›ÓÔ. O ¶Ï¿ÙˆÓ ı· ·ÊÈÂÚÒÛÂÈ ‰‡Ô ·fi ÙÔ˘˜ ˆÚ·ÈfiÙÂÚÔ˘˜ ‰È·ÏfiÁÔ˘˜ ÙÔ˘ ÛÙÔÓ ¤ÚˆÙ· –ÙÔ
™˘ÌfiÛÈÔ Î·È ÙÔÓ º·›‰ÚÔ–, ÂÓÒ ÙÔ ÌÔÙ›‚Ô ÙÔ˘ ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊÈÎÔ‡ ¤ÚˆÙ· ‰È·ÙÚ¤¯ÂÈ ÙÔ ¤ÚÁÔ ÙÔ˘ ·fi ÙÔÓ ÚÒÈÌÔ X·ÚÌ›‰Ë,
fiÔ˘ Ë ·ÚÂÙ‹ Ù˘ ÛˆÊÚÔÛ‡Ó˘ ÂÈÛ¿ÁÂÙ·È ˆ˜ ÙÔ ·ÓÙ›ıÂÙÔ Ù˘ ÂÚˆÙÈ΋˜ ¿ÎÚ·Ù˘ ÔÚÌ‹˜, ̤¯ÚÈ ÙËÓ ‡ÛÙÂÚË 7Ë EÈ-
ÛÙÔÏ‹. O ¶Ï¿ÙˆÓ ÂÓۈ̷ÙÒÓÂÈ ÙÔÓ ¤ÚˆÙ· ÛÙË ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊ›· ÙÔ˘, ·ÍÈÔÔÈÒÓÙ·˜ Î·È ÌÂÙ·Û¯ËÌ·Ù›˙ÔÓÙ·˜, fiˆ˜ Û˘ÓËı›-
˙ÂÈ, ÔÈΛϘ ÚÔ¸¿Ú¯Ô˘Û˜ Ì˘ıÔÏÔÁÈΤ˜ Î·È ÔÈËÙÈΤ˜ ÂÈÎfiÓ˜ ÙÔ˘ ¤ÚˆÙ·. T·˘ÙÔ¯ÚfiÓˆ˜, Ë Ï·ÙˆÓÈ΋ ·ÓÙ›ÏË„Ë
ÙÔ˘ ¤ÚˆÙ· Â›Ó·È ¤Ó· ‰ÈÂÈÛ‰˘ÙÈÎfi Û¯fiÏÈÔ ÛÙËÓ ÙÚ¤¯Ô˘Û· ÂÚˆÙÈ΋ Ú·ÎÙÈ΋ Ù˘ ÂÔ¯‹˜ ÙÔ˘. TË ıÂÌ·ÙÈ΋ ·˘Ù‹ ÌÔÚ›
Ó· ÙËÓ ·Ú·ÎÔÏÔ˘ı‹ÛÂÈ Ô ·Ó·ÁÓÒÛÙ˘ ÛÙÔ˘˜ ÏfiÁÔ˘˜ ÙˆÓ Û˘Ó‰·ÈÙ˘ÌfiÓˆÓ ÙÔ‡ ™ˆÎÚ¿ÙË ÛÙÔ ™˘ÌfiÛÈÔ, Ì ··Ú·›-
ÙËÙÔ ‚Ô‹ıËÌ· ÙË ÌÓËÌÂÈÒ‰Ë ¤Î‰ÔÛË ÙÔ˘ ™˘ÎÔ˘ÙÚ‹.1
˙‹ÙËÛË, Ô ‰ËÌÈÔ˘ÚÁÈÎfi˜ ‰È¿ÏÔÁÔ˜, ̤۷ ·fi ÙÔÓ ÔÔ›Ô Ë Ó¤· Eros in Plato
ÁÂÓÈ¿ ÙˆÓ Ì·ıËÙÒÓ ‚Ú›ÛÎÂÈ ÙÔ ‰ÚfiÌÔ Ù˘. ∂›Ó·È ¯·Ú·ÎÙËÚÈ- Vassilis Kalfas
ÛÙÈÎfi fiÙÈ ÌÂÙ¿ ÙÔÓ ¶Ï¿ÙˆÓ·, ÌÔÏÔÓfiÙÈ ÙÔ ÂÚˆÙÈÎfi ÛÙÔȯ›Ô
‰ÂÓ ÚÔ‚¿ÏÏÂÙ·È Ï¤ÔÓ Ì ÙËÓ ›‰È· ¤ÓÙ·ÛË, Ë ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊÈ΋ The article attempts to outline the Platonic conception of
̇ËÛË ÛÙÔÓ ·Ú¯·›Ô ÎfiÛÌÔ Á›ÓÂÙ·È ¿ÓÙÔÙ ‰›Ï· Û ¤Ó·Ó ‰¿- Eros (physical love/sexual desire) as a philosophical no-
ÛηÏÔ ‹ ÛÙÔ ÂÛˆÙÂÚÈÎfi ÌÈ·˜ ÊÈÏÔÛÔÊÈ΋˜ Û¯ÔÏ‹˜. tion. Whenever Eros is pictured in the Presocratic thought
(Hesiod, Parmenides, Empedocles), it personifies the power
or reason that puts in motion all elements of the universe.
Plato, however, will assign a different and radically new role
to Eros: being the most powerful and complex human de-
sire, Eros functions as an unexpected inner ally to our
course to real philosophy. The erotic attraction begins as
an irrational passion, however it has the potential to be
transformed to a kind of divine mania that drives man to
the union with ideas. In the Symposium, both in Diotima’s
speech and in Alcibiades’s intervention, Eros is identified
with the philosopher, the “friend” (=philos) of wisdom
(=sophia), and with Socrates in particular. Also in Phae-
drus, the privileged relation of Eros to Beautiful opens up
an earthly perspective towards ideas. Philosophy is de-
fined as a live communication between souls, the soul of
the lover-teacher and the soul of the beloved-disciple. If
philosophy is a learning procedure that preconditions two
unequal poles, the teacher and the disciple, then the erot-
ic conversation is the human activity closer to this ideal.