IN PLATO’S IMAGE“Who then, Diotima,” I asked, “are the lovers of wisdom, if they are
neither the wise nor the ignorant?”
“Why, a child could tell by this time,” she answered, “that they are
the intermediate sort, and amongst these also is Eros. For wisdom has
to do with the fairest things, and Eros is a love directed to what is fair;
so that Eros must needs be a friend of wisdom, and, as such, must be
between wise and ignorant.” (204a– b)^11Eros, in his capacity as lover of wisdom, that is, in his capacity as phi-
losopher, is of the intermediate type between wisdom and ignorance.
If Socrates is a philosopher, and there is plenty of evidence in this
dialogue (and others) that Socrates loves wisdom and the beautiful
but does not possess them, then we ought to take note that Diotima’s
method of teaching Socrates about eros is through an image: the ladder
of ascent. The language here, however, would seem to preclude reading
Diotima’s speech as simply a method of ascent that was, strictly speak-
ing, recommended and possible for humans. The language is consis-
tent with a view of humans as fundamentally limited, and Diotima puts
forward philosophy as the practice reserved for those who love wisdom
and the beautiful, but who do not possess them. Furthermore, Socrates,
the lover of wisdom, who claims to have learned much from the wisdom
of Diotima, learned fi rst from question and answer and then from the
beautiful image she created for him.^12
An even more compelling image in the Symposium is drawn by
Aristophanes, and this image tells the story of human incompleteness
(189c– 191d). Long ago, we were beings which we would now consider
“double,” with four legs and four arms, two sets of genitals, and two
faces, joined together back to back. Each such being exhibited great
strength, vigor, and joy. We were, in that state, complete. These beings
had such “lofty notions” that they “conspired against the gods,” schem-
ing to assault them in “high heaven.” So, in anger the gods split these
beings asunder, ensuring that forever they would be doomed to seek
their other halves for completeness. As Drew Hyland describes this sym-
bolic representation of human limitation, we are consequently “bound
to strive to overcome that incompleteness we experience.”^13
Like the Symposium, the Phaedrus also tells the tale of erotic im-
pulses toward wisdom. It is further linked to the Symposium insofar as it
contains a myth that has many similarities to Diotima’s ladder. The story
and image of the charioteer, like Diotima’s ladder, tells the tale of the
lover ascending to the heights. Oddly enough, though, the Phaedrus also
relies on recollection and so has important links to the Phaedo. Socrates
begins his story of the charioteer by saying that he cannot give a direct
account of the nature of the soul, but will instead provide an image.