飨宴篇中的爱与理型世界

《飨宴篇》中的「爱」与

「理型世界」

2《飨宴篇》(TheSymposium)公认是是柏拉图对话录中，最受欢迎的一篇，因为在这篇对话录中，柏拉图处理的是有关「爱」的起源、目的与本质。在这一篇对话录中，「爱」这个议题，由七位人士分别针对「爱」(Eros)发言，并且经由发言的次序，展现深入讨论的层次感，最终符应了柏拉图的理型理念。3这七个人是：Phaedrus（柏拉图对话录中的对话角色）,Pausanias（法律专家）,Eryximachus（医生）,Aristophanes（有名的剧作家）,Agathon（主人与有名的剧作家）,SocratesandAlcibiades（知名的雅典公民，以俊美著称）。阅读《飨宴篇》之前，应当注意的几件事：4因为苏格拉底的另一位学生Xenophon也写过《飨宴篇》，其中Xenophon对于「性爱享受论」提出蔑视的态度。从这一点，可以说明，古希腊人对于性爱的态度并非一致，也非想象中那么「开放」。EROS不是性爱，而是神话故事中的一位神。这是饮酒作乐的场合，所以说出来的话，是少数对话录中不是以「对话」，而是以「演讲」的方式所进行的结果。这极有可能是一场虚构的故事，即使该飨宴发生的时间与地点皆清楚地注记出来。内容重点：5主人Agathon在公元前416年的酒神节，因为庆祝一篇剧作的成功演出，举办一场「飨宴」。在飨宴中，有人提议赞美爱。有七个人针对「爱」发表意见。这个「爱」，基本上是对于年轻男性所展现的「爱」。苏格拉底透过一个神媒(Diotima)对他所说的内容，发展欲、美、理型、永恒与不变的理念。柏拉图透过这一连串的对话，有意以形上学的理型，取代苏格拉底想要追求美的心理状态。我们的讨论：首先是Phaedrus6Phaedrus在一开始引用希腊神话，说Eros是最早的神，没有父母。因此，「爱」的唯一功用，就是引发他所爱的对象之仰慕。例如在战场中展现英勇的精神，如此赢得仰慕。这是战胜所有战争的关键，因为相爱的人，会为了爱，甚至牺牲性命亦在所不惜。Archilles就是一个例子。他为了替爱人Patroclus复仇，即使知道会牺牲也依然勇往直前。因此，爱是具有强大力量的神。7Pausanias跟着Phaedrus说，与爱结合的美，不是AphroditePandemos

(对于一般人的美)，因为这种美的对象，往往只是男生与女人。与美结合的爱，是AphroditeUrania

(天上的美),完全来自于男性，而且不包含任何含混。这种爱的对象通常是针对比较年长的男性。Pausanias认为有关对于同性恋的态度，各地不尽相同，但他特别提到雅典的法律，并认为不好理解。主要原因是，雅典的法律将同性恋中男孩首肯的理由做出具有道德意义的区分。为了金钱与权力而陷入同性之爱的行为，应予蔑视，而为了智慧与德行所作的，则无伤人性尊严。8Eryximachus从医学的眼光中说，爱是影响健康的内在因素，是幸福的来源，让人能够与高层的人、圣人、神结合在一起。9Aristophanes开始讲一个有关为什么爱让人觉得「圆满」的故事。早先人长的是两个身躯和在一起的样子，具有强大的力量，并有三种性别：男性、女性与雌雄同体(androgynous)。它们最终冒犯宙斯，所以遭天打雷劈，从中间分成两块，然后从背部缝起来，成为人。从此，人就到处找寻他的另一半，因为他们都想恢复原有的本质。10Agathon开始埋怨，所以直到他为止的演说，都是针对爱的特质，但是没有人针对爱神发表观点。他说，爱神是永远年轻的神，并且对抗老化，适合年轻的人。11Alcibiades直接向苏格拉底示爱，令苏觉得有些恐怖，还要求Alcibiades别因为他坐在Agathon旁边而生气。Alcibiades认为他直接用爱来说明苏格拉底，他就象是一具外表丑陋，但内部充满金像的雕像。他说，听见苏讲话时，他得灵魂发生悸动，改变生命的价值，并觉得惭愧。尤其是，当他认识苏的内心世界时，他觉得其灵魂展现只有神才会有的特质，令他立即信服，言听计从。当Alcibiades求爱失败时，他体认他必须作最好的人才能成功。为了达到这一点，他要苏格拉底能够帮助他、教导他。苏格拉底的回答是，如果他真的有用，他愿意以真实的印象与Alcibiades的俊美印象并列。但如果他没用，就帮不了忙了。Russellsays:12Whatisthedifferencebetween"knowledge"and''opinion"?Themanwhohasknowledgehasknowledgeofsomething,thatistosay,ofsomethingthatexists,forwhatdoesnotexistisnothing.(ThisisreminiscentofParmenides.)Thusknowledgeisinfallible,sinceitislogicallyimpossibleforittobemistaken.Butopinioncanbemistaken.Howcanthisbe?Opinioncannotbeofwhatisnot,forthatisimpossible;norofwhatis,forthenitwouldbeknowledge.Thereforeopinionmustbeofwhatbothisandisnot.Buthowisthispossible?Russellsays:13Theansweristhatparticularthingsalwayspartakeofoppositecharacters:whatisbeautifulisalso,insomerespects,ugly;whatisjustis,insomerespects,unjust;andsoon.Allparticularsensibleobjects,soPlatocontends,havethiscontradictorycharacter;theyarethusintermediatebetweenbeingandnot-being,andaresuitableasobjectsofopinion,butnotofknowledge."Butthosewhoseetheabsoluteandeternalandimmutablemaybesaidtoknow,andnottohaveopiniononly."飨宴篇--Diotima14MayIaskyoufurther,Whetherloveistheloveofsomethingorofnothing?Yetletmeaskyouonemorequestioninordertoillustratemymeaning:Isnotabrothertoberegardedessentiallyasabrotherofsomething?Andnow,saidSocrates,IwillaskaboutLove:—IsLoveofsomethingorofnothing?Ofsomething,surely,hereplied.Keepinmindwhatthisis,andtellmewhatIwanttoknow—whetherLovedesiresthatofwhichloveis.Anddoeshepossess,ordoeshenotpossess,thatwhichhelovesanddesires?Probablynot,Ishouldsay.Verygood.Wouldhewhoisgreat,desiretobegreat,orhewhoisstrong,desiretobestrong?No.飨宴篇--Diotima15True.Forhewhoisanythingcannotwanttobethatwhichheis?Verytrue.Then,saidSocrates,hedesiresthatwhathehasatpresentmaybepreservedtohiminthefuture,whichisequivalenttosayingthathedesiressomethingwhichisnon-existenttohim,andwhichasyethehasnotgot:Verytrue,hesaid.Thenheandeveryonewhodesires,desiresthatwhichhehasnotalready,andwhichisfutureandnotpresent,andwhichhehasnot,andisnot,andofwhichheisinwant;—thesearethesortofthingswhichloveanddesireseek?Verytrue,hesaid.16Thennow,saidSocrates,letusrecapitulatetheargument.First,isnotloveofsomething,andofsomethingtoowhichiswantingtoaman?Yes,hereplied.Andifthisistrue,Loveistheloveofbeautyandnotofdeformity?Heassented.AndtheadmissionhasbeenalreadymadethatLoveisofsomethingwhichamanwantsandhasnot?True,hesaid.ThenLovewantsandhasnotbeauty?Certainly,hereplied.Andwouldyoucallthatbeautifulwhichwantsanddoesnotpossessbeauty?Certainlynot.17Thenwouldyoustillsaythatloveisbeautiful?Isnotthegoodalsothebeautiful?Yes.Theninwantingthebeautiful,lovewantsalsothegood?Icannotrefuteyou,SocratesAndnow,takingmyleaveofyou,IwouldrehearseataleoflovewhichIheardfromDiotimaofMantineia.ImustspeakfirstofthebeingandnatureofLove,andthenofhisworks.1.FirstIsaidtoherinnearlythesamewordswhichheusedtome,thatLovewasamightygod,2.Lovewasneitherfairnorgood.‘Whatdoyoumean,Diotima,’Isaid,‘islovethenevilandfoul?’18Hush,’shecried;‘mustthatbefoulwhichisnotfair?’‘Certainly,’Isaid.‘Andisthatwhichisnotwise,ignorant?Doyounotseethatthereisameanbetweenwisdomandignorance?’‘Andwhatmaythatbe?’Isaid.‘Rightopinion,’shereplied;‘which,asyouknow,beingincapableofgivingareason,isnotknowledge(forhowcanknowledgebedevoidofreason?noragain,ignorance,forneithercanignoranceattainthetruth),butisclearlysomethingwhichisameanbetweenignoranceandwisdom.’‘Quitetrue,’Ireplied.‘Donottheninsist,’shesaid,‘thatwhatisnotfairisofnecessityfoul,orwhatisnotgoodevil;orinferthatbecauseloveisnotfairandgoodheisthereforefoulandevil;forheisinameanbetweenthem.’‘Well,’Isaid,‘Loveissurelyadmittedbyalltobeagreatgod.’‘Bythosewhoknoworbythosewhodonotknow?’19‘Byall.’‘Andhow,Socrates,’shesaidwithasmile,‘canLovebeacknowledgedtobeagreatgodbythosewhosaythatheisnotagodatall?’‘Andwhoarethey?’Isaid.‘YouandIaretwoofthem,’shereplied.‘Howcanthatbe?’Isaid.‘Itisquiteintelligible,’shereplied;‘foryouyourselfwouldacknowledgethatthegodsarehappyandfair—ofcourseyouwould—wouldyoudaretosaythatanygodwasnot?’‘Certainlynot,’Ireplied.‘Andyoumeanbythehappy,thosewhoarethepossessorsofthingsgoodorfair?’‘Yes.’‘AndyouadmittedthatLove,becausehewasinwant,desiresthosegoodandfairthingsofwhichheisinwant?’‘Yes,Idid.’20‘Buthowcanhe(Love)beagodwhohasnoportioninwhatiseithergoodorfair?’‘Impossible.’‘ThenyouseethatyoualsodenythedivinityofLove.’‘WhatthenisLove?’Iasked;‘Ishemortal?’‘No.’‘Whatthen?’‘Asintheformerinstance,heisneithermortalnorimmortal,butinameanbetweenthetwo.’‘Whatishe,Diotima?’‘Heisagreatspirit(daimon),andlikeallspiritsheisintermediatebetweenthedivineandthemortal.’‘Andwhat,’Isaid,‘ishispower?’21‘Heinterprets,’shereplied,‘betweengodsandmen,conveyingandtakingacrosstothegodstheprayersandsacrificesofmen,andtomenthecommandsandrepliesofthegods;heisthemediatorwhospansthechasmwhichdividesthem,andthereforeinhimallisboundtogether,andthroughhimtheartsoftheprophetandthepriest,theirsacrificesandmysteriesandcharms,andallprophecyandincantation,findtheirway.22ForGodminglesnotwithman;butthroughLovealltheintercourseandconverseofGodwithman,whetherawakeorasleep,iscarriedon.Thewisdomwhichunderstandsthisisspiritualallotherwisdom,suchasthatofartsandhandicrafts,ismeanandvulgar.Nowthesespiritsorintermediatepowersaremanyanddiverse,andoneofthemisLove.’23‘Andwho,’Isaid,‘washisfather,andwhohismother?’‘Thetale,’shesaid,‘willtaketime;neverthelessIwilltellyou.OnthebirthdayofAphroditetherewasafeastofthegods,atwhichthegodPorosorPlenty,whoisthesonofMetisorDiscretion,wasoneoftheguests.Whenthefeastwasover,PeniaorPoverty,asthemannerisonsuchoccasions,cameaboutthedoorstobeg.NowPlentywhowastheworsefornectar(therewasnowineinthosedays),wentintothegardenofZeusandfellintoaheavysleep,andPovertyconsideringherownstraitenedcircumstances,plottedtohaveachildbyhim,andaccordinglyshelaydownathissideandconceivedLove,whopartlybecauseheisnaturallyaloverofthebeautiful,andbecauseAphroditeisherselfbeautiful,andalsobecausehewasbornonherbirthday,isherfollowerandattendant.24Andashisparentageis,soalsoarehisfortunes.Inthefirstplaceheisalwayspoor,andanythingbuttenderandfair,asthemanyimaginehim;andheisroughandsqualid,andhasnoshoes,norahousetodwellin;onthebareearthexposedheliesundertheopenheaven,inthestreets,oratthedoorsofhouses,takinghisrest;andlikehismotherheisalwaysindistress.Likehisfathertoo,whomhealsopartlyresembles,heisalwaysplottingagainstthefairandgood;heisbold,enterprising,strong,amightyhunter,alwaysweavingsomeintrigueorother,keeninthepursuitofwisdom,fertileinresources;aphilosopheratalltimes,terribleasanenchanter,sorcerer,sophist.25Heisbynatureneithermortalnorimmortal,butaliveandflourishingatonemomentwhenheisinplenty,anddeadatanothermoment,andagainalivebyreasonofhisfather’snature.Butthatwhichisalwaysflowinginisalwaysflowingout,andsoheisneverinwantandneverinwealth;and,further,heisinameanbetweenignoranceandknowledge.Thetruthofthematteristhis:Nogodisaphilosopherorseekerafterwisdom,forheiswisealready;nordoesanymanwhoiswiseseekafterwisdom.Neitherdotheignorantseekafterwisdom.Forhereinistheevilofignorance,thathewhoisneithergoodnorwiseisneverthelesssatisfiedwithhimself:hehasnodesireforthatofwhichhefeelsnowant.’‘Butwhothen,Diotima,’Isaid,‘aretheloversofwisdom,iftheyareneitherthewisenorthefoolish?’26‘Achildmayanswerthatquestion,’shereplied;‘theyarethosewhoareinameanbetweenthetwo;Loveisoneofthem.Forwisdomisamostbeautifulthing,andLoveisofthebeautiful;andthereforeLoveisalsoaphilosopherorloverofwisdom,andbeingaloverofwisdomisinameanbetweenthewiseandtheignorant.Andofthistoohisbirthisthecause;forhisfatheriswealthyandwise,andhismotherpoorandfoolish.Such,mydearSocrates,isthenatureofthespiritLove.27Theerrorinyourconceptionofhimwasverynatural,andasIim