How can we benefit by reflecting on Four Platonic Dialogues on Love: Lysis, Alcibiades, Symposium, and Phaedrus? How similar are they? Was it possible for men and women, and husbands and wives, to be friends in ancient Greece and Rome? Did the Platonic dialogues on love condone or encourage homosexuality […]
All ancient cultures were warrior cultures, out of necessity. War was a deadly business, if an ancient city-state lost the war the city would be plundered, often the military age men would be slain, and the women and children would be sold into slavery. In ancient Athens, a quarter of the population were slaves, and in ancient Rome about forty percent of the population were slaves. Most of these slaves were either born into slavery or were captured during war, some were captured and sold by pirates. […]
Socrates wants his students to think for themselves, so we cannot assume that Socrates really believes that virtue cannot be taught. After all, at the end of the dialogue, Socrates asserts that true knowledge leads to virtue. Perhaps he seeks to dissuade the youths in Athens from studying under the Sophists, who claim to be able to teach anything, for a fee, a generous fee, of course.
What example comes to mind if we assert that virtue can be taught? We need to go no further than the Book of Judges, which is filled with horrible stories that atheists love to parade as proof that God is not a loving god. We must keep in mind the constant theme of the Book of Judges: Everyone in Israel did what was right IN HIS OWN EYES. Which is the slogan of the Sophists. […]
Protagoras begins one of his works with “Man is the measure of all things, of things that are, that they are, and of things that are not, that they are not.”
The ancient author Sextus Empiricus also quotes this fragment, continuing the quote from Protagoras: “And for this reason he posits only what appears to the individual, thus introducing relativity.” “What Protagoras states then is this–that matter is in flux,” “and the senses are transformed and altered according to the times of life and to all other conditions of the bodies.” […]
Warfare is mentioned over three hundred times in the Old Testament, swords four hundred times. Ancient Israel was caught in many of the ancient wars since it was in the cross-roads of trade routes between Mesopotamia and Egypt. Since Judah was mountainous, its armies relied heavily on infantry, but the Bible mentions that King Ahab of the Northern Kingdom had chariots, and that he was felled by arrow probably shot by a composite bow. Assyria and Babylon had cavalry archers on horseback, but not Egypt or Israel. An Israeli chariot had three horses pulling three men, a driver with a spear, an archer, and a shield bearer. We know from our Sunday School stores King David slew Goliath with a sling, but the ancient slings were not the puny toys we imagine, the sling in the ancient world was a deadly combat weapon. A skilled slinger could sling a rock over 120 miles per hour, faster than the fastest fast ball. […]
The Greek innovation to ancient warfare was their hoplite warrior phalanx, a formation eight to ten rows of a hundred or more warriors, sometimes extending a quarter of a mile. The shields of the front row would interlock, and the entire formation would press upon the enemy, the soldiers would first throw their spears then jab with their swords from behind their shields, strictly maintaining their position. This required training and practice, the Athenians expected their nobles to drill during the year, the Spartans had a year-round military the practiced year-round. […]
The Greeks were the most formidable fighting force in the Near East. The mighty Persian empire loaded their army on ships to fight what they thought would be an easy victory, but were decisively defeated by Athens and Sparta and their allies both on land and on sea in two separate wars. This established the reputation of the Greeks, later a Persian prince, Cyrus the Younger, hired a Greek hoplite infantry army to fight for the crown of Persia. The Greeks dominated the battle, but Cyrus was killed in the fighting. Losing their patron, the Greeks were forced to fight their way through the Persian Empire back to the Black Sea and then to Greece. This showed that the mighty Persians were vulnerable, later Alexander the Great of Macedon would conquer all of Persia and some of India also.
The Greeks may have been the founders of Western Civilization, but they were first and foremost a warrior society. If the Greeks weren’t formidable warriors they would have been conquered by the mighty Persian Empire, which means that there would be no Socrates, no Plato, no Xenophon, the Greeks would not have been able to leave us a cultural legacy. […]
In antiquity through the Renaissance, Alcibiades I was a highly regarded Platonic dialogue, and was often the first dialogue serious students of philosophy studied. However, many modern scholars deprecate this dialogue, arguing that it was not written by Plato. We demur, we tend to side with the ancient, medieval, and Renaissance scholars in such judgments, who tend to be inclusive, whereas modern scholars tend to be exclusive, demanding absolute certainty of proof. Our translator agrees with us, he says that the German scholar Schleiermacher first doubted its authenticity based on scholarly taste and a superficial reading. IMHO, although it does appear to differ from his other earlier dialogues, Alcibiades I was likely either written by Plato, or maybe by one of his brightest students, with his input. […]
SOCRATES asks whether “only good men can be friends with one another? Can true friendship exist between a bad man and either a good man or another bad man?” (214d) The response of St John of the Cross would likely be that friendship with a bad man will draw you further away from the Love of God, poisoning your soul, leading you away from salvation. Friendship with a good man leads you to love and compassion, friendship with a bad men leads you to hatred and cruelty. […]
In his memorable metaphor for the nature of the soul, Socrates describes “a pair of winged horses and a charioteer. Now the winged horses and the charioteers of the gods are all of them noble and of noble descent, but those of other races are mixed; the human charioteer drives his in a pair; and one of them is noble and of noble breed, and the other is ignoble and of ignoble breed; and the driving of them of necessity gives a great deal of trouble to him.” […]
Copyright 2017
