I found strange, and unsatisfactory, the Socratic argument that one
cannot love what one already possesses.
This argument makes me suspicious about Socrates’ theory of love. His
argument goes something like this.
Love is desire for what is loved.
It is necessary that desire is always of something of which one is in
need.
If one has something, it is no longer in need of it
Therefore, one cannot love something that one already possesses
Socrates says that (given the previous argument) if one thinks one
desires something already possessed, this is a kind of illusion that must be
given a temporal explanation. Socrates
says that if you are already in possession of something, what you want “is to
possess these things in time to come, since in the present, whether you want to
or not, you have them.” (200d) Therefore,
it is more appropriate to say, “I want the things I have now to be mine in the
future as well” (200d). According to
this theory, there seems to be a kind of odd temporal dimension to love. For the things we do not possess, we can desire now,
but for things we do possess, what we
desire is really some future
state. This temporal effect also seems
to have an impact on the metaphysics of what is loved. The referent of what is loved switches from
something actual to something possible, from an actuality to a
potentiality.
There does seem to be something intuitive to the claim that Love desires
to possess what is loved through time. It
would hardly be worth arguing that love desires what love possesses now also in
the future. But what seems unacceptable
is the notion that one cannot love what one possesses now, in this very
moment. If this is a result of the “love
is desire” thesis, then the worse for that thesis. If anyone has ever been in love, one knows
that the fullest joy of love is the very moment of loving and being loved in
return. In this moment, one does possess
what one loves, the beloved. Perhaps we
need to augment Socrates theory with something like “enjoyment”. That Love is the desire and enjoyment of what
is loved. Perhaps I’m way off base
here. I would be interested in
discussing this in class.
I don't think this aspect of the definition is the whole story, but I like the qualification about enjoyment.
ReplyDelete