{"id":6122,"date":"2015-04-29T21:54:20","date_gmt":"2015-04-29T21:54:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/?p=6122"},"modified":"2020-06-20T22:38:50","modified_gmt":"2020-06-20T22:38:50","slug":"the-greek-loves-agape","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/2015\/04\/the-greek-loves-agape\/","title":{"rendered":"The Greek Loves: Agape"},"content":{"rendered":"

PREFACE TO THE ARTICLES ON GREEK LOVES<\/strong><\/p>\n

The following article series on the Greek Loves has been crafted under the supreme influence of Irving Singer\u2019s The Nature of Love: Plato to Luther<\/em> (Random House 1966) and Gardner Fair\u2019s An Introductory Guide through Plato\u2019s Symposium<\/em> (Molloy College 2000). I am immensely indebted to both of these authors; Singer for his original division of the Greek loves, and Fair for his application of them to Plato\u2019s Symposium<\/em>. While I am in some ways quite close to these authors (in fact quoting them verbatim in places), my study also departs from their conclusions and assessments in\u00a0substantial and significant ways. All errors are of course my own.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cAnd so it appears that every lesser creature is too small a receptacle for that good which has no end and is its own measure.\u201d – Dante Alighieri, Paradiso<\/em>, canto XIX<\/p>\n

\u201cA fallen god is not a man: he is a fraud; the lover has no other alternative.\u201d – Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex<\/em>\u00a0p. 665<\/p>\n

\u201cI\u2019ve seen Plato\u2019s cups and table, but not his cup-ness and table-ness.\u201d\u00a0– Diogenes of Sinope,\u00a0Fragment<\/em>, GD 109<\/p>\n

By Ryan Smith<\/strong><\/p>\n

The first of the four Greek loves is agape<\/em>. This is the love found in the Homeric epics: The unapologetic love of the warrior; the love between Achilles and Patroclus. As a love that might befit a hero, agape<\/em> is eruptive, uncontrollable; an explosive force that indiscriminately draws in the object of its desire and everything else around it.[1] As a love with a considerable public element to it, agape<\/em> is always close to a carefree, jubilant, almost defiantly triumphant celebration of love and instinct.<\/p>\n

\"celebritytypes15FINISHED<\/a>Agape<\/em> is grand and death-defying; it is love as benevolent impulse, a love that is free of restraint. Love as agape<\/em> is love laying claim to everything else.[2] When Achilles loves, he loves, when he fights, he fights, and when he weeps, he weeps without abandon or excuse. It is a primeval love susceptible to \u201cstormy agitations,\u201d as Freud would have it.[3]<\/p>\n

Through its reckless, unchained manner and its blown-up bravura, agape<\/em> also has not just a passionate, but also a comic aspect to it; a feature that one might find collectively expressed in the spirit of the carnival where the rigid order of everyday life is suspended in favor of instinct, joy and the sheer, indiscriminate largesse of love. It is here we find agape<\/em> as relief: As a love that is cheerfully ironic as stability and order are thrown to the wind in ecstatic jubilee.<\/p>\n

It is therefore hardly a surprise that it is where we find the total abandon of both self-release and radical forgiveness, the annulment of all prior faults and value judgments, that we also find agape<\/em>: It flourishes where established rules are abandoned without taking stock of their raison d\u2019etre<\/em>.<\/p>\n

With its glorification of the sexual instinct as a force that has the power to sweep aside all else, agape<\/em> might be epitomized, somewhat paradoxically, as a love that cultivates the greed of giving<\/em>:[4] It is at once self-indulgent and a joyful bestowal upon the other. As such, agape<\/em> triumphantly disregards any notion of objective value and worth \u2013 it is a profoundly instinctual, egoic love.[5] As the carefree jubilee of love that it is, agape<\/em> excludes all notions of justice and worth from the love relation, reminding us again of the carnival: In the carnival, too, our conventional value judgments are dissolved as we give ourselves over to the reversal of roles<\/em> on the one day of the year where the commoner orders the nobleman about, the student instructs his teacher, the patient cures the doctor, and so forth.<\/p>\n

The arts, moreover, with their ill-defined rules for the measurement of quality, are also an area that could be said to naturally belong to the domain of agape<\/em>. And so the artist, who blithely shuns any mention of concentrated effort in favor of the sudden, audacious impulse that inspires his art, is found again to be practicing agape<\/em>. In working with his instinct, rather than with his intellect, the artist confronts us with a species of beauty that is not the result of introspective reasoning, but rather a manifestation of pure instinct and whim. Hence the artist possessed of agape<\/em> was exactly the artist whom Socrates had in mind when he spoke of the poet who \u201csays true things without knowing why.\u201d[6] In other words, agape<\/em> is a natural inclination (physis<\/em>) and not a wisdom that is attained over time (sophia \/ sophrosyne<\/em>).<\/p>\n

It is also through the radical nature of agape<\/em> and its disregard for objective standards of value that complex challenges may unapologetically be met with simplicity and naivete. Hence it was agape<\/em> at play when Columbus crushed the egg to make it stand. With this gesture, Columbus not only smashed the egg, but also the tyranny of the established \u201crules\u201d of physics. Such impersonal rules and standards are anathema to agape<\/em>, as they inhibit the creative impulses that are its lifeblood. Thus agape<\/em> revels and finds a glee in springing open the frame that others have set before it and asserting its ungovernable uniqueness in the face of rules that everyone had taken for granted. Agape<\/em> acts on the impetus of impulse and in that lack of reflection lies the potential to escape set means and bounds. It is therefore agape<\/em> that Schiller described when he talked about the mindset of the naive poet:<\/p>\n

\u201cI have called naive poetry a\u00a0favor of nature,<\/em>\u00a0in order to observe that reflection has no share in it. It is a happy toss, in need of no improvement, if it succeeds, but also capable of none, if it fails. The entire work of the na\u00efve genius is completed in feeling; here lies its strength and its limit.\u201d[7]<\/p>\n

Thus, to sum up so far, agape<\/em> is generally attuned to instinct and spontaneity; not argumentative, introspective, or rational, but mythopoetic, egoic, aesthetic, and aiming to change everything through unapologetic sweeping gestures that are carried out with abandon. Of good agape<\/em> we will therefore say that it is a type of love that has a fine nose for the aesthetic, being instinctually attuned to it. Good agape <\/em>begets a benevolent state of mind that is as forceful as it is joyous, revelling in the divine bestowal of the agape-<\/em>hero\u2019s love upon the other in a consummate celebration of life.<\/p>\n

As for bad agape<\/em>, on the other hand, we may say that the impulse-fuelled mindset of agape<\/em> is one that is perennially in danger of having its charming, joyous whims succumb to pure egoity as the benevolent hero turns to self-absorbed child. The naivete turns inconsiderate and the facility of joyful giving is perverted into the baser craving for recognition, reputation, and attention, as demonstrated in the actions of Achilles.[8]<\/p>\n

We close by pointing to two examples of agape<\/em> in philosophy: Diogenes and Foucault.<\/p>\n

Agape in Diogenes of Sinope<\/strong><\/p>\n

Diogenes of Sinope was also known as \u201chistory\u2019s first punk\u201d and \u201ca Socrates gone mad.\u201d In his time, he was known for his wanton deprecations of almost anyone who crossed his path.[9] In the actions of Diogenes, there was no room for compromise or fear. We might term him an \u201cequal opportunity offender,\u201d levelling insults at good-natured city dwellers and murderous autocrats alike.<\/p>\n

While Alexander\u2019s father, the rancorous Philip of Macedon, was marching on Greece, the Athenian Diogenes was captured behind enemy lines. Diogenes was taken before Philip and presented as an Athenian spy. Prompted to plead for his life, Diogenes answered him thus: \u201cI only crossed Macedonian lines because I wished to see how big a fool a king could be.\u201d[10] And upon seeing the fearlessness in his eyes, Philip let him go.<\/p>\n

Alexander, too, was once snubbed by Diogenes. Attempting to gain the cynic\u2019s favor, the king Alexander approached the lowly and poverty-stricken philosopher:<\/p>\n

\u201cAsk me any boon you like,\u201d said Alexander.
\n\u201cStep out of my sunlight,\u201d replied Diogenes.[11]<\/p>\n

Thus Diogenes conducted nothing less than a reversal of roles<\/em> on the mighty Macedonian kings. (And adding insult to injury, the house of Alexander identified itself with the sun.)[12] Just as the carnival reverses the order of everyday life, letting commoners pretend to be nobles and nobles descend to the order of subjects for a day, so agape<\/em> revels in sweeping aside all establishment. Thus, through each of these audiences with the lowly Diogenes, the mighty Macedonian kings were humbled and reduced to subjects, while the commoner Diogenes was exalted to the rank of king.<\/p>\n

Diogenes also had his bouts with Plato. Asked of Plato\u2019s philosophy, he remarked on the boredom that its \u201cendless conversation\u201d[13] instils, and with charm and naivete he appealed to the immediacy of the senses, saying that he had seen Plato\u2019s cups and table but not his cup-ness and table-ness.[14] Likewise, Diogenes is also reported to have disrupted one of Plato\u2019s lectures waiving a plucked chicken about at the seance while screaming \u201cTHIS IS PLATO\u2019S MAN!\u201d[15]<\/p>\n

Thus, Diogenes\u2019 refutation of Plato\u2019s philosophy was carried forward by the same mentality that made Columbus smash the egg to make it stand. While Diogenes was undoubtedly crueler than most agape<\/em> lovers, he nevertheless reveled in childlike transgressions, charming naivete, a turning of the tables and the reversal of roles<\/em>. Like Columbus, he upset a great amount of affectation by a small amount of whim.[16] His actions were\u00a0driven by impulse, spontaneity, and\u00a0the impetus\u00a0to escape set rules and value judgments.<\/p>\n

Agape in Foucault<\/strong><\/p>\n

Just like Diogenes sought to reverse our notions about ruler and ruled, subject and king, so Foucault tried to change our conventional perceptions of doctor and patient in Madness and Civilization<\/em>. \u201cWho is really mad,\u201d asks Foucault: \u201cThose we confine to asylums, or those who feel compelled to confine others?\u201d Like Diogenes, Foucault sought to liberate the marginalized and suppressed from the value judgments forced upon them by the doctors. Hence he wrote:\u201c[Is madness] inspiration or hallucination? A spontaneous babble of words, or the pure origins of language? Must [madness] be taken [i.e. defined] from the wretched truth of men, or [must it be] discovered beyond?\u201d[17] and: \u201cvan Gogh [did] not need to ask doctors’ permission to paint pictures.\u201d[18]<\/p>\n

Indeed with this work, Foucault sought not only to turn the tables on doctor and patient in a reversal of roles<\/em> but also to make the \u201cvolcanoes of madness [erupt to] destroy the oldest laws\u201d[19], that is, laws that shackle the suppressed and confine to a certain identity – these must all be transgressed in order to liberate the irrational genius from ‘beyond.’<\/p>\n

***<\/p>\n

Image in the article commissioned from artist Will Rosales.
\n<\/em><\/p>\n

\u2018GD\u2019 fragment ordering follows Guy Devenport\u2019s \u20187 Greeks.\u2019<\/em>\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

REFERENCES
\n<\/strong>Beauvoir: The Second Sex<\/em> Vintage Publishing 1997
\nDevenport: <\/span>7 Greeks<\/em> New Directions Publishing 1995
\n<\/span>Dudley: <\/span>A History of Cynicism<\/em> Mayo Press 2008
\n<\/span>Foucault: <\/span>Madness and Civilization<\/em> Routledge 1995
\n<\/span>Freud: <\/span>Civilization and Its Discontents<\/em> W.W. Norton & Company Inc. 1989
\n<\/span>Jung: <\/span>Symbols of Transformation<\/em> Routledge and Kegan Paul 1970
\n<\/span>Miller: <\/span>The Passion of Michel Foucault<\/em> Anchor Books 1993
\n<\/span>Singer: <\/span>The Nature of Love: Plato to Luther<\/em> Random House 1966<\/span><\/p>\n

NOTES<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

[1] Singer: The Nature of Love p. 285
\n[2] Singer: The Nature of Love p. 277
\n[3] Freud: Civilization and Its Discontents p. 57
\n[4] Singer: The Nature of Love p. 128
\n[5] Singer: The Nature of Love p. 295
\n[6] Plato: The Apology: 22ac
\n[7] Schiller: On Naive and Sentimental Poetry, part 2
\n[8] Singer: The Nature of Love p. 317
\n[9] Diogenes Laertius: Lives and Sayings of Eminent Philosophers, 6.54
\n[10] Diogenes of Sinope: Fragment GD 29
\n[11] Diogenes Laertius: Lives and Sayings of Eminent Philosophers 6.38
\n[12] Jung: Symbols of Transformation p. 194
\n[13] Diogenes of Sinope: Fragment GD 47
\n[14] Diogenes of Sinope: Fragment GD 109
\n[15] Diogenes Laertius: Lives and Sayings of Eminent Philosophers 6.6
\n[16] Dudley: A History of Cynicism: From Diogenes to the 6th Century A.D. p. 21
\n[17] Foucault: Madness and Civilization p. 286
\n[18] Foucault: Madness and Civilization p. 287
\n[19] Miller: The Passion of Michel Foucault p. 172<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

PREFACE TO THE ARTICLES ON GREEK LOVES The following article series on the Greek Loves has been crafted under the supreme influence of Irving Singer\u2019s The Nature of Love: Plato to Luther (Random House 1966) and Gardner Fair\u2019s An Introductory Guide through Plato\u2019s Symposium (Molloy College 2000). I am immensely indebted to both of these[\u2026] Continue Reading<\/i><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6122","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-psychology"],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6122","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6122"}],"version-history":[{"count":18,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6122\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6955,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6122\/revisions\/6955"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6122"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6122"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.idrlabs.com\/articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6122"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}