TMTKI V- Where is the Love?

  Hopefully it's easier to find than a new post from TMTKI, because they've been pretty sparse of late (whoops).  I come to you today at the beginning of a new semester here in beautiful (and unseasonably hot) Steubenville, Ohio, and the philosophical juices are really starting to flow after nearly running dry during the dog days of summer that seemingly scorched both the earth and my mind (neither of these actually happened, but that does sound poetic or something).  One of my classes this semester is called "Person and Love," and we seem to have really hit the ground running (or philosophizing?) while discussing one of Plato's timeless dialogues- Symposium.  I have found very thought-provoking philosophical fodder in this work, and I would like to share with you some of the highlights of both the class discussion and my own ponderings.
  In Symposium, Plato, speaking through Socrates, gives an account of love that may be startling and offensive to some at first glance, as he begins by deriding the idea of love and claiming that because it is based on desire for the beauty of another thing, there is a lack of beauty or goodness necessarily implied in the lover.  He goes onto to soften his position a bit, saying that love is merely an in-between, almost purgatorial state of being characterized by the striving towards goodness, truth, and beauty, but also an incompletion and brokenness that goes along with being an imperfect creature.  It is noted that love/desire can lead man both to a seeking of the highest goods (wisdom/truth) and a wallowing in base pleasures (sensuality, hedonism) to fill the void of his existence, and that it is in need of cultivation.  Plato does admit that beauty can be concretized in the world of the senses and should be recognized there when possible, but there is an overriding air of skepticism towards the flesh, the "prison-house of the soul."  As some of you may know, Plato was really into the ideal forms, and found them to be much more worthy of love and contemplation than things given to the senses.  I would suggest reading the dialogue if you have any interest in this topic, as I have given it merely the sketchiest of outlines and focused only on the parts of the dialogue that touch on areas that I wish to discuss.
  Two things (for now) strike me as problematic in Plato's theory of love as given in Symposium.  Firstly, a theory of love based on the desire to unite oneself with or possess beautiful things (or beauty itself) because of an inherent lack in oneself leaves me somewhat cold.  I believe a theory of love based on lack is radically insufficient to explain many types of love.  In fact, I would even go so far as to say that this type of love ought to apply to very few things, especially not to the love of wisdom (philosophy) that Plato holds in such high esteem.  It seems that the only types of love that are truly based on a lack, or a poverty, are those that stem from extreme physical needs such as hunger/thirst, sickness, etc.  I do not wish to say that food/drink and health are only desired for survival purposes, but I think everyone can agree that a person who is starving will desire food more than a person who just finished a hot dog eating contest.  This being said, I think one could argue that the person who loves food the most is the one who recognizes its full value (aesthetic, flavor, healthiness, etc.)  and not just the fact that it will satiate hunger.  This is why I believe a theory of love based on lack is woefully insufficient.  To me, love is based on the goodness and value of an object primarily, not a lack in the lover.  This is not to say that lack has nothing to do with love, as I think that a very lovable thing will be sought more intensely if one has not experienced it before or enough.  However, the idea that lack is at the heart of love is, in my view, misguided primarily because it takes a circumstance that can intensify love and sets it up as the a priori grounding of it.
  A second, perhaps more modern (philosophically speaking) concern is the effect that a lack-theory of love has on the potential for self-love.  It seems ridiculous to say that one loves oneself due to a lack or even a desire for oneself.  The fact of the matter is that one is one's own self, and that there is never a lack of oneself in one's own life.  Perhaps this was not a concern of Plato, but unless he wants to deny the existence of self-love, I do not see how it could fit into his lack-based conception of love.    
        
Peace be with you,
  William

CUFC- "Noni's Field" by Anathallo is always a tune I find myself going back to for inspiration and enjoyment.