Introduction
The concept of kalokagathia was highly important to Ancient Greek society. It went beyond the traditional aspects of beauty and status that is seen in modern-day society, it was a holistic philosophy. The word encapsulates an individual that is both utmost beauty and absolute goodness. It was an ideal state of being that could be reached through a combination of luck (one does not choose to whom or as whom one is born, lineage), hard work, and persistence. This paper will strive to explore the varying descriptions in literature on kalokagathia from scholars of the era, Socrates, Homer, and Euripides to determine changes in across time and perspectives on the topic in Ancient Greek culture.
Background
First, it is necessary to offer a basic definition and description of kalokagathia. Coming from the words kalos (outward beauty, noble) and agathos (honesty, goodness, worthy of admiration, the term representing a teaching and social state which embraces the philosophy of being whole and evolved. Being kalokagathia meant striving to perfection across three disciplines. One must have had physical beauty and strength, achieved either by athletics or military training. One must have had moral goodness, which combined religious virtuosity and intellect achieved by academic training. Finally, there is the idea of high social standing, which combines lineage with civic participation in the polis. By all accounts only men could be kalokagathia since women did not have access to many of the aspects necessary.
Socrates’ Perspective
In Plato’s Symposium, Socrates takes the position of challenging the notion of Plato’s coextension that what is beautiful is good, and what is good is beautiful. Socrates realizes that having good may not come from beautiful things, therefore they must be distinct in properties. Instead, there is a difference with the erotic desire not necessary being of the good, but concerned with beauty that is physically present, lust (Plato 203c, 204b). Socrates is perplexed in connecting beauty (kalon) to the good. These values hold different roles in explaining erotic desire, and different psychological registers. From an erotic standpoint, what is beautiful does not need to appear good from an ethical standpoint. Even though beauty is a concept of attractive appearance described in phenomenological terms, it is not the appearance of good. While the good is an object of rational deliberation and judgment, kalon is usually referred to as short-term desire, working independently of such concepts as goodness, but through the use of sensory attraction. Kalon inspires pursuits of intense passion, with high-risk actions which are not good in nature, but their purpose is unclear (Fine 14). Therefore, the primary lesson as emphasized by Socrates is that what appears beautiful is not necessarily viewed as good.
Homer’s Perspective
In Homer’s Illiad, the concept of beauty is best represented by the characters of Helen and Paris. Helen is described extremely beautiful, very charmful, seemingly frail, but with a powerful complex character. She was compared to a goddess, “Terrible is the likeness of her face to immortal goddesses” (Homer 3.158). Meanwhile, Paris was young and described as handsome, viewed as the most attractive man in Troy, while also being a ruling prince and highly intelligent.
Both are initially seen as virtuous and the exact definition of what one would describe as kalokagathia. However, in the Illiad, Helen falls in love with Paris and leaves her husband run away with the young prince to Troy, sparking the Trojan Wars and eventual downfall of Troy. It is here, that it can be argued that Homer agrees with Socrates, that kalon and virtue are not one of the same.
Both Paris and Helen are consumed by their passions, disregarding any rational or virtuous action. Helen commits betrayal while Paris is inconsiderable to the outcomes of his actions on his kingdom. He is self-obsessed and becomes similarly obsessed with Helen, giving up any consideration or thought of his society. Even as his city is struggling to defend itself, Paris calls to Helen “let’s go to bed, let’s lose ourselves in love! Never has longing for you overwhelmed me so” (Homer 3.431-432). Their decision led to the destruction of Troy, and although Helen attempts to blame Aphrodite, “lusting to lure me to my ruin yet again,” it is evident that both have the freewill to make their decisions. Throughout the epic, Homer emphasizes that the beauty of these two protagonists is distant from any means of virtue. This supports Socrates’ perspective that what is beautiful does not unequivocally mean good, and that the beauty is more relatable to signs of passion than anything else.
Euripides’ Perspective
In Euripides’ Bacchae, the story of the Greek god Dionysus is told. He is the god of wine, ritual, wild things, and fertility. He is also the most human like of all the Greek gods, sharing their virtues and passions. Dionysus is described as extremely beautiful,
“you are attractive, stranger, at least to women
which explains, I think, your presence here in Thebes.
Your curls are long. You do not wrestle, I take it.
And what fair skin you have-you must take care of it
no daylight complexion; no, it comes from the night
when you hunt Aphrodite with your beauty” (Euripides 453-458).
As a god, Dionysus has significant powers, including over nature and to shape-shift. It is implied that he is a womanizer. Throughout the story, he is morally ambiguous. On one hand, he wants to do good, but on the other, he seeks to cause chaos and prove his divine nature, given that he is the only god with a mortal parent. By the end, Dionysus is portrayed as an entity or horror, madness and violence. He seemingly loses any potential for virtue he had before in his blind purpose to gain revenge on Pentheus.
In his book, Bennett Simon analyzes Bacchae and its protagonist from a psychiatric standpoint. It becomes evident that psychologically Dionysus was perverted and twisted. Simon compares the plot to that of a sacrificial ritual, “a drama of extreme ambivalence, and nowhere is love more confused with devouring rage, lust with destruction” (Simon 114). Going back to the original argument of beauty and virtue, it seems that Euripides’ perspective similarly matches that of Socrates and Homer. Dionysus was a perfect specimen of physical beauty for both humans and gods. However, he from the depths was the opposite of virtue. Simon notes that great virtue comes about with self-control, moderation, chastity, and sanity. In Bacchae, the utter opposite could be seen as Dionysus uses his power to create madness in his thirst for revenge, in the process committing unspeakable atrocities.
Discussion
The examination of these three works by Plato (speaking on behalf of Socrates), Homer, and Euripides brought about unexpected conclusions. Despite the presence of kalokagathia as a prevalent philosophy in Greek culture and society, the works demonstrate that at least for beauty and virtue, these parameters do not seem to align. Perhaps, these stories were told as lessons, in a way teaching audience how to not behave. Across all three, virtue is dismissed in exchange for pursuit of passions, sexual or otherwise when beauty is involved. Socrates’ underlying lesson was correct in emphasizing that beauty creates irrational passions which lack basis in virtue, and it is an extremely difficult aspect to control.
For Ancient Greeks, physical beauty was almost an obsession. Beauty was viewed as a tremendous gift from gods. However, at the same time, beauty as part of kalokagathia was equivalent to virtue and intelligence, a healthy wonderful mind. However, as seen in these wirings, and many other myths and stories, beauty has also been the cause of disputes and wars in antiquity. As a result, it may suggest an inherent flaw in the Greek assumptions of kalokagathia as a unifying and harmonious state, and that a beautiful body does not mean an equally ‘beautiful’ mind.
Conclusion
This paper sought to examine three ancient Greek works to identify the perspectives of their respective authors on the connection between virtue and beauty as part of kalokagathia. Findings indicate that all three strongly agree through their writing that beauty and virtue do not align. The question for future research arises as to what this means for the concept of kalokagathia, is it possible in the first place in real life applications, or are these stories told as foreboding lessons on the immorality which can arise when one is consumed by your own or someone else’s beauty.
Works Cited
Euripides. Bacchae. Translated by Paul Woodruff, Hackett Publishing Company, 1999.
Fine, Jonathan. “The Guise of the Beautiful: Symposium 204d Ff.” Phronesis, vol. 65, no. 2, 2019, pp. 129–152.
Homer. “The Illiad.” Project Gutenberg, 2005, Web.
Plato. The Dialogues of Plato. Volume II: The Symposium. Translated by R.E. Allen, Yale University Press, 1993.
Simon, Bennett. Mind and Madness in Ancient Greece. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1978.