ht　to　desire　something　which　he　already　has　or　is。　I　give　the　example　in　order　that　we　may　avoid　misconception。　For　the　possessors　of　these　qualities；　Agathon；　must　be　supposed　to　have　their　respective　advantages　at　the　time；　whether　they　choose　or　not；　and　who　can　desire　that　which　he　has？　Therefore　when　a　person　says；　I　am　well　and　wish　to　be　well；　or　I　am　rich　and　wish　to　be　rich；　and　I　desire　simply　to　have　what　I　have…to　him　we　shall　reply：　〃You；　my　friend；　having　wealth　and　health　and　strength；　want　to　have　the　continuance　of　them；　for　at　this　moment；　whether　you　choose　or　no；　you　have　them。　And　when　you　say；　I　desire　that　which　I　have　and　nothing　else；　is　not　your　meaning　that　you　want　to　have　what　you　now　have　in　the　future？　〃He　must　agree　with　us…must　he　not？　　　He　must；　replied　Agathon。　　　Then；　said　Socrates；　he　desires　that　what　he　has　at　present　may　be　preserved　to　him　in　the　future；　which　is　equivalent　to　saying　that　he　desires　something　which　is　non…existent　to　him；　and　which　as　yet　he　has　not　got。　　　Very　true；　he　said。　　　Then　he　and　every　one　who　desires；　desires　that　which　he　has　not　already；　and　which　is　future　and　not　present；　and　which　he　has　not；　and　is　not；　and　of　which　he　is　in　want；…these　are　the　sort　of　things　which　love　and　desire　seek？　　　Very　true；　he　said。　　　Then　now；　said　Socrates；　let　us　recapitulate　the　argument。　First；　is　not　love　of　something；　and　of　something　too　which　is　wanting　to　a　man？　　　Yes；　he　replied。　　　Remember　further　what　you　said　in　your　speech；　or　if　you　do　not　remember　I　will　remind　you：　you　said　that　the　love　of　the　beautiful　set　in　order　the　empire　of　the　gods；　for　that　of　deformed　things　there　is　no　love…did　you　not　say　something　of　that　kind？　　　Yes；　said　Agathon。　　　Yes；　my　friend；　and　the　remark　was　a　just　one。　And　if　this　is　true；　Love　is　the　love　of　beauty　and　not　of　deformity？　　　He　assented。　　　And　the　admission　has　been　already　made　that　Love　is　of　something　which　a　man　wants　and　has　not？　　　True；　he　said。　　　Then　Love　wants　and　has　not　beauty？　　　Certainly；　he　replied。　　　And　would　you　call　that　beautiful　which　wants　and　does　not　possess　beauty？　　　Certainly　not。　　　Then　would　you　still　say　that　love　is　beautiful？　　　Agathon　replied：　I　fear　that　I　did　not　understand　what　I　was　saying。　　　You　made　a　very　good　speech；　Agathon；　replied　Socrates；　but　there　is　yet　one　small　question　which　I　would　fain　ask：…Is　not　the　good　also　the　beautiful？　　　Yes。　　　Then　in　wanting　the　beautiful；　love　wants　also　the　good？　　　I　cannot　refute　you；　Socrates；　said　Agathon：…Let　us　assume　that　what　you　say　is　true。　　　Say　rather；　beloved　Agathon；　that　you　cannot　refute　the　truth；　for　Socrates　is　easily　refuted。　　　And　now；　taking　my　leave　of　you；　I　would　rehearse　a　tale　of　love　which　I　heard　from　Diotima　of　Mantineia；　a　woman　wise　in　this　and　in　many　other　kinds　of　knowledge；　who　in　the　days　of　old；　when　the　Athenians　offered　sacrifice　before　the　coming　of　the　plague；　delayed　the　disease　ten　years。　She　was　my　instructress　in　the　art　of　love；　and　I　shall　repeat　to　you　what　she　said　to　me；　beginning　with　the　admissions　made　by　Agathon；　which　are　nearly　if　not　quite　the　same　which　I　made　to　the　wise　woman　when　she　questioned　me…I　think　that　this　will　be　the　easiest　way；　and　I　shall　take　both　parts　myself　as　well　as　I　can。　As　you；　Agathon；　suggested；　I　must　speak　first　of　the　being　and　nature　of　Love；　and　then　of　his　works。　First　I　said　to　her　in　nearly　the　same　words　which　he　used　to　me；　that　Love　was　a　mighty　god；　and　likewise　fair　and　she　proved　to　me　as　I　proved　to　him　that；　by　my　own　showing；　Love　was　neither　fair　nor　good。　〃What　do　you　mean；　Diotima；〃　I　said；　〃is　love　then　evil　and　foul？〃　〃Hush；〃　she　cried；　〃must　that　be　foul　which　is　not　fair？〃　〃Certainly；〃　I　said。　〃And　is　that　which　is　not　wise；　ignorant？　do　you　not　see　that　there　is　a　mean　between　wisdom　and　ignorance？〃　〃And　what　may　that　be？〃　I　said。　〃Right　opinion；〃　she　replied；　〃which；　as　you　know；　being　incapable　of　giving　a　reason；　is　not　knowledge　（for　how　can　knowledge　be　devoid　of　reason？　nor　again；　ignorance；　for　neither　can　ignorance　attain　the　truth）；　but　is　clearly　something　which　is　a　mean　between　ignorance　and　wisdom。〃　〃Quite　true；〃　I　replied。　〃Do　not　then　insist；〃　she　said；　〃that　what　is　not　fair　is　of　necessity　foul；　or　what　is　not　good　evil；　or　infer　that　because　love　is　not　fair　and　good　he　is　therefore　foul　and　evil；　for　he　is　in　a　mean　between　them。〃　〃Well；〃　I　said；　〃Love　is　surely　admitted　by　all　to　be　a　great　god。〃　〃By　those　who　know　or　by　those　who　do　not　know？〃　〃By　all。〃　〃And　how；　Socrates；〃　she　said　with　a　smile；　〃can　Love　be　acknowledged　to　be　a　great　god　by　those　who　say　that　he　is　not　a　god　at　all？〃　〃And　who　are　they？〃　I　said。　〃You　and　I　are　two　of　them；〃　she　replied。　〃How　can　that　be？〃　I　said。　〃It　is　quite　intelligible；〃　she　replied；　〃for　you　yourself　would　acknowledge　that　the　gods　are　happy　and　fair　of　course　you　would…would　to　say　that　any　god　was　not？〃　〃Certainly　not；〃　I　replied。　〃And　you　mean　by　the　happy；　those　who　are　the　possessors　of　things　good　or　fair？〃　〃Yes。〃　〃And　you　admitted　that　Love；　because　he　was　in　want；　desires　those　good　and　fair　things　of　which　he　is　in　want？〃　〃Yes；　I　did。〃　〃But　how　can　he　be　a　god　who　has　no　portion　in　what　is　either　good　or　fair？〃　〃Impossible。〃　〃Then　you　see　that　you　also　deny　the　divinity　of　Love。〃　　　〃What　then　is　Love？〃　I　asked；　〃Is　he　mortal？〃　〃No。〃　〃What　then？〃　〃As　in　the　former　instance；　he　is　neither　mortal　nor　immortal；　but　in　a　mean　between　the　two。〃　〃What　is　he；　Diotima？〃　〃He　is　a　great　spirit　（daimon）；　and　like　all　spirits　he　is　intermediate　between　the　divine　and　the　mortal。〃　〃And　what；〃　I　said；　〃is　his　power？〃　〃He　interprets；〃　she　replied；　〃between　gods　and　men；　conveying　and　taking　across　to　the　gods　the　prayers　and　sacrifices　of　men；　and　to　men　the　commands　and　replies　of　the　gods；　he　is　the　mediator　who　spans　the　chasm　which　divides　them；　and　therefore　in　him　all　is　bound　together；　and　through　him　the　arts　of　the　prophet　and　the　priest；　their　sacrifices　and　mysteries　and　charms；　and　all；　prophecy　and　incantation；　find　their　way。　For　God　mingles　not　with　man；　but　through　Love。　all　the　intercourse；　and　converse　of　god　with　man；　whether　awake　or　asleep；　is　carried　on。　The　wisdom　which　understands　this　is　spiritual；　all　other　wisdom；　such　as　that　of　arts　and　handicrafts；　is　mean　and　vulgar。　Now　these　spirits　or　intermediate　powers　are　many　and　diverse；　and　one　of　them　is　Love。　〃And　who；〃　I　said；　〃was　his　father；　and　who　his　mother？〃　〃The　tale；〃　she　said；　〃will　take　time；　nevertheless　I　will　tell　you。　On　the　birthday　of　Aphrodite　there　was　a　feast　of　the　gods；　at　which　the　god　Poros　or　Plenty；　who　is　the　son　of　Metis　or　Discretion；　was　one　of　the　guests。　When　the　feast　was　over；　Penia　or　Poverty；　as　the　manner　is　on　such　occasions；　came　about　the　doors　to　beg。　Now　Plenty　who　was　the　worse　for　nectar　（there　was　no　wine　in　those　days）；　went　into　the　garden　of　Zeus　and　fell　into　a　heavy　sleep；　and　Poverty　considering　her　own　straitened　circumstances；　plotted　to　have　a　child　by　him；　and　accordingly　she　lay　down　at　his　side　and　conceived　love；　who　partly　because　he　is　naturally　a　lover　of　the　beautiful；　and　because　Aphrodite　is　herself　beautiful；　and　also　because　he　was　born　on　her　birthday；　is　her　follower　and　attendant。　And　as　his　parentage　is；　so　also　are　his　fortunes。　In　the　first　place　he　is　always　poor；　and　anything　but　tender　and　fair；　as　the　many　imagine　him；　and　he　is　rough　and　squalid；　and　has　no　shoes；　nor　a　house　to　dwell　in；　on　the　bare　earth　exposed　he　lies　under　the　open　heaven；　in…the　streets；　or　at　the　doors　of　houses；　taking　his　rest；　and　like　his　mother　he　is　always　in　distress。　Like　his　father　too；　whom　he　also　partly　resembles；　he　is　always　plotting　against　the　fair　and　good；　he　is　bold；　enterprising；　strong；　a　mighty　hunter；　always　weaving　some　intrigue　or　other；　keen　in　the　pursuit　of　wisdom；　fertile　in　resources；　a　philosopher　at　all　times；　terrible　as　an　enchanter；　sorcerer；　sophist。　He　is　by　nature　neither　mortal　nor　immortal；　but　alive　and　flourishing　at　one　moment　when　he　is　in　plenty；　and　dead　at　another　moment；　and　again　alive　by　reason　of　his　father's　nature。　But　that　which　is　always　flowing　in　is　always　flowing　out；　and　so　he　is　never　in　want　and　never　in　wealth；　and；　further；　he　is　in　a　mean　between　ignorance　and　knowledge。　The　truth　of　the　matter　is　this：　No　god　is　a　philosopher。　or　seeker　after　wisdom；　for　he　is　wise　already；　nor　does　any　man　who　is　wise　seek　after　wisdom。　Neither　do　the　ignorant　seek　after　Wisdom。　For　herein　is　the　evil　of　ignorance；　that　he　who　is　neither　good　nor　wise　is　nevertheless　satisfied　with　himself：　he　has　no　desire　for　that　of　which　he　feels　no　want。〃　〃But…who　then；　Diotima；〃　I　said；　〃are　the　lovers　of　wisdom；　if　they　are　neither　the　wise　nor　the　foolish？〃　〃A　child　may　answer　that　question；〃　she　replied；　〃they　are　those　who　are　in　a　mean　between　the　two；　Love　is　one　of　them。　For　wisdom　is　a　most　beautiful　thing；　and　Love　is　of　the　beautiful；　and　therefore　Love　is　also　a　philosopher：　or　lover　of　wisdom；　and　being　a　lover　of　wisdom　is　in　a　mean　between　the　wise　and　the　ignorant。　And　of　this　too　his　birth　is　the　cause；　for　his　father　is　wealthy　and　wise；　and　his　mother　poor　and　foolish。　Such；　my　dear　Socrates；　is　the　nature　of　the　spir