Beauty is a prevalent theme throughout works of literature by Plato, namely Republic and The Symposium. Republic describes several instances which prove the subjective nature of beauty. The Symposium, on the other hand, presents and argues the idea that beauty is inherent, and is therefore objective. Which of these two works, then, correctly depicts the concept and beauty? Furthermore, why would Plato choose to depict beauty in different ways within his novels? In Book V of Republic Socrates begins a short discussion on people who believe in beautiful objects. He describes two types of people where one “believes in beautiful things, but doesn’t believe in the beautiful itself” and the other “believes in the beautiful itself, and can see both…show more content… As part of this dialogue, she explains that “beauty always is, and doesn’t come into being or cease” and that something “[is] not beautiful in one respect but ugly in another […]” (Plato, The Symposium 48). This thought is in opposition to the analogy of the beautiful statue presented in Republic. In that case, though the individual parts were imperfect, the statue as a whole could be seen as beautiful. The Symposium, conversely, describes that true beauty will only exist when something is beautiful in its entirety, and when everyone believes that it is completely beautiful. If, then, something that is beautiful can never be seen as anything else, beauty cannot be subjective, for if beauty were subjective then what one person finds beautiful and another finds ugly would not be beautiful at all. In other words, beauty must be objective because an object can only be considered truly beautiful if every part of it is beautiful, and if every person agrees that it is beautiful. This notion contradicts the idea of beauty present in Republic. What then, is the more appropriate nature of beauty: subjective or objective? The answer may lie in the closing of Diotima’s
