Modern critics are quick to assert that Socrates failed in his role as teacher to Alcibiades by refusing to engage in sexual relations. Upon further investigation of both Socrates' traditional and revised form of pederasty, the reasoning behind the lack of sexual activity is gleaned. In classical Athens, the traditional and established form of pederasty featured a complex exchange between lover and beloved that involved predetermined exchanges between both parties. As the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades deviated from the normal pattern, it followed that the two were not required to perform according to traditional guidelines and therefore sexual gratification was not necessary. When we study the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades through the lens of Socrates' reformed model of pederasty, the absence of sexual relations is, again, not surprising. Socratic pederasty had less to do with the exchange of knowledge for sexual gratification than with the attainment and enrichment of beauty through the education and observance of youthful beauty, here, Alcibiades. Plato's Symposium features speeches given by guests in classical Athens, most notably speeches given by Socrates and Alcibiades, demonstrating contemporary views on pederasty and the nuances of the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades---illustrating with finality the exact basis and the failures. within their close association. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get the original essayPederasty, in its traditional form, observed by the majority of Athenian citizens, was the cornerstone of democratic values ​​and life Greeks. The roles of lover and beloved were already molded into the ideals of the wise older pursuer and the young beautiful pursued, each offering their respective, balanced qualities to the other. Athenian society believed that one could "hardly imagine a greater good for one from his youth than a good lover, and for a lover, a beloved." The importance of the two relative to each other led to a system of accountability for politics and war as a whole. As neither the lover nor the beloved could resist public shaming in front of their partners, their actions should, ideally, remain above reproach and complement a corruption-free civic society. The pederasty relationship was also an integral part of the education system, providing the younger generation with an irreplaceable source of knowledge and experience. The Athenian Greeks believed that "that which should guide human beings who must live fairly throughout their lives cannot be implanted by blood ties, nor by honor, nor by wealth, nor by anything else." as beautiful as love.” Thus, the reciprocity of this relationship represented the same key values ​​as the government and formed the basis on which new generations would continue to lead society. The traditional form of pederasty was only loosely defined by the presence of both a lover and a partner. beloved, but many societal notions are formed based on the pretenses of relationship. Athenian society dictated in which situations pederasty could actually be considered an honorable practice and in which it could be considered vile and worthy of disgrace. Harmodius and Aristogiton, heroes of the republic, characterized the ideal form of relationship, one which was based on the goodness of the soul and which was therefore honorable. Athenian democratic legend attributes tothis pair of lovers the fall of tyranny in Athens, leaving this noble homosexual couple as the republican ideal to imitate. Conversely, in the Symposium, dinner guest Pausanias speaks of pandemic lovers who based their pederasty relationships entirely on the young boys' outward appearance rather than the goodness of their souls – forming a fleeting and entirely based on appearance. PederastyRelationships in which the lover discerns solely on the basis of appearance and where the beloved is easily swayed by offers of money and political power are those relationships that Athenian society considered barbaric and even worthy of accusation criminal, as in the speech of Aeschines against Timarchus. Athenian society prided itself on the fact that "here [in Athens] there are customs much more beautiful than elsewhere... [for] it is said that it is a more beautiful thing to love openly than to love in secret and especially to love the noblest and the best, even if they are uglier than the others. » The notions governing the traditional form of Athenian pederasty proclaimed that the institution was noble and fulfilling for both the lover and the beloved in very specific circumstances only. For the lover must be able to “contribute to prudence and the rest of virtue, while the other [the beloved] needs it to acquire education and the rest of wisdom. Then and only then, when these laws converge: it follows that the satisfaction of a beloved with his lover is noble, but it is not so in other circumstances. » In the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades, these conditions were met, since Socrates could be described as Alcibiades' “only deserving lover”. Alcibiades, in fact, tells Socrates that he “should be much more ashamed before men of sense.” for I am no more satisfied with a man like you [Socrates] than I should be in front of many, and I am foolish to satisfy you. proved this above Alcibiades' offer, just as Socrates refuses the traditional pederast exchange of wisdom and experience for sexual gratification. Socrates' refusal to accept the sexual gratification offered by Alcibiades is not only merely acceptable but rather almost commendable. The pederast relationship does not have clear rules stipulating that the lover must seek and accept sexual exchanges, although it does indeed seem to prohibit a pursuing nature in the beloved. As Alcibiades clearly admits in Plato's Symposium, he has been deceived "in regarding him [Socrates] as the lover, [but] he makes him the beloved rather than the lover." Whether Alcibiades is seen in the role of a lover or a beloved, his sexual advances toward Socrates would be considered socially unacceptable because they do not fit within the narrow confines of the noble pederast relationship. As Alcibiades, a lover, would have nothing to offer Socrates in terms of wisdom or experience and in the role of beloved, Alcibiades is required to fulfill the role of the pursued submissive and not the sexual aggressor. Socrates' refusal to engage in sexual relations is also admirable by Athenian social standards. With Athenian society's structured emphasis on the importance of the soul rather than the body, Socrates' strict adherence to only matters of the soul (i.e. matters concerning wisdom, prudence and other enviable qualities) in his relationship with Alcibiades is more idyllic than problematic. As the Athenians were proud of their tradition of idealized pederasty, that is, pederasty based on the nobility of the soul, giving importance to vile sexual relations would have devalued the institution by giving importance to the body. Thus, Socrates' lack of desire to engage in relationships"..