MARC Record from harvard_bibliographic_metadata

LEADER: 02813cam a22003374a 4500
001 012110565-2
005 20140731170959.0
008 940406s1994 enk b 001 0 eng
010 $a 94015728
020 $a0198267614 (alk. paper)
020 $a9780198267614 (alk. paper)
035 0 $aocm30358628
040 $aDLC$cDLC$dNLGGC$dBTCTA$dYDXCP
043 $ae------
050 00 $aBD436$b.O82 1994
082 00 $a128/.4$220
084 $a08.21$2bcl
100 1 $aRowett, Catherine.
245 10 $aEros unveiled :$bPlato and the god of love /$cCatherine Osborne.
246 30 $aPlato and the god of love
260 $aOxford :$bClarendon Press ;$aNew York :$bOxford University Press,$c1994.
300 $ax, 246 p. ;$c23 cm.
504 $aIncludes bibliographical references (p. [227]-233) and indexes.
505 0 $a1. The Bow in the Clouds -- 2. God is Love: The Word Agape in the New Testament -- 3. Arrows, Eros, Agape -- 4. Eros, the Socratic Spirit: Inside and Outside the Symposium -- 5. The Power of the Beloved: Aristotle on the Unmoved Mover -- 6. Friends, Friendship, and Loving Others: Aristotle and Aquinas -- 7. Philanthropia, God's Love for Mankind in Origen -- 8. Dionysius the Areopagite's Divine Names and the Meaning of 'God is Love' -- 9. Bonds of Love: Augustine, Dionysius, and Aquinas -- Appendix: Anders Nygren and Gregory Vlastos.
520 $aFew books on love can claim to make significant contributions to our understanding both of ancient views on eros and of its place in the Christian tradition. On the basis of a new and sympathetic reading of Plato, Catherine Osborne shows that the long-standing distrust of eros, rather than agape, as a model for the believer's relation to God in Christian thought derives from a misunderstanding of ancient thought on love. Focussing on a number of classic texts, including Plato's Symposium and Lysis, Aristotle's Ethics and Metaphysics, and famous passages in Gregory of Nyssa, Origen, Dionysius the Areopagite, Plotinus, Augustine, and Thomas Aquinas, she shows that love is not motivated by a need that seeks fulfilment. On the contrary, Dr Osborne argues, to seek a motive for love, whether in Plato's account or our own, is to pursue a philosophical confusion.
520 8 $aTo mention love is to mention the motive that explains our response of affection or devotion or desire; the response cannot be the motive for our love, but is an attitude that belongs in a vision of the beloved transfigured by love. It is for this reason that we have to restore the image of Cupid, whose mischievous darts picture the impossibility of seeking some further grounds or explanation for love.
650 0 $aLove$xHistory$yTo 1500.
650 0 $aPhilosophy, Ancient.
650 0 $aPhilosophy, Medieval.
988 $a20091030
906 $0DLC