Introduction
It is crucial to note that kalokagathia is a collection of essential terms in Greek society. Firstly, it is derived from two words, namely kalos, which means external beauty, and agathos, which implies honesty, representing doctrine and social status (Tomecka 11). Therefore, kalokagathia can be explained as the human endeavor to achieve excellence in these three areas. These three concepts constitute a holistic philosophy, which can also be observed in modern society in a modified form (Tomecka 12). Thus, it is essential to observe the changes in the concept and description of kalokagathia in the works of Socrates, Homer, and Euripides.
Socrates’ Concept
Socrates was one of the first Greek philosophers to consider kalokagathia. In Plato’s Symposium, Socrates does not support Plato’s understanding of the world. This is because Plato proposes that the beautiful is good and vice versa. This idea is based on the fact that the concepts of beauty and goodness have a common nature and should be related to each other (Plato 28c1-2).
Instead, after studying Plato’s works, Socrates realized that beauty does not necessarily have to come from goodness because there are different properties and forms. While researching Symposium, Socrates gives an example of erotic desire, which is beautiful by design, and therefore comes from the good. Socrates argues that erotic desire is not necessarily good but is related to beauty, which is physical (Plato 93c5-7). Thus, according to the philosopher, distinguishing physical properties characteristic of people, such as lust, is worthwhile. Therefore, Socrates does not support Plato’s claim that beauty is related to the good but explains the need to expand it.
Moreover, Socrates needs clarification on how Plato connects beauty with the good. To explain the incorrectness of this point of view, Socrates again gives an example of people’s erotic desires. Accordingly, from an erotic point of view, what is beautiful does not necessarily have to look good from an ethical perspective (Plato 93c5-7). Especially certain erotic moments and actions that may seem beautiful, according to the subjective opinion of some people, do not necessarily come from the concept of goodness. As a result, Socrates concludes that beauty is a concept of attractive appearance but not an indicator of goodness or virtue.
Socrates also focused on social status and argued that high social status is not directly related to goodness and virtue. According to ancient Greek concepts, people who achieve specific achievements do not necessarily perform good actions and look beautiful. Accordingly, in contrast to Plato, Socrates’ view of kalokagathia is characterized by different properties of goodness, beauty, and social status (Plato 143c 8-9). To this end, Socrates argues that kalos can inspire individuals of different social statuses to want to achieve great fortune at the same time, without considering the risks, and such actions cannot be unambiguously good. Therefore, the main lesson, as emphasized by Socrates, is that what appears to be beautiful is not necessarily considered good.
Homer’s Perspective
Homer also used the concept of beauty, which is based on three main areas: goodness, physical beauty, and high social status. In Homer’s The Iliad, the concept of beauty is best represented by the characters of Helen and Paris. For example, Homer describes Helen as beautiful but with a complex character (Homer 7. 127). Accordingly, it is apparent from the description that the external beauty of the body in Homer is not connected with inner goodness, just as in Socrates.
Meanwhile, such a description contradicts Plato’s idea that goodness is always beautiful and vice versa. It is also worth noting that Homer described Paris as a young, intelligent, and handsome man from the upper ruling class (Homer 7. 127). Accordingly, at first, Paris corresponds to all parts of the concept of kalokagathia, but the investigation of the The Iliad demonstrates the opposite.
Correspondingly, Helen and Paris in The Iliad are initially presented as virtuous characters and can embody the meaning of kalokagathia. Although Helen falls in love with Paris and leaves her husband, fleeing to Troy, it provokes the Trojan Wars and the final fall of Troy (Homer 6. 119). As a result, this episode explains that Homer shares the point of view of Socrates, not Plato. Beautiful and intelligent characters do not necessarily have to be guided by logic and good intentions.
In the story of Helen and Paris’ escape, Homer shows that kalos and virtue differ. Thus, regardless of their high social status, origin, and external beauty, both characters chose their desires over preserving peace and tranquility in the state. Their actions cannot be considered reasonable and virtuous because Helena betrayed her husband to satisfy her desires, and Paris neglected the negative consequences for the state (Homer 6. 119). Hence, the desire to fulfill the personal desires of the heroes led to the destruction of Troy.
Meanwhile, Homer also demonstrates that virtue is not mandatory for beautiful people. For instance, when Helen realized the consequences of her desires, she blamed Aphrodite (Homer 24. 451). Helen does not recognize that her decision with Paris led to the war, which shows Homer supports the Socratic understanding of kalokagathia. This is because the beauty of the main characters of The Iliad does not correlate with virtue, as is commonly believed according to Plato.
Also, unlike Plato and Socrates, Homer also provides kalokagathia with new features; Homer indicates that beauty is associated with passion. Accordingly, Homer considers passion and beauty to be the same as achieving personal desires. Moreover, Homer supports Socrates’ view that beauty is not related to virtue. Thus, Homer often supported Socrates’ assertion in The Iliad and introduced a new syllable for passion.
Nevertheless, although the words kalos in ancient Greek expressed beauty and agathos, which means goodness, these concepts’ meanings differed for all Greeks. Homer demonstrates in The Iliad that goodness and beauty are not basic categories. The social component of the knightly ethnos, a social group that was less mentioned by Socrates and Plato, should also be added (Homer 9. 189). This can be explained by the fact that “The Iliad is an epos telling the story of mostly bravery, devotion and gallantry of the knightly elite, in which each of the knights is presented together with his noble ancestors” (Tomecka 12).
Accordingly, The Iliad‘s concepts of virtue and beauty can be seen in the knights who fought to preserve their state and performed the function assigned to their class with integrity. Thus, according to Homer, not only can people with high social status be decent and beautiful people, but Socrates did not consider this option. This is because knights, unlike Paris, fit the standard description of kalokagathia.
Euripides’ Perspective
Euripides, like Socrates, Plato, and Homer, tries to operate with the term and properties of kalokagathia when describing the characters in the Bacchae. Accordingly, Euripides depicts the Greek god Dionysus, who has a high social status as the god of wine, animals, and fertility (Euripides 18-1). Nevertheless, human virtues and passions also characterize Dionysus, and Euripides describes the god as beautiful but not morally unambiguous. In this way, Dionysus has the property of beauty and social status, but the virtue of Dionysus is constantly changing.
As a result, Euripides supports Socrates’ view that virtue does not necessarily correlate with beauty. The fact that Dionysus succumbed to the zeal and desire to prove his true divine nature. As a result, he punished ordinary people and committed violence (Euripides 120-23). Hence, Dionysus’s actions cannot be viewed as virtuous and fall under Plato’s category of kalokagathia.
Instead, Euripides supports Homer’s and Socrates’ opinions but introduces the concept of loss of virtue. At the beginning of the Bacchae, Dionysus possessed beauty, high social status, and virtue. Still, he lost his goodness under the influence of passion and the desire to demonstrate his power (Euripides 120-24). Therefore, Euripides supports Plato’s views but considers the possibility of identifying beauty and virtue if the hero is not influenced by passion and personal desires.
Conclusion
In summary, the writings of Plato, Homer, and Euripides explain that at least beauty and virtue are not interdependent concepts. The common thread in their works is that virtue can be neglected even by beautiful and high-status people for their passions and desires. However, according to Plato, Euripides admits the possibility of kalokagathia only in the absence of a person’s special wishes.
Moreover, Homer shows knights as beautiful and virtuous, but not with a high social status. Accordingly, certain parts of the concept of kalokagathia may vary. However, Socrates’ main lesson that beauty gives rise to irrational passions not based on virtue is correct and familiar to all authors.
Works Cited
Euripides. Bacchae of Euripides. Edited by Geoffrey Kirk, Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Homer. The Iliad. Edited by Robert Fagles, and Bernard Knox, Penguin, 1991.
Plato. Plato’s Symposium. Edited by Richard Hunter, Oxford University Press, 2004.
Tomecka, Małgorzata. “Old Greek Ideal of Kalokagathia and Its Examples in the Contemporary World. A Reminiscence of the Beautiful, Good and Wise Associate Professor–Halina Zdebska-Biziewska.” Studies in Sport Humanities, vol. 23, 2019, pp. 11-18. Web.