both ignorant and poor. “‘Such is the dæmoniacal nature, my dear Socrates; nor do I wonder at your error concerning Love, for you thought, as I conjecture from what you say, that Love was not the lover but the beloved, and thence, well concluded that he must be supremely beautiful; for that which is the object of Love must indeed be fair, and delicate, and perfect, and most happy; but Love inherits, as I have declared, a totally opposite nature.’--‘Your words have persuasion in them, O stranger,’ I said; ‘be it as you say. But this Love, what advantages does he afford to men?’--‘I will proceed to explain it to you, Socrates. Love being such and so produced as I have described, is, indeed, as you say, the love of things which are beautiful. But if any one should ask us, saying: O Socrates and Diotima, why is Love the love of beautiful things? Or, in plainer words, what does the lover of that which is beautiful, love in the object of his love, and seek from it?’--‘He seeks,’ I said, interrupting her, ‘the property and possession of it.’--‘But that,’ she replied, ‘might still be met with another question, What has he, who possesses that which is beautiful?’--‘Indeed, I cannot immediately reply.’--‘But, if changing the beautiful for good, any one should inquire,--I ask, O Socrates, what is that which he who loves that which is good, loves in the object of his love?’--‘To be in his possession,’ I replied.--‘And what has he, who has the possession of good?’--‘This question is of easier solution, he is happy.’--‘Those who are happy, then, are happy through the possession; and it is useless to inquire what he desires, who desires to be happy; the question seems to have a complete reply. But do you think that this wish and this love are common to all men, and that all desire that that which is good should be for ever present to them?’--‘Certainly, common to all.’--‘Why do we not say then, Socrates, that every one loves? if, indeed, all love perpetually the same thing? But we say that some love, and some do not.’--‘Indeed I wonder why it is so.’--‘Wonder not,’ said Diotima, ‘for we select a particular species of love, and apply to it distinctively, the appellation of that which is universal.’----