Modern critics are quick to claim that Socrates failed in his role as Alcibiades' teacher by refusing to engage in sexual relationships. After a deeper investigation of both the traditional and revised forms of Socrates' pederasty, the reasoning behind the lack of sexual activity is gleaned. In classical Athens, the traditional and established form of pederasty involved a complex exchange between lover and beloved involving predetermined exchanges between the two parties. Since the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades deviated from the normal pattern, it followed that the two were not forced to play according to traditional guidelines and, therefore, sexual gratification was not necessary. When investigating the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades through the microscope of Socrates' reformed model of pederasty, the absence of sexual intercourse is, once again, not surprising. Socratic pederasty had less to do with the exchange of knowledge for sexual gratification and more to do with the attainment and enrichment of beauty through the education and respect of youthful beauty, here, Alcibiades. Plato's Symposium provides speeches given by dinner guests in classical Athens, particularly speeches by Socrates and Alcibiades, which demonstrate contemporary views on pederasty and the nuances of the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades, definitively illustrating the exact foundations and failures . within their close association. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Pederasty, in its traditional form, observed by the majority of Athenian citizens, was the cornerstone of Greek values ​​and democratic life. The roles of lover and beloved were already modeled in the ideals of the wise old pursuer and the young and beautiful persecuted girl, each offering their respective and balanced qualities to the other. Athenian society believed that "one could hardly point to a greater good for someone to have from youth onwards than a good lover, and for a lover, a beloved." The mutual importance of the two led to a system of responsibility for politics and warfare as a whole. Since neither the lover nor the loved one could resist public shaming in front of their partners, their actions would, ideally, remain above reproach and complete a corruption-free civic society. The relationship of pederasty was also an integral part of the educational system, providing younger generations with an irreplaceable source of knowledge and experience. The Athenian Greeks believed that "that which should guide human beings who will live equally throughout their lives cannot be implanted either by blood ties, nor by honors, nor by wealth, nor by anything else so beautiful as love" . Therefore, the reciprocity of this relationship represented the same core values ​​of government and provided the basis for 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 beloved, but many social notions were formed based on the demands of the relationship. Athenian society dictated in which situations pederasty could actually be seen as an honorable practice and in which it could be seen as ignoble and worthy of disgrace. Harmodius and Aristogiton, heroes of the republic, characterized the ideal form of the relationship, one based on the goodness of the soul and was, therefore, honourable. Athenian democratic legend credited this pair of lovers with bringing about the fall of tyranny in Athens, leaving this noble homosexual couple as a republican idealto emulate. By contrast, in the Symposium, dinner guest Pausanias talks about pandemic lovers who based their pederasty relationships completely on the young boys' outward appearance rather than the goodness of their souls, forming a transitory and completely appearance-based bond. Pederast relationships in which the lover discerns exclusively on the basis of appearance and the beloved is easily influenced by offers of money and political power are those relationships that Athenian society considered barbaric and even worthy of criminal accusation, as in the speech of Aeschines against Timarchus. Athenian society boasted that "here [in Athens] there are much finer customs than elsewhere... [for] it is said to be a finer thing to love openly than in secret, and especially to love the noblest and best even if I'm uglier than others." The notions that governed the traditional form of pederasty in Athens proclaimed that the institution was noble and fulfilling for both lover and beloved only under very particular circumstances. Because the lover should be "able to contribute 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 turns out that a beloved's gratification of his lover is noble but under any other circumstances it is not." In the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades these conditions were met, as Socrates could be described as Alcibiades' "only worthy lover". Alcibiades, in fact, states to Socrates that ""he should be much more ashamed before men of sense not to gratify a man like you [Socrates] than I should be before many and senseless to gratify you.'" In these terms Alcibiades affirms offers to Socrates, but, strangely, the prudence and virtue that labeled Socrates as a worthy lover also proved him above accepting Alcibiades' offer, as Socrates rejects the traditional pederastic exchange of wisdom and experience for gratification sexual Socrates' refusal to accept the sexual gratification offered by Alcibiades is not only simply acceptable but rather almost commendable. The pederast relationship has no clear rules that the lover must seek and accept sexual exchanges, even if, in fact. , seems to forbid a persecuting nature within the beloved. As Alcibiades clearly admits in Plato's Symposium, he was deceived "into thinking of him [Socrates] as the lover, [but] he contrives to be the beloved rather than the lover". Whether Alcibiades is seen in the role of lover or beloved, his sexual advances towards Socrates would be seen as socially unacceptable because they do not fall within the narrow confines of the noble pederast relationship. As a lover, Alcibiades would have nothing to offer Socrates in terms of wisdom or experience and in the role of beloved, Alcibiades is expected to fill the role of the pursued submissive and not the sexual aggressor. Socrates' refusal to engage in sexual intercourse is also admirable when viewed by Athenian social standards. With Athenian society's structured focus on the importance of the soul rather than the body, Socrates' strict adherence only to matters of the soul (i.e. matters concerning wisdom, prudence, and other enviable qualities) in his dealings with Alcibiades is more idyllic what a problem. Since the Athenians prided themselves on their tradition of idealized pederasty, that is, pederasty based on the nobility of the soul, attributing importance to vile sexual relations would have diminished the institution by attributing importance to the body. Therefore, Socrates' lack of desire to engage in sexual intercourse made Alcibiades' push on the issue socially"..