Funny. Ain't it? Of all things in the world, on this fine evening, just few hours from the biggest and the best celebration of a man, a special man, Jesus of Nazareth, gave his body, not exactly, as a full payment, in advance, for all those sinners, of his time, in the land of David, not yet considered as belonging to the Jews (only) I am thinking about a man, a slave, in fact, Socrates.
A lot has been said about Jesus of Nazareth. More on fictional nature than the truth. So much so that the current trend is bucking the usual and customary hoopla, associated with more and more shopping, decorating real and China made artificial trees with China made twinkling lights, tingling decorations, pretty as pretty can be miniature barns with animals snuggling up with kings, camels, sheep, goats, donkeys and visitors wearing ridiculous head gears twice the size of their heads, kneeling, praying, singing the joyous songs and rare merchandising being offered to this little male child born out of wedlock, oops, miraculous birth without Mary and her boy friend Joseph having a baby without the benefit of sex.
Something in this picture is not kosher. If Socrates were one of the kings coming from the east, Oops, west, he would have certainly taken a serious objection. He was famous for his truth serum. The guy accepted the Hemlock, a certain death to a life of (perpetual) slavery.
Rachels was a strong believer in the ability of moral philosophy to improve our lives. This collection, which brings these important works together for the first time, is a testament to both the value of moral philosophy in understanding our world and the richness of Rachels's contributions to this understanding.
Socrates (
/ˈsɒkrətiːz/; Greek: Σωκράτης, Ancient Greek pronunciation: [sɔːkrátɛːs], Sōkrátēs; c. 469 BC – 399 BC)[1] was a classical Greek Athenian philosopher. Credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy, he is an enigmatic figure known chiefly through the accounts of later classical writers, especially the writings of his students Plato and Xenophon, and the plays of his contemporary Aristophanes. Many would claim that Plato's dialogues are the most comprehensive accounts of Socrates to survive from antiquity.[2]
Through his portrayal in Plato's dialogues, Socrates has become renowned for his contribution to the field of ethics, and it is this Platonic Socrates who also lends his name to the concepts of Socratic irony and the Socratic method, or elenchus. The latter remains a commonly used tool in a wide range of discussions, and is a type of pedagogy in which a series of questions are asked not only to draw individual answers, but also to encourage fundamental insight into the issue at hand. It is Plato's Socrates that also made important and lasting contributions to the fields of epistemology and logic, and the influence of his ideas and approach remains strong in providing a foundation for much western philosophy that followed.
As one recent commentator has put it, Plato, the idealist, offers "an idol, a master figure, for philosophy. A Saint, a prophet of the 'Sun-God', a teacher condemned for his teachings as a heretic."[3]
As Socrates did not write philosophical texts, the knowledge of the man, his life, and his philosophy is entirely based on writings by his students and contemporaries. Foremost among them is Plato; however, works by Xenophon, Aristotle, and Aristophanes also provide important insights.[4] The difficulty of finding the “real” Socrates arises because these works are often philosophical or dramatic texts rather than straightforward histories. Aside from Thucydides (who makes no mention of Socrates or philosophers in general) and Xenophon, there are in fact no straightforward histories contemporary with Socrates that dealt with his own time and place. A corollary of this is that sources that do mention Socrates do not necessarily claim to be historically accurate, and are often partisan (those who prosecuted and convicted Socrates have left no testament). Historians therefore face the challenge of reconciling the various texts that come from these men to create an accurate and consistent account of Socrates' life and work. The result of such an effort is not necessarily realistic, merely consistent.
Plato is frequently viewed as the most informative source about Socrates' life and philosophy.[5] At the same time, however, many scholars believe that in some works Plato, being a literary artist, pushed his avowedly brightened-up version of "Socrates" far beyond anything the historical Socrates was likely to have done or said; and that Xenophon, being an historian, is a more reliable witness to the historical Socrates. It is a matter of much debate which Socrates Plato is describing at any given point—the historical figure, or Plato's fictionalization.
It is also clear from other writings and historical artifacts, however, that Socrates was not simply a character, or an invention, of Plato. The testimony of Xenophon and Aristotle, alongside some of Aristophanes' work (especially The Clouds), is useful in fleshing out a perception of Socrates beyond Plato's work.
Carnelian gem imprint representing Socrates, Rome, 1st century BC-1st century AD.Details about Socrates can be derived from three contemporary sources: the dialogues of Plato and Xenophon (both devotees of Socrates), and the plays of Aristophanes. He has been depicted by some scholars, including Eric Havelock and Walter Ong, as a champion of oral modes of communication, standing up at the dawn of writing against its haphazard diffusion.[6]
Aristophanes' play The Clouds portrays Socrates as a clown who teaches his students how to bamboozle their way out of debt. Most of Aristophanes' works, however, function as parodies. Thus, it is presumed this characterization was also not literal.
According to Plato, Socrates' father was Sophroniscus[7] and his mother Phaenarete,[8] a midwife. Though characterized as unattractive in appearance and short in stature, Socrates married Xanthippe,[9] who was much younger than him. She bore for him three sons,[10] Lamprocles, Sophroniscus and Menexenus. His friend Crito of Alopece criticized him for abandoning his sons when he refused to try to escape before his execution.[11]
It is unclear how Socrates earned a living. Ancient texts seem to indicate that Socrates did not work. In Xenophon's Symposium, Socrates is reported as saying he devotes himself only to what he regards as the most important art or occupation: discussing philosophy. In The Clouds Aristophanes portrays Socrates as accepting payment for teaching and running a sophist school with Chaerephon, while in Plato's Apology and Symposium and in Xenophon's accounts, Socrates explicitly denies accepting payment for teaching. More specifically, in the Apology Socrates cites his poverty as proof he is not a teacher. According to Timon of Phlius and later sources, Socrates took over the profession of stonemasonry from his father. There was a tradition in antiquity, not credited by modern scholarship, that Socrates crafted the statues of the Three Graces, which stood near the Acropolis until the 2nd century AD.[12]
Several of Plato's dialogues refer to Socrates' military service. Socrates says he served in the Athenian army during three campaigns: at Potidaea, Amphipolis, and Delium. In the Symposium Alcibiades describes Socrates' valour in the battles of Potidaea and Delium, recounting how Socrates saved his life in the former battle (219e-221b). Socrates' exceptional service at Delium is also mentioned in the Laches by the General after whom the dialogue is named (181b). In the Apology, Socrates compares his military service to his courtroom troubles, and says anyone on the jury who thinks he ought to retreat from philosophy must also think soldiers should retreat when it seems likely that they will be killed in battle.
In 406 he was a member of the Boule, and his tribe the Antiochis held the Prytany on the day the Generals of the Battle of Arginusae, who abandoned the slain and the survivors of foundered ships to pursue the defeated Spartan navy, were discussed. Socrates was the Epistates and resisted the unconstitutional demand for a collective trial to establish the guilt of all eight Generals, proposed by Callixeinus. Eventually, Socrates refused to be cowed by threats of impeachment and imprisonment and blocked the vote until his Prytany ended the next day, whereupon the six Generals who had returned to Athens were condemned to death.
In 404 the Thirty Tyrants sought to ensure the loyalty of those opposed to them by making them complicit in their activities. Socrates and four others were ordered to bring a certain Leon of Salamis from his home for unjust execution. Socrates quietly refused, his death averted only by the overthrow of the Tyrants soon afterwards.
Socrates lived during the time of the transition from the height of the Athenian hegemony to its decline with the defeat by Sparta and its allies in the Peloponnesian War. At a time when Athens sought to stabilize and recover from its humiliating defeat, the Athenian public may have been entertaining doubts about democracy as an efficient form of government. Socrates appears to have been a critic of democracy, and some scholars interpret his trial as an expression of political infighting.
Claiming loyalty to his city, Socrates clashed with the current course of Athenian politics and society.[13] He praises Sparta, archrival to Athens, directly and indirectly in various dialogues. But perhaps the most historically accurate of Socrates' offenses to the city was his position as a social and moral critic. Rather than upholding a status quo and accepting the development of what he perceived as immorality within his region, Socrates questioned the collective notion of "might makes right" that he felt was common in Greece during this period. Plato refers to Socrates as the "gadfly" of the state (as the gadfly stings the horse into action, so Socrates stung various Athenians), insofar as he irritated some people with considerations of justice and the pursuit of goodness.[14] His attempts to improve the Athenians' sense of justice may have been the source of his execution.
According to Plato's Apology, Socrates' life as the "gadfly" of Athens began when his friend Chaerephon asked the oracle at Delphi if anyone was wiser than Socrates; the Oracle responded that none was wiser. Socrates believed that what the Oracle had said was a paradox, because he believed he possessed no wisdom whatsoever. He proceeded to test the riddle by approaching men considered wise by the people of Athens—statesmen, poets, and artisans—in order to refute the Oracle's pronouncement. Questioning them, however, Socrates concluded that, while each man thought he knew a great deal and was wise, in fact they knew very little and were not wise at all. Socrates realized that the Oracle was correct, in that while so-called wise men thought themselves wise and yet were not, he himself knew he was not wise at all, which, paradoxically, made him the wiser one since he was the only person aware of his own ignorance. Socrates' paradoxical wisdom made the prominent Athenians he publicly questioned look foolish, turning them against him and leading to accusations of wrongdoing. Socrates defended his role as a gadfly until the end: at his trial, when Socrates was asked to propose his own punishment, he suggests a wage paid by the government and free dinners for the rest of his life instead, to finance the time he spends as Athens' benefactor.[15] He was, nevertheless, found guilty of both corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens and of "not believing in the gods of the state",[16] and subsequently sentenced to death by drinking a mixture containing poison hemlock.
Bust of Socrates in the Vatican Museum.According to Xenophon's story, Socrates purposefully gave a defiant defense to the jury because "he believed he would be better off dead". Xenophon goes on to describe a defense by Socrates that explains the rigors of old age, and how Socrates would be glad to circumvent them by being sentenced to death. It is also understood that Socrates also wished to die because he "actually believed the right time had come for him to die."
Xenophon and Plato agree that Socrates had an opportunity to escape, as his followers were able to bribe the prison guards. He chose to stay for several reasons:
Socrates' death is described at the end of Plato's Phaedo. Socrates turned down the pleas of Crito to attempt an escape from prison. After drinking the poison, he was instructed to walk around until his legs felt numb. After he lay down, the man who administered the poison pinched his foot. Socrates could no longer feel his legs. The numbness slowly crept up his body until it reached his heart. Shortly before his death, Socrates speaks his last words to Crito: "Crito, we owe a rooster to Asclepius. Please, don't forget to pay the debt." Asclepius was the Greek god for curing illness, and it is likely Socrates' last words meant that death is the cure—and freedom, of the soul from the body. Additionally, in Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths, Robin Waterfield adds another interpretation of Socrates' last words. He suggests that Socrates was a voluntary scapegoat; his death was the purifying remedy for Athens’ misfortunes. In this view, the token of appreciation for Asclepius would represent a cure for the ailments of Athens.[14]
To illustrate the use of the Socratic method; a series of questions are posed to help a person or group to determine their underlying beliefs and the extent of their knowledge. The Socratic method is a negative method of hypothesis elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. It was designed to force one to examine one's own beliefs and the validity of such beliefs. In fact, Socrates once said, "I know you won't believe me, but the highest form of Human Excellence is to question oneself and others."[17]
An alternative interpretation of the dialectic is that it is a method for direct perception of the Form of the Good. Philosopher Karl Popper describes the dialectic as "the art of intellectual intuition, of visualising the divine originals, the Forms or Ideas, of unveiling the Great Mystery behind the common man's everyday world of appearances."[18] In a similar vein French philosopher Pierre Hadot suggests that the dialogues are a type of spiritual exercise. "Furthermore," writes Hadot, "in Plato's view, every dialectical exercise, precisely because it is an exercise of pure thought, subject to the demands of the Logos, turns the soul away from the sensible world, and allows it to convert itself towards the Good."[19]
The matter is complicated because the historical Socrates seems to have been notorious for asking questions but not answering, claiming to lack wisdom concerning the subjects about which he questioned others.[20]
If anything in general can be said about the philosophical beliefs of Socrates, it is that he was morally, intellectually, and politically at odds with his fellow Athenians. When he is on trial for heresy and corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens, he uses his method of elenchos to demonstrate to the jurors that their moral values are wrong-headed. He tells them they are concerned with their families, careers, and political responsibilities when they ought to be worried about the "welfare of their souls". Socrates' belief in the immortality of the soul, and his conviction that the gods had singled him out as a divine emissary seemed to provoke, if not ridicule, at least annoyance. Socrates also questioned the Sophistic doctrine that arete (virtue) can be taught. He liked to observe that successful fathers (such as the prominent military general Pericles) did not produce sons of their own quality. Socrates argued that moral excellence was more a matter of divine bequest than parental nurture. This belief may have contributed to his lack of anxiety about the future of his own sons.
Socrates frequently says his ideas are not his own, but his teachers'. He mentions several influences: Prodicus the rhetor and Anaxagoras the scientist. Perhaps surprisingly, Socrates claims to have been deeply influenced by two women besides his mother: he says that Diotima, a witch and priestess from Mantinea, taught him all he knows about eros, or love; and that Aspasia, the mistress of Pericles, taught him the art of rhetoric.[21] John Burnet argued that his principal teacher was the Anaxagorean Archelaus but his ideas were as Plato described them; Eric A. Havelock, on the other hand, considered Socrates' association with the Anaxagoreans to be evidence of Plato's philosophical separation from Socrates.
In Plato's Theaetetus (150a), Socrates compares himself to a true matchmaker (προμνηστικός promnestikós), as distinguished from a panderer (προᾰγωγός proagogos). This distinction is echoed in Xenophon's Symposium (3.20), when Socrates jokes about his certainty of being able to make a fortune, if he chose to practice the art of pandering. For his part as a philosophical interlocutor, he leads his respondent to a clearer conception of wisdom, although he claims he is not himself a teacher (Apology). His role, he claims, is more properly to be understood as analogous to a midwife (μαῖα maia). Socrates explains that he is himself barren of theories, but knows how to bring the theories of others to birth and determine whether they are worthy or mere "wind eggs" (ἀνεμιαῖον anemiaion). Perhaps significantly, he points out that midwives are barren due to age, and women who have never given birth are unable to become midwives; they would have no experience or knowledge of birth and would be unable to separate the worthy infants from those that should be left on the hillside to be exposed. To judge this, the midwife must have experience and knowledge of what she is judging.
Bust of Socrates in the Palermo Archaeological Museum.Socrates believed the best way for people to live was to focus on self-development rather than the pursuit of material wealth.[citation needed] He always invited others to try to concentrate more on friendships and a sense of true community, for Socrates felt this was the best way for people to grow together as a populace.[citation needed] His actions lived up to this: in the end, Socrates accepted his death sentence when most thought he would simply leave Athens, as he felt he could not run away from or go against the will of his community; as mentioned above, his reputation for valor on the battlefield was without reproach.
The idea that humans possessed certain virtues formed a common thread in Socrates' teachings. These virtues represented the most important qualities for a person to have, foremost of which were the philosophical or intellectual virtues. Socrates stressed that "virtue was the most valuable of all possessions; the ideal life was spent in search of the Good. Truth lies beneath the shadows of existence, and it is the job of the philosopher to show the rest how little they really know."[citation needed]
Socrates' opposition to democracy is often denied, and the question is one of the biggest philosophical debates when trying to determine exactly what Socrates believed. The strongest argument of those who claim Socrates did not actually believe in the idea of philosopher kings is that the view is expressed no earlier than Plato's Republic, which is widely considered one of Plato's "Middle" dialogues and not representative of the historical Socrates' views. Furthermore, according to Plato's Apology of Socrates, an "early" dialogue, Socrates refused to pursue conventional politics; he often stated he could not look into other's matters or tell people how to live their lives when he did not yet understand how to live his own. He believed he was a philosopher engaged in the pursuit of Truth, and did not claim to know it fully. Socrates' acceptance of his death sentence, after his conviction by the Boule (Senate), can also be seen to support this view. It is often claimed much of the anti-democratic leanings are from Plato, who was never able to overcome his disgust at what was done to his teacher. In any case, it is clear Socrates thought the rule of the Thirty Tyrants was at least as objectionable as Democracy; when called before them to assist in the arrest of a fellow Athenian, Socrates refused and narrowly escaped death before the Tyrants were overthrown. He did however fulfill his duty to serve as Prytanis when a trial of a group of Generals who presided over a disastrous naval campaign were judged; even then he maintained an uncompromising attitude, being one of those who refused to proceed in a manner not supported by the laws, despite intense pressure.[24] Judging by his actions, he considered the rule of the Thirty Tyrants less legitimate than the Democratic Senate that sentenced him to death.
Perhaps the most interesting facet of this is Socrates' reliance on what the Greeks called his "daemonic sign", an averting (ἀποτρεπτικός apotreptikos) inner voice Socrates heard only when he was about to make a mistake. It was this sign that prevented Socrates from entering into politics. In the Phaedrus, we are told Socrates considered this to be a form of "divine madness", the sort of insanity that is a gift from the gods and gives us poetry, mysticism, love, and even philosophy itself. Alternately, the sign is often taken to be what we would call "intuition"; however, Socrates' characterization of the phenomenon as "daemonic" suggests its origin is divine, mysterious, and independent of his own thoughts.
The Apology professes to be a record of the actual speech Socrates delivered in his own defense at the trial. In the Athenian jury system, an "apology" is composed of three parts: a speech, followed by a counter-assessment, then some final words. "Apology" is a transliteration, not a translation, of the Greek apologia, meaning "defense"; in this sense it is not apologetic according to our contemporary use of the term.
Plato generally does not place his own ideas in the mouth of a specific speaker; he lets ideas emerge via the Socratic Method, under the guidance of Socrates. Most of the dialogues present Socrates applying this method to some extent, but nowhere as completely as in the Euthyphro. In this dialogue, Socrates and Euthyphro go through several iterations of refining the answer to Socrates' question, "...What is the pious, and what the impious?"
In Plato's Dialogues, learning appears as a process of remembering. The soul, before its incarnation in the body, was in the realm of Ideas (very similar to the Platonic "Forms"). There, it saw things the way they truly are, rather than the pale shadows or copies we experience on earth. By a process of questioning, the soul can be brought to remember the ideas in their pure form, thus bringing wisdom.
Especially for Plato's writings referring to Socrates, it is not always clear which ideas brought forward by Socrates (or his friends) actually belonged to Socrates and which of these may have been new additions or elaborations by Plato – this is known as the Socratic Problem. Generally, the early works of Plato are considered to be close to the spirit of Socrates, whereas the later works – including Phaedo and the Republic – are considered to be possibly products of Plato's elaborations.
Immediately, the students of Socrates set to work both on exercising their perceptions of his teachings in politics and also on developing many new philosophical schools of thought. Some of Athens' controversial and anti-democratic tyrants were contemporary or posthumous students of Socrates including Alcibiades and Critias. Critias' cousin, Plato would go on to found the Academy in 385 BC, which gained so much notoriety that 'Academy' became the base word for educational institutions in later European languages such as English, French, and Italian. Plato's protege, another important figure of the Classical era, Aristotle went on to tutor Alexander the Great and also to found his own school in 335 BC- the Lyceum, whose name also now means an educational institution.
While Socrates was shown to demote the importance of institutional knowledge like mathematics or science in relation to the human condition in his Dialogues, Plato would emphasize it with metaphysical overtones mirroring that of Pythagoras – the former who would dominate Western thought well into the Renaissance. Aristotle himself was as much of a philosopher as he was a scientist with rudimentary work in the fields of biology and physics.
Socratic thought which challenged conventions, especially in stressing a simplistic way of living, became divorced from Plato's more detached and philosophical pursuits. This idea was inherited by one of Socrates' older students, Antisthenes, who became the originator of another philosophy in the years after Socrates' death – Cynicism. Antisthenes attacked Plato and Alcibiades over what he deemed as their betrayal of Socrates' tenets in his writings.[citation needed]
The idea of asceticism being hand in hand with an ethical life or one with piety, ignored by Plato and Aristotle and somewhat dealt with by the Cynics, formed the core of another philosophy in 281 BC – Stoicism when Zeno of Citium would discover Socrates' works and then learn from Crates, a Cynic philosopher. None of the schools however, would inherit his tendency to openly associate with and respect women or the regular citizen.[citation needed]
While some of the later contributions of Socrates to Hellenistic Era culture and philosophy as well as the Roman Era have been lost to time, his teachings began a resurgence in both medieval Europe and the Islamic Middle East alongside those of Aristotle and Stoicism. Socrates is mentioned in the dialogue Kuzari by Jewish philosopher and rabbi Yehuda Halevi in which a Jew instructs the Khazar king about Judaism. al-Kindi, a well-known Arabic philosopher, introduced and tried to reconcile Socrates and Hellenistic philosophy to an Islamic audience.
Socrates' stature in Western philosophy returned in full force with the Renaissance and the Age of Reason in Europe when political theory began to resurface under those like Locke and Hobbes. Voltaire even went so far as to write a satirical play about the Trial of Socrates. There were a number of paintings about his life including Socrates Tears Alcibiades from the Embrace of Sensual Pleasure by Jean-Baptiste Regnault and The Death of Socrates by Jacques-Louis David in the later 18th century.
To this day, the Socratic Method is still used in classroom and law school discourse to expose underlying issues in both subject and the speaker. He has been rewarded with accolades ranging from numerous mentions in pop culture such as the movie Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure and a Greek rock band to numerous busts in academic institutions in recognition of his contribution to education.
Evaluation and reaction to Socrates has been undertaken with both historical and philosophical inquiry from the time of his death to the present day with a multitude of conclusions and perspectives. One of the initial criticisms levied against the philosopher was presented at his trial – that he was not the proponent of a philosophy but an individual with a method of undermining the fabric of Athenian society, a charge carried by the 500-man jury of Athenians that sentenced him to death. Although he was not directly prosecuted for his connection to Critias, leader of the Spartan-backed Thirty Tyrants, he was seen as a controversial figure, who mentored oligarchs who became abusive tyrants, and undermined Athenian democracy. The Sophist establishment he railed at in life survived him, but by the 3rd century BC, was rapidly overtaken by the many philosophical schools of thought that Socrates influenced.
Socrates' death is considered iconic and his status as a martyr of philosophy overshadowed most contemporary and posthumous criticism at the time. However, Xenophon attempts to explain that Socrates purposely welcomed the hemlock due to his old age using the arguably self-destructive testimony to the jury as evidence. Direct criticism of Socrates almost disappears at this point, but there is a noticeable preference for Plato or Aristotle over the elements of Socratic philosophy distinct from those of his students, even into the Middle Ages.
Modern scholarship holds that, with so much of the philosopher obscured and possibly altered by Plato, it is impossible to gain a clear picture of Socrates amidst all the seeming contradictions. That both Cynicism and Stoicism, which carried heavy influence from Socratic thought, were unlike or even contrary to Platonism further illustrates this. The ambiguity and lack of reliability serves as the modern basis of criticism – that it is near impossible to know the real Socrates. Some controversy also exists about claims of Socrates exempting himself from the homosexual customs of ancient Greece and not believing in the Olympian gods to the point of being monotheistic or if this was an attempt by later Medieval scholars to reconcile him with the morals of the era. However, it is still commonly taught and held with little exception that Socrates is the founder of modern Western philosophy, to the point that philosophers before him are referred to as pre-Socratic.
Search Soulmates profiles and find a date today
A lot has been said about Jesus of Nazareth. More on fictional nature than the truth. So much so that the current trend is bucking the usual and customary hoopla, associated with more and more shopping, decorating real and China made artificial trees with China made twinkling lights, tingling decorations, pretty as pretty can be miniature barns with animals snuggling up with kings, camels, sheep, goats, donkeys and visitors wearing ridiculous head gears twice the size of their heads, kneeling, praying, singing the joyous songs and rare merchandising being offered to this little male child born out of wedlock, oops, miraculous birth without Mary and her boy friend Joseph having a baby without the benefit of sex.
Something in this picture is not kosher. If Socrates were one of the kings coming from the east, Oops, west, he would have certainly taken a serious objection. He was famous for his truth serum. The guy accepted the Hemlock, a certain death to a life of (perpetual) slavery.
 |
No eBook available  New! Shop for Google eBooksGo to the Google eBookstore for over 3 million eBooks to read on the Web, Android, iPhone, iPad, Sony and Nook.Shop for eBooks now » |
What people are saying - Write a reviewWe haven't found any reviews in the usual places. Related booksMontaigne: a collection of essays, Volume 5 Dikka Berven The complete essays of Montaigne Michel de Montaigne Language and Meaning Dikka Berven Montaigne Hugo Friedrich, Philippe Desan Montaigne studies, Volume 17, Issues 1-2 University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Dept. of French and Italian, University of Chicago. Division of the Humanities Montaigne Richard Anthony Sayce, Ian Maclean Montaigne Théodore Vernier (comte de Mont-Orient) Distinguo Steven Rendall Montaigne Anonymous Contents
Common terms and phrases1'autre 1'homme Apologie argument autre bien Bordeaux branle c'est chapter chose Christian conscience conservatism consubstantial corps critical Croquette d'une death Descartes deux dire discourse diversity Divertissement edition entiere Essaying Montaigne essayist example faict fait faut fideism fois forme French hommes human Ibid ideas interpretation j'ay jamais Jean Starobinski LETTERATURA FRANCESE Livre Marguerite de Valois Marie de Gournay meaning meme memory ment mesme Michel de Montaigne mind monde Montaigne's Essais Montaigne's thought moral mouvement n'est nature naturelle opinions Paris Pascal pensee peut philosophical phrase Pierre political Port-Royal premiere present propre Pyrrhonism qu'elle qu'il qu'on qu'un raison Raymond Sebond reader reading reason religion religious Renaissance repentir rhetorical rien s'il Sainte-Beuve says Sebond seul seulement simply Socrates sujet taigne taigne's temps theme things tion tousjours tout trouve truth University vanite Villey virtue voir vrai words writing Popular passagesPage 99- See, through this air, this ocean, and this earth, All matter quick, and bursting into birth. Above, how high progressive life may go! Around, how wide! how deep extend below! Vast chain of being! which from God began. Natures ethereal, human, angel, man, Beast, bird, fish, insect, what no eye can see, No glass can reach; from infinite to thee, From thee to nothing. Page 100- And when we consider the infinite power and wisdom of the Maker, we have reason to think that it is suitable to the magnificent harmony of the universe, and the great design and infinite goodness of the Architect... Page 244- Le monde n'est qu'une branloire perenne. Toutes choses y branlent sans cesse : la terre, les rochers du Caucase, les pyramides d'/Egypte, et du branle public et du leur. La constance mesme n'est autre chose qu'un branle plus languissant. Page 319- Législateurs, et n'est police où il n'y ait quelque meslange ou de vanité cérémonieuse, ou d'opinion mensongère, qui serve de bride à tenir le peuple en office. C'est pour cela que la pluspart ont leurs origines et commencemens... Page 325- Le moyen que ie prens pour rabbattre cette frénésie, et qui me semble le plus propre, c'est de froisser et fouler aux pieds l'orgueil et l'humaine fierté; leur faire sentir l'inanité, la vanité et deneantise de l'homme ; leur arracher des poings les chestifves armes de leur raison ; leur faire baisser la teste et mordre la terre soubs l'auctorité et révérence de la maiesté divine. Page 206- La conservation des estats est chose qui vraysemblablement surpasse nostre intelligence : c'est, comme dict Platon », chose puissante, et de difficile dissolution, qu'une civile police; elle dure souvent contre des maladies mortelles et intestines, contre l'injure des loix injustes, contre la tyrannie, contre le desbordement et ignorance des magistrats, licence et sédition des peuples. Page 315- ... the universe, that is, the whole mass of all things that are), is corporeal, that is to say, body; and hath the dimensions of magnitude, namely, length, breadth, and depth: also every part of body, is likewise body, and hath the like dimensions; and consequently every part of the universe... Page 129- Je ne peints pas l'estre. Je peints le passage : non un passage d'aage en autre, ou, comme dict le peuple, de sept en sept ans, mais de jour en jour, de minute en minute. Page 99- Were we to press, inferior might on ours ; Or in the full creation leave a void, Where, one step broken, the great scale's destroy'd : From Nature's chain whatever link you strike, Tenth, or ten thousandth, breaks the chain alike. And if each system in gradation roll, Alike essential to th... Page 127- Il me sembloit que ma vie ne me tenoit plus qu'au bout des lèvres; je fermois les yeux pour ayder, ce me sembloit, à la pousser hors, et prenois plaisir à m'alanguir et à me laisser aller. C'estoit une imagination qui ne faisoit que nager superficiellement en mon ame, aussi tendre et aussi foible que tout le reste, mais à la verité non seulement exempte de desplaisir, ains meslée à cette douceur que sentent ceux qui se laissent glisser au sommeil. Bibliographic information
|
The Legacy of Socrates: Essays in Moral Philosophy
Share |
December, 2006
Cloth, 264 pages,
ISBN: 978-0-231-13844-4
$50.00 / £34.50
Cloth, 264 pages,
ISBN: 978-0-231-13844-4
$50.00 / £34.50
James Rachels's philosophical writings address key questions of contemporary life and the classic dilemmas of moral philosophy. A leading figure in the development of applied ethics, James Rachels became an influential and sometimes controversial thinker on issues concerning animal rights, euthanasia, bioethics, and moral objectivity. This final collection of James Rachels's work brings together fourteen essays that best summarize Rachels's philosophical positions. The essays also shed new light on the depth and breadth of Rachels's work and its importance for contemporary philosophy.
Written in Rachels's characteristically lucid, literary prose, these essays address the relationship between morality and reason, the duty to relieve both human and animal suffering, the independence of morality from religion, the rejection of relativism and egoism, and the role of ethics in a democratic society. Rachels offers an argument for vegetarianism, examines a controversial case involving a surrogate mother, and speculates on the ethics of political killing. Other essays range from Rachels's interpretation of Nietzsche's philosophy to his appreciation of movies.Rachels was a strong believer in the ability of moral philosophy to improve our lives. This collection, which brings these important works together for the first time, is a testament to both the value of moral philosophy in understanding our world and the richness of Rachels's contributions to this understanding.
Related Subjects
About the Author
top of page© Columbia University Press
ENGLISH 101. ACADEMIC WRITING Reading for Lesson 12 | ||
| Illustrative "Scholarly Journal" Articles on Socrates: be prepared for your research to take longer than you think! | ||
Course Info Schedule (for Fall 2004) Course Index | As we begin our first significant college research project, we may imagine that, almost instantly, we will find all kinds of high quality information that will answer whatever question we have. Searching the databases with a critical eye, however, we may soon discover that we are finding few articles with much research value for us. Searches are likely to turn up more newspaper stories and movie reviews than thorough professional and academic reports. Even researching a seemingly academic subject like Socrates, using a reputable college library database like ProQuest, search results turn up lots of popular writing like the Chicago Tribune article, The remarkable tale of the priest turned terrorist turned philosopher that I discussed in connection with the first library assignment. That article appeared in ProQuest among 359 search results when I asked simply for "Socrates" AND "Plato," but when I restricted the ProQuest search only to "scholarly journals, including peer reviewed," the number of search results was cut to 166. So most of the initial search results were NOT academic sources. And not all of these remaining on the list from the more restricted search were academic, either. A number were from high end popular magazines like The Times Literary Supplement and History Today, but ProQuest decided to flatter them with the description of "scholarly." ProQuest, InfoTrac and other databases do not screen for research quality. They subscribe to a wide variety of publications and scan everything in. The result is a stew of the good, the bad and the ugly. It's up to us, as users, to screen for quality, to judge which articles (if any) to accept in our research. This task is difficult for beginning researchers, so it's advisable to start by getting help from an expert in the field of the research or from a professional librarian. Get help online from TC3 Library's home page by clicking on "Ask a Librarian."  What's published in scholarly journals by academics is not always useful, of course. To pick one example from many candidates, see "Quentin P. Taylor's "The Last Days of Socrates" (and Dr. G's critical remarks). Taylor is an academic writer publishing in a scholarly journal, but the overall argument in his article is not coherent. It is self-contradictory. If you did not know much about Socrates before you found this article, how would you realize that its quality is poor? Maybe you wouldn't. You might simply assume that the article must be valid, simply because it is published in a scholarly journal. By exercising common sense and good judgment, however, you can sometimes recognize when the arguments in an article are weak or flawed. In academic research, we must always read with critical detachment, weighing the evidence that authors produce against the claims that they make. In the search for truth at the academy, all conclusions are provisional. They are always open to question.ProQuest classifies all of the sources in its database as "Newspapers," "Magazines," "Trade Publications," and "Scholarly Articles." In a ProQuest advanced search, the results can be divided into these four classifications by clicking on the gray tabs at the top of the column of search results. ProQuest's classifications can be helpful, but sometimes they can be misleading. In a search for Socrates AND Plato, one "Scholarly Article," according to ProQuest, is Melissa Lane's "Was Socrates a Democrat?" (and Dr. G's critical remarks). It's true that Lane is an academic from a great world-class university, but she's not publishing here in an academic journal. This article appears in a popular magazine, History Today. The magazine's editors have gutted the citations from her work and have trimmed her text to keep her story moving along with a minimum of complications and pauses for facts. As a result, the article may be very satisfactory for the magazine's casual readers, who read for pleasure, but it is not especially helpful to academic researchers who are trying to pursue their own investigation of Socrates' politics. When we hunt for quality sources, the publication can matter more than the author. The publishing game generally is controlled by editors, not authors. Lane's article is dummed down, but many other academic pieces about Socrates in ProQuest and InfoTrac pose an opposite kind of problem, specialization. A scholarly article on Socrates may assume that its readers are thoroughly familiar with the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, or the historical account of the Peloponnesian War by Socrates' contemporary Thucydides. It is very likely to assume readers' familiarity with prior research on Socrates. In many cases, student researchers will be in the dark when trying to understand articles that have been written by specialists for specialists. What's a student to do? Where can good sources be found? Plan on spending a lot of search time looking for sources that are just right for your research project. (return to Lesson 12) | |
gutchess@englishare.net Academic writing home page Gary Gutchess © 2003 | ||
Manetti's Socrates and the Socrateses of Antiquity
Citable link to this page
Show full Dublin Core record
| Title: | Manetti's Socrates and the Socrateses of Antiquity |
| Author: | Hankins, JamesNote: Order does not reflect citation order of authors. |
| Citation: | Hankins, James. 2008. Manetti’s Socrates and the Socrateses of antiquity. In Dignitas et excellentia hominis: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi su Giannozzo Manetti, Ed. Stefano U. Baldassarri, 203-219. Florence: Le Lettere. |
| Full Text & Related Files: | Hankins_ManettiSocrates.pdf (118.6Kb; PDF)  |
| Abstract: | This article argues that Giannozzo Manetti's Life of Socrates (c. 1440), seemingly a random pastiche of ancient sources, is in fact carefully constructed to present a particular image of Socrates, a Socrates who can serve as a model for the humanistic movement of the early fifteenth century. |
| Terms of Use: | This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of-use#LAA |
| Citable link to this page: | http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:2961810 |
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- FAS Scholarly Articles [4022]
Peer reviewed scholarly articles from the Faculty of Arts and Sciences of Harvard University
Search DASH
Submitters
Socrates
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is about the classical Greek philosopher. For other uses of Socrates, see Socrates (disambiguation).
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011) |
 Socrates | |
| Full name | Socrates (Σωκράτης) |
|---|---|
| Born | c. 469 / 470 BC[1] Deme Alopece, Athens |
| Died | 399 BC (age approx. 71) Athens |
| Era | Ancient philosophy |
| Region | Western Philosophy |
| School | Classical Greek |
| Main interests | Epistemology, ethics |
| Notable ideas | Socratic method, Socratic irony |
 |
| Part of a series on |
| Socrates |
|---|
| "I know that I know nothing" Social gadfly · Trial of Socrates |
| Eponymous concepts |
| Socratic dialogue · Socratic method Socratic problem · Socratic paradox |
| Disciples |
| Plato · Xenophon Antisthenes · Aristippus |
| Related topics |
| Cynics · Cyrenaics · Platonism Stoicism · The Clouds |
/ˈsɒkrətiːz/; Greek: Σωκράτης, Ancient Greek pronunciation: [sɔːkrátɛːs], Sōkrátēs; c. 469 BC – 399 BC)[1] was a classical Greek Athenian philosopher. Credited as one of the founders of Western philosophy, he is an enigmatic figure known chiefly through the accounts of later classical writers, especially the writings of his students Plato and Xenophon, and the plays of his contemporary Aristophanes. Many would claim that Plato's dialogues are the most comprehensive accounts of Socrates to survive from antiquity.[2]Through his portrayal in Plato's dialogues, Socrates has become renowned for his contribution to the field of ethics, and it is this Platonic Socrates who also lends his name to the concepts of Socratic irony and the Socratic method, or elenchus. The latter remains a commonly used tool in a wide range of discussions, and is a type of pedagogy in which a series of questions are asked not only to draw individual answers, but also to encourage fundamental insight into the issue at hand. It is Plato's Socrates that also made important and lasting contributions to the fields of epistemology and logic, and the influence of his ideas and approach remains strong in providing a foundation for much western philosophy that followed.
As one recent commentator has put it, Plato, the idealist, offers "an idol, a master figure, for philosophy. A Saint, a prophet of the 'Sun-God', a teacher condemned for his teachings as a heretic."[3]
Contents[hide] |
[edit] Biography
[edit] The Socratic problem
An accurate picture of the historical Socrates and his philosophical viewpoints is problematic: an issue known as the Socratic problem.As Socrates did not write philosophical texts, the knowledge of the man, his life, and his philosophy is entirely based on writings by his students and contemporaries. Foremost among them is Plato; however, works by Xenophon, Aristotle, and Aristophanes also provide important insights.[4] The difficulty of finding the “real” Socrates arises because these works are often philosophical or dramatic texts rather than straightforward histories. Aside from Thucydides (who makes no mention of Socrates or philosophers in general) and Xenophon, there are in fact no straightforward histories contemporary with Socrates that dealt with his own time and place. A corollary of this is that sources that do mention Socrates do not necessarily claim to be historically accurate, and are often partisan (those who prosecuted and convicted Socrates have left no testament). Historians therefore face the challenge of reconciling the various texts that come from these men to create an accurate and consistent account of Socrates' life and work. The result of such an effort is not necessarily realistic, merely consistent.
Plato is frequently viewed as the most informative source about Socrates' life and philosophy.[5] At the same time, however, many scholars believe that in some works Plato, being a literary artist, pushed his avowedly brightened-up version of "Socrates" far beyond anything the historical Socrates was likely to have done or said; and that Xenophon, being an historian, is a more reliable witness to the historical Socrates. It is a matter of much debate which Socrates Plato is describing at any given point—the historical figure, or Plato's fictionalization.
It is also clear from other writings and historical artifacts, however, that Socrates was not simply a character, or an invention, of Plato. The testimony of Xenophon and Aristotle, alongside some of Aristophanes' work (especially The Clouds), is useful in fleshing out a perception of Socrates beyond Plato's work.
[edit] Life
Aristophanes' play The Clouds portrays Socrates as a clown who teaches his students how to bamboozle their way out of debt. Most of Aristophanes' works, however, function as parodies. Thus, it is presumed this characterization was also not literal.
According to Plato, Socrates' father was Sophroniscus[7] and his mother Phaenarete,[8] a midwife. Though characterized as unattractive in appearance and short in stature, Socrates married Xanthippe,[9] who was much younger than him. She bore for him three sons,[10] Lamprocles, Sophroniscus and Menexenus. His friend Crito of Alopece criticized him for abandoning his sons when he refused to try to escape before his execution.[11]
It is unclear how Socrates earned a living. Ancient texts seem to indicate that Socrates did not work. In Xenophon's Symposium, Socrates is reported as saying he devotes himself only to what he regards as the most important art or occupation: discussing philosophy. In The Clouds Aristophanes portrays Socrates as accepting payment for teaching and running a sophist school with Chaerephon, while in Plato's Apology and Symposium and in Xenophon's accounts, Socrates explicitly denies accepting payment for teaching. More specifically, in the Apology Socrates cites his poverty as proof he is not a teacher. According to Timon of Phlius and later sources, Socrates took over the profession of stonemasonry from his father. There was a tradition in antiquity, not credited by modern scholarship, that Socrates crafted the statues of the Three Graces, which stood near the Acropolis until the 2nd century AD.[12]
Several of Plato's dialogues refer to Socrates' military service. Socrates says he served in the Athenian army during three campaigns: at Potidaea, Amphipolis, and Delium. In the Symposium Alcibiades describes Socrates' valour in the battles of Potidaea and Delium, recounting how Socrates saved his life in the former battle (219e-221b). Socrates' exceptional service at Delium is also mentioned in the Laches by the General after whom the dialogue is named (181b). In the Apology, Socrates compares his military service to his courtroom troubles, and says anyone on the jury who thinks he ought to retreat from philosophy must also think soldiers should retreat when it seems likely that they will be killed in battle.
In 406 he was a member of the Boule, and his tribe the Antiochis held the Prytany on the day the Generals of the Battle of Arginusae, who abandoned the slain and the survivors of foundered ships to pursue the defeated Spartan navy, were discussed. Socrates was the Epistates and resisted the unconstitutional demand for a collective trial to establish the guilt of all eight Generals, proposed by Callixeinus. Eventually, Socrates refused to be cowed by threats of impeachment and imprisonment and blocked the vote until his Prytany ended the next day, whereupon the six Generals who had returned to Athens were condemned to death.
In 404 the Thirty Tyrants sought to ensure the loyalty of those opposed to them by making them complicit in their activities. Socrates and four others were ordered to bring a certain Leon of Salamis from his home for unjust execution. Socrates quietly refused, his death averted only by the overthrow of the Tyrants soon afterwards.
[edit] Trial and death
Main article: Trial of Socrates
Claiming loyalty to his city, Socrates clashed with the current course of Athenian politics and society.[13] He praises Sparta, archrival to Athens, directly and indirectly in various dialogues. But perhaps the most historically accurate of Socrates' offenses to the city was his position as a social and moral critic. Rather than upholding a status quo and accepting the development of what he perceived as immorality within his region, Socrates questioned the collective notion of "might makes right" that he felt was common in Greece during this period. Plato refers to Socrates as the "gadfly" of the state (as the gadfly stings the horse into action, so Socrates stung various Athenians), insofar as he irritated some people with considerations of justice and the pursuit of goodness.[14] His attempts to improve the Athenians' sense of justice may have been the source of his execution.
According to Plato's Apology, Socrates' life as the "gadfly" of Athens began when his friend Chaerephon asked the oracle at Delphi if anyone was wiser than Socrates; the Oracle responded that none was wiser. Socrates believed that what the Oracle had said was a paradox, because he believed he possessed no wisdom whatsoever. He proceeded to test the riddle by approaching men considered wise by the people of Athens—statesmen, poets, and artisans—in order to refute the Oracle's pronouncement. Questioning them, however, Socrates concluded that, while each man thought he knew a great deal and was wise, in fact they knew very little and were not wise at all. Socrates realized that the Oracle was correct, in that while so-called wise men thought themselves wise and yet were not, he himself knew he was not wise at all, which, paradoxically, made him the wiser one since he was the only person aware of his own ignorance. Socrates' paradoxical wisdom made the prominent Athenians he publicly questioned look foolish, turning them against him and leading to accusations of wrongdoing. Socrates defended his role as a gadfly until the end: at his trial, when Socrates was asked to propose his own punishment, he suggests a wage paid by the government and free dinners for the rest of his life instead, to finance the time he spends as Athens' benefactor.[15] He was, nevertheless, found guilty of both corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens and of "not believing in the gods of the state",[16] and subsequently sentenced to death by drinking a mixture containing poison hemlock.
Xenophon and Plato agree that Socrates had an opportunity to escape, as his followers were able to bribe the prison guards. He chose to stay for several reasons:
- He believed such a flight would indicate a fear of death, which he believed no true philosopher has.
- If he fled Athens his teaching would fare no better in another country as he would continue questioning all he met and undoubtedly incur their displeasure.
- Having knowingly agreed to live under the city's laws, he implicitly subjected himself to the possibility of being accused of crimes by its citizens and judged guilty by its jury. To do otherwise would have caused him to break his "social contract" with the state, and so harm the state, an act contrary to Socratic principle.
Socrates' death is described at the end of Plato's Phaedo. Socrates turned down the pleas of Crito to attempt an escape from prison. After drinking the poison, he was instructed to walk around until his legs felt numb. After he lay down, the man who administered the poison pinched his foot. Socrates could no longer feel his legs. The numbness slowly crept up his body until it reached his heart. Shortly before his death, Socrates speaks his last words to Crito: "Crito, we owe a rooster to Asclepius. Please, don't forget to pay the debt." Asclepius was the Greek god for curing illness, and it is likely Socrates' last words meant that death is the cure—and freedom, of the soul from the body. Additionally, in Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths, Robin Waterfield adds another interpretation of Socrates' last words. He suggests that Socrates was a voluntary scapegoat; his death was the purifying remedy for Athens’ misfortunes. In this view, the token of appreciation for Asclepius would represent a cure for the ailments of Athens.[14]
[edit] Philosophy
 |
| Part of a series on |
| Plato |
|---|
| Early life · Works · Platonism Epistemology · Idealism / Realism Theory of Forms Form of the Good Third man argument Euthyphro dilemma · Five regimes Philosopher king |
| Allegories and metaphors |
| Ring of Gyges · The cave The divided line · The sun Ship of state · Myth of Er The chariot |
| Related articles |
| The Academy in Athens Socratic problem Commentaries on Plato Middle Platonism · Neoplatonism Neoplatonism and Christianity |
[edit] Socratic method
Main article: Socratic method
Perhaps his most important contribution to Western thought is his dialectic method of inquiry, known as the Socratic method or method of "elenchus", which he largely applied to the examination of key moral concepts such as the Good and Justice. It was first described by Plato in the Socratic Dialogues. To solve a problem, it would be broken down into a series of questions, the answers to which gradually distill the answer a person would seek. The influence of this approach is most strongly felt today in the use of the scientific method, in which hypothesis is the first stage. The development and practice of this method is one of Socrates' most enduring contributions, and is a key factor in earning his mantle as the father of political philosophy, ethics or moral philosophy, and as a figurehead of all the central themes in Western philosophy.To illustrate the use of the Socratic method; a series of questions are posed to help a person or group to determine their underlying beliefs and the extent of their knowledge. The Socratic method is a negative method of hypothesis elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. It was designed to force one to examine one's own beliefs and the validity of such beliefs. In fact, Socrates once said, "I know you won't believe me, but the highest form of Human Excellence is to question oneself and others."[17]
An alternative interpretation of the dialectic is that it is a method for direct perception of the Form of the Good. Philosopher Karl Popper describes the dialectic as "the art of intellectual intuition, of visualising the divine originals, the Forms or Ideas, of unveiling the Great Mystery behind the common man's everyday world of appearances."[18] In a similar vein French philosopher Pierre Hadot suggests that the dialogues are a type of spiritual exercise. "Furthermore," writes Hadot, "in Plato's view, every dialectical exercise, precisely because it is an exercise of pure thought, subject to the demands of the Logos, turns the soul away from the sensible world, and allows it to convert itself towards the Good."[19]
[edit] Philosophical beliefs
The beliefs of Socrates, as distinct from those of Plato, are difficult to discern. Little in the way of concrete evidence exists to demarcate the two. The lengthy theories given in most of the dialogues are those of Plato, and some scholars think Plato so adapted the Socratic style as to make the literary character and the philosopher himself impossible to distinguish. Others argue that he did have his own theories and beliefs, but there is much controversy over what these might have been, owing to the difficulty of separating Socrates from Plato and the difficulty of interpreting even the dramatic writings concerning Socrates. Consequently, distinguishing the philosophical beliefs of Socrates from those of Plato and Xenophon is not easy and it must be remembered that what is attributed to Socrates might more closely reflect the specific concerns of these thinkers.The matter is complicated because the historical Socrates seems to have been notorious for asking questions but not answering, claiming to lack wisdom concerning the subjects about which he questioned others.[20]
If anything in general can be said about the philosophical beliefs of Socrates, it is that he was morally, intellectually, and politically at odds with his fellow Athenians. When he is on trial for heresy and corrupting the minds of the youth of Athens, he uses his method of elenchos to demonstrate to the jurors that their moral values are wrong-headed. He tells them they are concerned with their families, careers, and political responsibilities when they ought to be worried about the "welfare of their souls". Socrates' belief in the immortality of the soul, and his conviction that the gods had singled him out as a divine emissary seemed to provoke, if not ridicule, at least annoyance. Socrates also questioned the Sophistic doctrine that arete (virtue) can be taught. He liked to observe that successful fathers (such as the prominent military general Pericles) did not produce sons of their own quality. Socrates argued that moral excellence was more a matter of divine bequest than parental nurture. This belief may have contributed to his lack of anxiety about the future of his own sons.
Socrates frequently says his ideas are not his own, but his teachers'. He mentions several influences: Prodicus the rhetor and Anaxagoras the scientist. Perhaps surprisingly, Socrates claims to have been deeply influenced by two women besides his mother: he says that Diotima, a witch and priestess from Mantinea, taught him all he knows about eros, or love; and that Aspasia, the mistress of Pericles, taught him the art of rhetoric.[21] John Burnet argued that his principal teacher was the Anaxagorean Archelaus but his ideas were as Plato described them; Eric A. Havelock, on the other hand, considered Socrates' association with the Anaxagoreans to be evidence of Plato's philosophical separation from Socrates.
[edit] Socratic paradoxes
Many of the beliefs traditionally attributed to the historical Socrates have been characterized as "paradoxal" because they seem to conflict with common sense. The following are among the so-called Socratic Paradoxes:[22]- No one desires evil.
- No one errs or does wrong willingly or knowingly.
- Virtue—all virtue—is knowledge.
- Virtue is sufficient for happiness.
[edit] Knowledge
One of the best known sayings of Socrates is "I only know that I know nothing". The conventional interpretation of this remark is that Socrates' wisdom was limited to an awareness of his own ignorance. Socrates believed wrongdoing was a consequence of ignorance and those who did wrong knew no better. The one thing Socrates consistently claimed to have knowledge of was "the art of love", which he connected with the concept of "the love of wisdom", i.e., philosophy. He never actually claimed to be wise, only to understand the path a lover of wisdom must take in pursuing it. It is debatable whether Socrates believed humans (as opposed to gods like Apollo) could actually become wise. On the one hand, he drew a clear line between human ignorance and ideal knowledge; on the other, Plato's Symposium (Diotima's Speech) and Republic (Allegory of the Cave) describe a method for ascending to wisdom.In Plato's Theaetetus (150a), Socrates compares himself to a true matchmaker (προμνηστικός promnestikós), as distinguished from a panderer (προᾰγωγός proagogos). This distinction is echoed in Xenophon's Symposium (3.20), when Socrates jokes about his certainty of being able to make a fortune, if he chose to practice the art of pandering. For his part as a philosophical interlocutor, he leads his respondent to a clearer conception of wisdom, although he claims he is not himself a teacher (Apology). His role, he claims, is more properly to be understood as analogous to a midwife (μαῖα maia). Socrates explains that he is himself barren of theories, but knows how to bring the theories of others to birth and determine whether they are worthy or mere "wind eggs" (ἀνεμιαῖον anemiaion). Perhaps significantly, he points out that midwives are barren due to age, and women who have never given birth are unable to become midwives; they would have no experience or knowledge of birth and would be unable to separate the worthy infants from those that should be left on the hillside to be exposed. To judge this, the midwife must have experience and knowledge of what she is judging.
[edit] Virtue
The idea that humans possessed certain virtues formed a common thread in Socrates' teachings. These virtues represented the most important qualities for a person to have, foremost of which were the philosophical or intellectual virtues. Socrates stressed that "virtue was the most valuable of all possessions; the ideal life was spent in search of the Good. Truth lies beneath the shadows of existence, and it is the job of the philosopher to show the rest how little they really know."[citation needed]
[edit] Politics
It is often argued that Socrates believed "ideals belong in a world only the wise man can understand",[citation needed] making the philosopher the only type of person suitable to govern others. In Plato's dialogue the Republic, Socrates was in no way subtle about his particular beliefs on government. He openly objected to the democracy that ran Athens during his adult life. It was not only Athenian democracy: Socrates objected to any form of government that did not conform to his ideal of a perfect republic led by philosophers, and Athenian government was far from that. It is, however, possible that the Socrates of Plato's Republic is colored by Plato's own views. During the last years of Socrates' life, Athens was in continual flux due to political upheaval. Democracy was at last overthrown by a junta known as the Thirty Tyrants, led by Plato's relative, Critias, who had been a student of Socrates. The Tyrants ruled for about a year before the Athenian democracy was reinstated, at which point it declared an amnesty for all recent events.Socrates' opposition to democracy is often denied, and the question is one of the biggest philosophical debates when trying to determine exactly what Socrates believed. The strongest argument of those who claim Socrates did not actually believe in the idea of philosopher kings is that the view is expressed no earlier than Plato's Republic, which is widely considered one of Plato's "Middle" dialogues and not representative of the historical Socrates' views. Furthermore, according to Plato's Apology of Socrates, an "early" dialogue, Socrates refused to pursue conventional politics; he often stated he could not look into other's matters or tell people how to live their lives when he did not yet understand how to live his own. He believed he was a philosopher engaged in the pursuit of Truth, and did not claim to know it fully. Socrates' acceptance of his death sentence, after his conviction by the Boule (Senate), can also be seen to support this view. It is often claimed much of the anti-democratic leanings are from Plato, who was never able to overcome his disgust at what was done to his teacher. In any case, it is clear Socrates thought the rule of the Thirty Tyrants was at least as objectionable as Democracy; when called before them to assist in the arrest of a fellow Athenian, Socrates refused and narrowly escaped death before the Tyrants were overthrown. He did however fulfill his duty to serve as Prytanis when a trial of a group of Generals who presided over a disastrous naval campaign were judged; even then he maintained an uncompromising attitude, being one of those who refused to proceed in a manner not supported by the laws, despite intense pressure.[24] Judging by his actions, he considered the rule of the Thirty Tyrants less legitimate than the Democratic Senate that sentenced him to death.
[edit] Mysticism
In the Dialogues of Plato, Socrates often seems to support a mystical side, discussing reincarnation and the mystery religions; however, this is generally attributed to Plato[citation needed]. Regardless, this cannot be dismissed out of hand, as we cannot be sure of the differences between the views of Plato and Socrates; in addition, there seem to be some corollaries in the works of Xenophon. In the culmination of the philosophic path as discussed in Plato's Symposium and Republic, one comes to the Sea of Beauty or to the sight of the form of the Good in an experience akin to mystical revelation; only then can one become wise. (In the Symposium, Socrates credits his speech on the philosophic path to his teacher, the priestess Diotima, who is not even sure if Socrates is capable of reaching the highest mysteries.) In the Meno, he refers to the Eleusinian Mysteries, telling Meno he would understand Socrates' answers better if only he could stay for the initiations next week. Further confusions result from the nature of these sources, insofar as the Platonic Dialogues are arguably the work of an artist-philosopher, whose meaning does not volunteer itself to the passive reader nor again the lifelong scholar. Plato himself was a playwright before taking up the study of philosophy. His works are, indeed, dialogues; Plato's choice of this, the medium of Sophocles, Euripides, and the fictions of theatre, may reflect the interpretable nature of his writings. What is more, the first word of nearly all Plato's works is a, or the, significant term for that respective study, and is used with the commonly approved definition in mind. Finally, the Phaedrus and the Symposium each allude to Socrates' coy delivery of philosophic truths in conversation; the Socrates of the Phaedrus goes so far as to demand such dissembling and mystery in all writing. The mysticism we often find in Plato, appearing here and there and couched in some enigmatic tract of symbol and irony, is often at odds with the mysticism Plato's Socrates expounds in some other dialogue. These mystical resolutions to hitherto rigorous inquiries and analyses fail to satisfy caring readers, without fail. Whether they would fail to satisfy readers who understood them is another question, and will not, in all probability, ever be resolved.Perhaps the most interesting facet of this is Socrates' reliance on what the Greeks called his "daemonic sign", an averting (ἀποτρεπτικός apotreptikos) inner voice Socrates heard only when he was about to make a mistake. It was this sign that prevented Socrates from entering into politics. In the Phaedrus, we are told Socrates considered this to be a form of "divine madness", the sort of insanity that is a gift from the gods and gives us poetry, mysticism, love, and even philosophy itself. Alternately, the sign is often taken to be what we would call "intuition"; however, Socrates' characterization of the phenomenon as "daemonic" suggests its origin is divine, mysterious, and independent of his own thoughts.
[edit] Satirical playwrights
He was prominently lampooned in Aristophanes' comedy The Clouds, produced when Socrates was in his mid-forties; he said at his trial (according to Plato) that the laughter of the theater was a harder task to answer than the arguments of his accusers. Søren Kierkegaard believed this play was a more accurate representation of Socrates than those of his students. In the play, Socrates is ridiculed for his dirtiness, which is associated with the Laconizing fad; also in plays by Callias, Eupolis, and Telecleides. Other comic poets who lampooned Socrates include Mnesimachus and Ameipsias. In all of these, Socrates and the Sophists were criticised for "the moral dangers inherent in contemporary thought and literature".[edit] Prose sources
Plato, Xenophon, and Aristotle are the main sources for the historical Socrates; however, Xenophon and Plato were direct disciples of Socrates, and presumably, they idealize him; however, they wrote the only continuous descriptions of Socrates that have come down to us. Aristotle refers frequently, but in passing, to Socrates in his writings. Almost all of Plato's works center on Socrates. However, Plato's later works appear to be more his own philosophy put into the mouth of his mentor.[edit] The Socratic dialogues
Main article: Socratic dialogues
The Socratic Dialogues are a series of dialogues written by Plato and Xenophon in the form of discussions between Socrates and other persons of his time, or as discussions between Socrates' followers over his concepts. Plato's Phaedo is an example of this latter category. Although his Apology is a monologue delivered by Socrates, it is usually grouped with the Dialogues.The Apology professes to be a record of the actual speech Socrates delivered in his own defense at the trial. In the Athenian jury system, an "apology" is composed of three parts: a speech, followed by a counter-assessment, then some final words. "Apology" is a transliteration, not a translation, of the Greek apologia, meaning "defense"; in this sense it is not apologetic according to our contemporary use of the term.
Plato generally does not place his own ideas in the mouth of a specific speaker; he lets ideas emerge via the Socratic Method, under the guidance of Socrates. Most of the dialogues present Socrates applying this method to some extent, but nowhere as completely as in the Euthyphro. In this dialogue, Socrates and Euthyphro go through several iterations of refining the answer to Socrates' question, "...What is the pious, and what the impious?"
In Plato's Dialogues, learning appears as a process of remembering. The soul, before its incarnation in the body, was in the realm of Ideas (very similar to the Platonic "Forms"). There, it saw things the way they truly are, rather than the pale shadows or copies we experience on earth. By a process of questioning, the soul can be brought to remember the ideas in their pure form, thus bringing wisdom.
Especially for Plato's writings referring to Socrates, it is not always clear which ideas brought forward by Socrates (or his friends) actually belonged to Socrates and which of these may have been new additions or elaborations by Plato – this is known as the Socratic Problem. Generally, the early works of Plato are considered to be close to the spirit of Socrates, whereas the later works – including Phaedo and the Republic – are considered to be possibly products of Plato's elaborations.
[edit] Legacy
[edit] Immediate influence
 | This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011) |
While Socrates was shown to demote the importance of institutional knowledge like mathematics or science in relation to the human condition in his Dialogues, Plato would emphasize it with metaphysical overtones mirroring that of Pythagoras – the former who would dominate Western thought well into the Renaissance. Aristotle himself was as much of a philosopher as he was a scientist with rudimentary work in the fields of biology and physics.
Socratic thought which challenged conventions, especially in stressing a simplistic way of living, became divorced from Plato's more detached and philosophical pursuits. This idea was inherited by one of Socrates' older students, Antisthenes, who became the originator of another philosophy in the years after Socrates' death – Cynicism. Antisthenes attacked Plato and Alcibiades over what he deemed as their betrayal of Socrates' tenets in his writings.[citation needed]
The idea of asceticism being hand in hand with an ethical life or one with piety, ignored by Plato and Aristotle and somewhat dealt with by the Cynics, formed the core of another philosophy in 281 BC – Stoicism when Zeno of Citium would discover Socrates' works and then learn from Crates, a Cynic philosopher. None of the schools however, would inherit his tendency to openly associate with and respect women or the regular citizen.[citation needed]
[edit] Later historical effects
| This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011) |
Socrates' stature in Western philosophy returned in full force with the Renaissance and the Age of Reason in Europe when political theory began to resurface under those like Locke and Hobbes. Voltaire even went so far as to write a satirical play about the Trial of Socrates. There were a number of paintings about his life including Socrates Tears Alcibiades from the Embrace of Sensual Pleasure by Jean-Baptiste Regnault and The Death of Socrates by Jacques-Louis David in the later 18th century.
To this day, the Socratic Method is still used in classroom and law school discourse to expose underlying issues in both subject and the speaker. He has been rewarded with accolades ranging from numerous mentions in pop culture such as the movie Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure and a Greek rock band to numerous busts in academic institutions in recognition of his contribution to education.
[edit] Criticism
| This section does not cite any references or sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (November 2011) |
Socrates' death is considered iconic and his status as a martyr of philosophy overshadowed most contemporary and posthumous criticism at the time. However, Xenophon attempts to explain that Socrates purposely welcomed the hemlock due to his old age using the arguably self-destructive testimony to the jury as evidence. Direct criticism of Socrates almost disappears at this point, but there is a noticeable preference for Plato or Aristotle over the elements of Socratic philosophy distinct from those of his students, even into the Middle Ages.
Modern scholarship holds that, with so much of the philosopher obscured and possibly altered by Plato, it is impossible to gain a clear picture of Socrates amidst all the seeming contradictions. That both Cynicism and Stoicism, which carried heavy influence from Socratic thought, were unlike or even contrary to Platonism further illustrates this. The ambiguity and lack of reliability serves as the modern basis of criticism – that it is near impossible to know the real Socrates. Some controversy also exists about claims of Socrates exempting himself from the homosexual customs of ancient Greece and not believing in the Olympian gods to the point of being monotheistic or if this was an attempt by later Medieval scholars to reconcile him with the morals of the era. However, it is still commonly taught and held with little exception that Socrates is the founder of modern Western philosophy, to the point that philosophers before him are referred to as pre-Socratic.
[edit] Ahmadiyya viewpoint
Mirza Tahir Ahmad (the fourth Caliph of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community) argued in his book Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge & Truth that Socrates was a prophet of the ancient Greeks. The apparent prophetic qualities of Socrates are indeed a subject for debate.[25] His constant reference to the oracle and how it performs the active function of a moral compass by preventing him from unseemly acts could easily be taken as a reference to – or substitute for revelation. Similarly, Socrates often refers to God in the singular as opposed to the plural and actively rejected the Greek pantheon of Gods and Goddesses unless citing them as examples of their falseness.[26][edit] See also
[edit] Notes
- ^ a b "Socrates". 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. 1911. Retrieved 2007-11-14.
- ^ Sarah Kofman, Socrates: Fictions of a Philosopher (1998) ISBN 0-8014-3551-X
- ^ Martin Cohen, Philosophical Tales (2008) ISBN 1405140372
- ^ Many other writers added to the fashion of Socratic dialogues (called Sőkratikoi logoi) at the time. In addition to Plato and Xenophon, each of the following is credited by some source as having added to the genre: Aeschines of Sphettus, Antisthenes, Aristippus, Bryson, Cebes, Crito, Euclid of Megara, and Phaedo. It is unlikely Plato was the first in this field (Vlastos, p. 52).
- ^ There are several reasons this is the case. For one, Socrates is credited as an intellectual by almost every existing primary source. It is more likely then, that a fellow intellectual (i.e., Plato) would be more capable of understanding Socrates's ideas than a comic playwright, like Aristophanes. Furthermore, Socrates – as he is depicted by Xenophon's works – does nothing that would lead one to conclude he was a revolutionary or a threat to Athens (both Socrates and Xenophon served in military forces). Plato's Socrates behaves in ways that would explain why he was condemned for impiety (May, On Socrates).
- ^ Ong, pp. 78–79.
- ^ Plato, Laches 180d, Euthydemus 297e, Hippias Major 298c
- ^ Plato, Theaetetus 149a, [http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:1999.01.0176:text=Alc.%201:section=131e Alcibiades 1 131e
- ^ Xenophon, Symposium 2.10
- ^ Plato, Phaedo 116b
- ^ Plato, Crito 45c-45e
- ^ The ancient tradition is attested in Pausanias, 1.22.8; for a modern denial, see Kleine Pauly, "Sokrates" 7; the tradition is a confusion with the sculptor, Socrates of Thebes, mentioned in Pausanias 9.25.3, a contemporary of Pindar.
- ^ Here it is telling to refer to Thucydides (3.82.8): "Reckless audacity came to be considered the courage of a loyal ally; prudent hesitation, specious cowardice; moderation was held to be a cloak for unmanliness; ability to see all sides of a question inaptness to act on any. Frantic violence, became the attribute of manliness; cautious plotting, a justifiable means of self-defense. The advocate of extreme measures was always trustworthy; his opponent a man to be suspected."
- ^ a b Waterfield,Robin. Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths. New York:W.W.Norton and Company, 2009
- ^ Brun (1978).
- ^ Plato. Apology, 24–27.
- ^ Coppens.
- ^ Popper, K. (1962) The Open Society and its Enemies, Volume 1 Plato, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, p133.
- ^ Hadot, P. (1995) Philosophy as a Way of Life, Oxford, Blackwells, p93.
- ^ Plato, Republic 336c & 337a, Theaetetus 150c, Apology 23a; Xenophon, Memorabilia 4.4.9; Aristotle, Sophistical Refutations 183b7.
- ^ Plato, Menexenus 235e
- ^ p. 14, Terence Irwin, The Development of Ethics, vol. 1, Oxford University Press 2007; p. 147, Gerasimos Santas, "The Socratic Paradoxes", Philosophical Review 73 (1964), pp. 147–64.
- ^ Apology of Socrates 21d.
- ^ Kagen (1978).
- ^ Hughes, Bettany. Socrates: The Hemlock Cup. (Random House, 2009)
- ^ Greek Philosophy – Al Islam
[edit] References
- Brun, Jean (1978 (sixth edition)). Socrate. Presses universitaires de France. pp. 39–40. ISBN 2-13-035620-6. (French)
- Coppens, Philip, "Socrates, that’s the question" Feature Articles – Biographies, PhilipCoppens.com.
- May, Hope (2000). On Socrates. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. ISBN 0534576044.
- Ong, Walter (2002). Orality and Literacy. New York: Routledge. ISBN 0415281296.
- Kagan, Donald. The Fall of the Athenian Empire. First. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1987.
- Pausanias, Description of Greece. W. H. S. Jones (translator). Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. (1918). Vol. 1. Books I–II: ISBN 0-674-99104-4. Vol. 4. Books VIII.22–X: ISBN 0-674-99328-4.
- Thucydides; The Peloponnesian War. London, J. M. Dent; New York, E. P. Dutton. 1910.
- Vlastos, Gregory (1991). Socrates, Ironist and Moral Philosopher. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0801497876.
[edit] Further reading
- Bernas, Richard, cond. Socrate. By Erik Satie. LTM/Boutique, 2006
- Bruell, C. (1994). “On Plato’s Political Philosophy”, Review of Politics, 56: 261-82.
- Bruell, C. (1999). On the Socratic Education: An Introduction to the Shorter Platonic Dialogues, Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
- Grube, G.M.A.(2002). "Plato, Five Dialogues". Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
- Hanson, V.D. (2001). "Socrates Dies at Delium, 424 B.C.", What If? 2, Robert Cowley, editor, G.P. Putnam's Sons, NY.
- Egan, K. The educated mind : how cognitive tools shape our understanding. (1997) University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ISBN 0-226-19036-6 p. 137-144
- Kierkegaard, Søren (1968). The Concept of Irony: with Constant Reference to Socrates. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. ISBN 9780253201119.
- Levinson, Paul (2007). The Plot to Save Socrates. New York: Tor Books. ISBN 0765311976.
- Luce, J.V. (1992). An Introduction to Greek Philosophy, Thames & Hudson, NY.
- Maritain, J. (1930, 1991). Introduction to Philosophy, Christian Classics, Inc., Westminster, MD.
- Robinson, R (1953). Plato's Earlier Dialectic. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 9780198247777. Ch. 2: "Elenchus", Ch. 3: "Elenchus: Direct and Indirect"
- Taylor, C.C.W. , Hare, R.M. & Barnes, J. (1998). Greek Philosophers – Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, Oxford University Press, NY.
- Taylor, C.C.W. (2001). Socrates: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[edit] External links
 | Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Socrates |
 | Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Socrates |
- Socrates on In Our Time at the BBC. (listen now)
- Socrates entry by Debra Nails in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Greek Philosophy: Socrates
Diogenes Laërtius, Life of Socrates, translated by Robert Drew Hicks (1925).- Original Fresque of Socrates in Archaeological Museum of Ephesus
- Socrates Narrates Plato's The Republic
- Apology of Socrates, by Plato.
- Project Gutenberge-texts on Socrates, amongst others:
- The Dialogues of Plato (see also Wikipedia articles on Dialogues by Plato)
- The writings of Xenophon, such as the Memorablia and Hellenica.
- The satirical plays by Aristophanes
- Aristotle's writings
- Voltaire's Socrates
- A free audiobook of the Socratic dialogue Euthyphro at LibriVox
- Socratic Method Research Portal
- Video on Socratic method
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Edition: US
About us
Subscribe
Socrates – a man for our times
He was condemned to death for telling the ancient Greeks things they didn't want to hear, but his views on consumerism and trial by media are just as relevant today
- Bettany Hughes
- guardian.co.uk,
- Article history
The Death of Socrates, 1787, by Jacques Louis David. Photograph: World History Archive / Alamy
Two thousand four hundred years ago, one man tried to discover the meaning of life. His search was so radical, charismatic and counterintuitive that he become famous throughout the Mediterranean. Men – particularly young men – flocked to hear him speak. Some were inspired to imitate his ascetic habits. They wore their hair long, their feet bare, their cloaks torn. He charmed a city; soldiers, prostitutes, merchants, aristocrats – all would come to listen. As Cicero eloquently put it, "He brought philosophy down from the skies."
For close on half a century this man was allowed to philosophise unhindered on the streets of his hometown. But then things started to turn ugly. His glittering city-state suffered horribly in foreign and civil wars. The economy crashed; year in, year out, men came home dead; the population starved; the political landscape was turned upside down. And suddenly the philosopher's bright ideas, his eternal questions, his eccentric ways, started to jar. And so, on a spring morning in 399BC, the first democratic court in the story of mankind summoned the 70-year-old philosopher to the dock on two charges: disrespecting the city's traditional gods and corrupting the young. The accused was found guilty. His punishment: state-sponsored suicide, courtesy of a measure of hemlock poison in his prison cell.
The man was Socrates, the philosopher from ancient Athens and arguably the true father of western thought. Not bad, given his humble origins. The son of a stonemason, born around 469BC, Socrates was famously odd. In a city that made a cult of physical beauty (an exquisite face was thought to reveal an inner nobility of spirit) the philosopher was disturbingly ugly. Socrates had a pot-belly, a weird walk, swivelling eyes and hairy hands. As he grew up in a suburb of Athens, the city seethed with creativity – he witnessed the Greek miracle at first-hand. But when poverty-striken Socrates (he taught in the streets for free) strode through the city's central marketplace, he would harrumph provocatively, "How many things I don't need!"
Whereas all religion was public in Athens, Socrates seemed to enjoy a peculiar kind of private piety, relying on what he called his "daimonion", his "inner voice". This "demon" would come to him during strange episodes when the philosopher stood still, staring for hours. We think now he probably suffered from catalepsy, a nervous condition that causes muscular rigidity.
Putting aside his unshakable position in the global roll-call of civilisation's great and good, why should we care about this curious, clever, condemned Greek? Quite simply because Socrates's problems were our own. He lived in a city-state that was for the first time working out what role true democracy should play in human society. His hometown – successful, cash-rich – was in danger of being swamped by its own vigorous quest for beautiful objects, new experiences, foreign coins.
The philosopher also lived through (and fought in) debilitating wars, declared under the banner of demos-kratia – people power, democracy. The Peloponnesian conflict of the fifth century against Sparta and her allies was criticised by many contemporaries as being "without just cause". Although some in the region willingly took up this new idea of democratic politics, others were forced by Athens to love it at the point of a sword. Socrates questioned such blind obedience to an ideology. "What is the point," he asked, "of walls and warships and glittering statues if the men who build them are not happy?" What is the reason for living life, other than to love it?
For Socrates, the pursuit of knowledge was as essential as the air we breathe. Rather than a brainiac grey-beard, we should think of him as his contemporaries knew him: a bustling, energetic, wine-swilling, man-loving, vigorous, pug-nosed, sword-bearing war-veteran: a citizen of the world, a man of the streets.
According to his biographers Plato and Xenophon, Socrates did not just search for the meaning of life, but the meaning of our own lives. He asked fundamental questions of human existence. What makes us happy? What makes us good? What is virtue? What is love? What is fear? How should we best live our lives? Socrates saw the problems of the modern world coming; and he would certainly have something to say about how we live today.
He was anxious about the emerging power of the written word over face-to-face contact. The Athenian agora was his teaching room. Here he would jump on unsuspecting passersby, as Xenophon records. "One day Socrates met a young man on the streets of Athens. 'Where can bread be found?' asked the philosopher. The young man responded politely. 'And where can wine be found?' asked Socrates. With the same pleasant manner, the young man told Socrates where to get wine. 'And where can the good and the noble be found?' then asked Socrates. The young man was puzzled and unable to answer. 'Follow me to the streets and learn,' said the philosopher."
Whereas immediate, personal contact helped foster a kind of honesty, Socrates argued that strings of words could be manipulated, particularly when disseminated to a mass market. "You might think words spoke as if they had intelligence, but if you question them they always say only one thing . . . every word . . . when ill-treated or unjustly reviled always needs its father to protect it," he said.
When psychologists today talk of the danger for the next generation of too much keyboard and texting time, Socrates would have flashed one of his infuriating "I told you so" smiles. Our modern passion for fact-collection and box-ticking rather than a deep comprehension of the world around us would have horrified him too. What was the point, he said, of cataloguing the world without loving it? He went further: "Love is the one thing I understand."
The televised election debates earlier this year would also have given pause. Socrates was withering when it came to a polished rhetorical performance. For him a powerful, substanceless argument was a disgusting thing: rhetoric without truth was one of the greatest threats to the "good" society.
Interestingly, the TV debate experiment would have seemed old hat. Public debate and political competition (agon was the Greek word, which gives us our "agony") were the norm in democratic Athens. Every male citizen over the age of 18 was a politician. Each could present himself in the open-air assembly up on the Pnyx to raise issues for discussion or to vote. Through a complicated system of lots, ordinary men might be made the equivalent of heads of state for a year; home secretary or foreign minister for the space of a day. Those who preferred a private to a public life were labelled idiotes (hence our word idiot).
Socrates died when Golden Age Athens – an ambitious, radical, visionary city-state – had triumphed as a leader of the world, and then over-reached herself and begun to crumble. His unusual personal piety, his guru-like attraction to the young men of the city, suddenly seemed to have a sinister tinge. And although Athens adored the notion of freedom of speech (the city even named one of its warships Parrhesia after the concept), the population had yet to resolve how far freedom of expression ratified a freedom to offend.
Socrates was, I think, a scapegoat for Athens's disappointment. When the city was feeling strong, the quirky philosopher could be tolerated. But, overrun by its enemies, starving, and with the ideology of democracy itself in question, the Athenians took a more fundamentalist view. A confident society can ask questions of itself; when it is fragile, it fears them. Socrates's famous aphorism "the unexamined life is not worth living" was, by the time of his trial, clearly beginning to jar.
After his death, Socrates's ideas had a prodigious impact on both western and eastern civilisation. His influence in Islamic culture is often overlooked – in the Middle East and North Africa, from the 11th century onwards, his ideas were said to refresh and nourish, "like . . . the purest water in the midday heat". Socrates was nominated one of the Seven Pillars of Wisdom, his nickname "The Source". So it seems a shame that, for many, Socrates has become a remote, lofty kind of a figure.
When Socrates finally stood up to face his charges in front of his fellow citizens in a religious court in the Athenian agora, he articulated one of the great pities of human society. "It is not my crimes that will convict me," he said. "But instead, rumour, gossip; the fact that by whispering together you will persuade yourselves that I am guilty." As another Greek author, Hesiod, put it, "Keep away from the gossip of people. For rumour [the Greek pheme, via fama in Latin, gives us our word fame] is an evil thing; by nature she's a light weight to lift up, yes, but heavy to carry and hard to put down again. Rumour never disappears entirely once people have indulged her."
Trial by media, by pheme, has always had a horrible potency. It was a slide in public opinion and the uncertainty of a traumatised age that brought Socrates to the hemlock. Rather than follow the example of his accusers, we should perhaps honour Socrates's exhortation to "know ourselves", to be individually honest, to do what we, not the next man, knows to be right. Not to hide behind the hatred of a herd, the roar of the crowd, but to aim, hard as it might be, towards the "good" life.
The Hemlock Cup: Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life, by Bettany Hughes, is published by Jonathan Cape (rrp £25). To order a copy for £21.99, including free UK mainland p&p, go to guardian.co.uk/bookshop or call 0330 333 68467
For close on half a century this man was allowed to philosophise unhindered on the streets of his hometown. But then things started to turn ugly. His glittering city-state suffered horribly in foreign and civil wars. The economy crashed; year in, year out, men came home dead; the population starved; the political landscape was turned upside down. And suddenly the philosopher's bright ideas, his eternal questions, his eccentric ways, started to jar. And so, on a spring morning in 399BC, the first democratic court in the story of mankind summoned the 70-year-old philosopher to the dock on two charges: disrespecting the city's traditional gods and corrupting the young. The accused was found guilty. His punishment: state-sponsored suicide, courtesy of a measure of hemlock poison in his prison cell.
The man was Socrates, the philosopher from ancient Athens and arguably the true father of western thought. Not bad, given his humble origins. The son of a stonemason, born around 469BC, Socrates was famously odd. In a city that made a cult of physical beauty (an exquisite face was thought to reveal an inner nobility of spirit) the philosopher was disturbingly ugly. Socrates had a pot-belly, a weird walk, swivelling eyes and hairy hands. As he grew up in a suburb of Athens, the city seethed with creativity – he witnessed the Greek miracle at first-hand. But when poverty-striken Socrates (he taught in the streets for free) strode through the city's central marketplace, he would harrumph provocatively, "How many things I don't need!"
Whereas all religion was public in Athens, Socrates seemed to enjoy a peculiar kind of private piety, relying on what he called his "daimonion", his "inner voice". This "demon" would come to him during strange episodes when the philosopher stood still, staring for hours. We think now he probably suffered from catalepsy, a nervous condition that causes muscular rigidity.
Putting aside his unshakable position in the global roll-call of civilisation's great and good, why should we care about this curious, clever, condemned Greek? Quite simply because Socrates's problems were our own. He lived in a city-state that was for the first time working out what role true democracy should play in human society. His hometown – successful, cash-rich – was in danger of being swamped by its own vigorous quest for beautiful objects, new experiences, foreign coins.
The philosopher also lived through (and fought in) debilitating wars, declared under the banner of demos-kratia – people power, democracy. The Peloponnesian conflict of the fifth century against Sparta and her allies was criticised by many contemporaries as being "without just cause". Although some in the region willingly took up this new idea of democratic politics, others were forced by Athens to love it at the point of a sword. Socrates questioned such blind obedience to an ideology. "What is the point," he asked, "of walls and warships and glittering statues if the men who build them are not happy?" What is the reason for living life, other than to love it?
For Socrates, the pursuit of knowledge was as essential as the air we breathe. Rather than a brainiac grey-beard, we should think of him as his contemporaries knew him: a bustling, energetic, wine-swilling, man-loving, vigorous, pug-nosed, sword-bearing war-veteran: a citizen of the world, a man of the streets.
According to his biographers Plato and Xenophon, Socrates did not just search for the meaning of life, but the meaning of our own lives. He asked fundamental questions of human existence. What makes us happy? What makes us good? What is virtue? What is love? What is fear? How should we best live our lives? Socrates saw the problems of the modern world coming; and he would certainly have something to say about how we live today.
He was anxious about the emerging power of the written word over face-to-face contact. The Athenian agora was his teaching room. Here he would jump on unsuspecting passersby, as Xenophon records. "One day Socrates met a young man on the streets of Athens. 'Where can bread be found?' asked the philosopher. The young man responded politely. 'And where can wine be found?' asked Socrates. With the same pleasant manner, the young man told Socrates where to get wine. 'And where can the good and the noble be found?' then asked Socrates. The young man was puzzled and unable to answer. 'Follow me to the streets and learn,' said the philosopher."
Whereas immediate, personal contact helped foster a kind of honesty, Socrates argued that strings of words could be manipulated, particularly when disseminated to a mass market. "You might think words spoke as if they had intelligence, but if you question them they always say only one thing . . . every word . . . when ill-treated or unjustly reviled always needs its father to protect it," he said.
When psychologists today talk of the danger for the next generation of too much keyboard and texting time, Socrates would have flashed one of his infuriating "I told you so" smiles. Our modern passion for fact-collection and box-ticking rather than a deep comprehension of the world around us would have horrified him too. What was the point, he said, of cataloguing the world without loving it? He went further: "Love is the one thing I understand."
The televised election debates earlier this year would also have given pause. Socrates was withering when it came to a polished rhetorical performance. For him a powerful, substanceless argument was a disgusting thing: rhetoric without truth was one of the greatest threats to the "good" society.
Interestingly, the TV debate experiment would have seemed old hat. Public debate and political competition (agon was the Greek word, which gives us our "agony") were the norm in democratic Athens. Every male citizen over the age of 18 was a politician. Each could present himself in the open-air assembly up on the Pnyx to raise issues for discussion or to vote. Through a complicated system of lots, ordinary men might be made the equivalent of heads of state for a year; home secretary or foreign minister for the space of a day. Those who preferred a private to a public life were labelled idiotes (hence our word idiot).
Socrates died when Golden Age Athens – an ambitious, radical, visionary city-state – had triumphed as a leader of the world, and then over-reached herself and begun to crumble. His unusual personal piety, his guru-like attraction to the young men of the city, suddenly seemed to have a sinister tinge. And although Athens adored the notion of freedom of speech (the city even named one of its warships Parrhesia after the concept), the population had yet to resolve how far freedom of expression ratified a freedom to offend.
Socrates was, I think, a scapegoat for Athens's disappointment. When the city was feeling strong, the quirky philosopher could be tolerated. But, overrun by its enemies, starving, and with the ideology of democracy itself in question, the Athenians took a more fundamentalist view. A confident society can ask questions of itself; when it is fragile, it fears them. Socrates's famous aphorism "the unexamined life is not worth living" was, by the time of his trial, clearly beginning to jar.
After his death, Socrates's ideas had a prodigious impact on both western and eastern civilisation. His influence in Islamic culture is often overlooked – in the Middle East and North Africa, from the 11th century onwards, his ideas were said to refresh and nourish, "like . . . the purest water in the midday heat". Socrates was nominated one of the Seven Pillars of Wisdom, his nickname "The Source". So it seems a shame that, for many, Socrates has become a remote, lofty kind of a figure.
When Socrates finally stood up to face his charges in front of his fellow citizens in a religious court in the Athenian agora, he articulated one of the great pities of human society. "It is not my crimes that will convict me," he said. "But instead, rumour, gossip; the fact that by whispering together you will persuade yourselves that I am guilty." As another Greek author, Hesiod, put it, "Keep away from the gossip of people. For rumour [the Greek pheme, via fama in Latin, gives us our word fame] is an evil thing; by nature she's a light weight to lift up, yes, but heavy to carry and hard to put down again. Rumour never disappears entirely once people have indulged her."
Trial by media, by pheme, has always had a horrible potency. It was a slide in public opinion and the uncertainty of a traumatised age that brought Socrates to the hemlock. Rather than follow the example of his accusers, we should perhaps honour Socrates's exhortation to "know ourselves", to be individually honest, to do what we, not the next man, knows to be right. Not to hide behind the hatred of a herd, the roar of the crowd, but to aim, hard as it might be, towards the "good" life.
The Hemlock Cup: Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life, by Bettany Hughes, is published by Jonathan Cape (rrp £25). To order a copy for £21.99, including free UK mainland p&p, go to guardian.co.uk/bookshop or call 0330 333 68467
More on this story
-
News: Malmesbury bids to become UK's first 'philosophy town'Think carefully if you are considering heading to this corner of Wiltshire – the market town that gave us philosopher Thomas Hobbes is aiming to become Britain's capital of thought
Related
- 4 Mar 2006It's all Greek ...
- 14 Feb 2010Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths by Robin Waterfield
- 28 Feb 2009End of an era
- 21 Mar 2009Exit strategies
Article history- University of Phoenix®Official Site - Start Class Today. Online and Campus College Degrees.Phoenix.edu
- Moving to the CloudGet Best Practices with Gartner Research or call (877) 806-2599Go.SungardAS.com
- Self-Publish Your BookGet End to End Publishing Support Plus 555 Book Promotion Tips Nowwww.CreateSpace.com
Comments
Staff
Contributor
tufsoft18 October 2010 12:38PMThis "demon" would come to him during strange episodes when the philosopher stood still, staring for hours. We think now he probably suffered from catalepsy, a nervous condition that causes muscular rigidity.
Well that's alright then, got that safely explained away.
MoRiddiford18 October 2010 12:38PMI can truly say that Socrates' words: "the unexamined life is not worth living" blew my mind at fourteen, and still do thirty years later.
scribler9918 October 2010 12:47PMCor. Socrates in the Grauniad and Andrew Marr 'Starting the Week' on Radio 4 with a philosophy discussion with Mary Warnock, and others. Truly, with this plurality of media, we are spoiled.
Rebelspirit18 October 2010 12:53PMLet us not forget Epicurus who painted in big red lettering in the central market of his town slogans that warned against consumption, imagine trying that at your local supermarket or shopping mall today.
Alain De Botton's outstanding Philosophy: A Guide To Happiness covered Socrates and five other philosophers including Epicurus, Senaca, Michel de Montaigne, Schopenhauer and Friedrich Nietzsche, all available on Youtube, I recommend it to one and all.
amnesiac8818 October 2010 12:57PMDon't you mean Plato?
freespeechoneeach18 October 2010 01:00PM"What is the point," he asked, "of walls and warships and glittering statues if the men who build them are not happy?" What is the reason for living life, other than to love it?
Absolutely fantastic! Socrates is my hero.
I have a little idea of my own, though I don't know whether it's congruent with Socratic thought....
Only in the present can we find happiness. In the past, we can find dead nostalgia. In the future, we can find fantasies and fictions. But in order to experience the bliss of being, we have to be here and now. That's the most precious present (pun intended) of all.
Alsvid18 October 2010 01:00PMDiogenes of Sinope next. He was also awesome.
Alsvid18 October 2010 01:03PMPlus, to what extent was Jesus a mystical late-Plato Socrates + the asceticism of the Cynics?
I know you shouldn't get what you wish for, but I wish Socrates had founded a religion instead. I can't imagine it would work out any better over time, but still.
umbongo18 October 2010 01:11PMSocrates telling people what they don't want to hear?
Those in the Media know not to say things their little consumers don't want to hear.
scribler9918 October 2010 01:20PMRebelspirit 12:53PM
Let us not forget Epicurus
Who could possibly forget Epicurus.
hickerydickery18 October 2010 01:24PMSo your point, Bettany, is that human nature has not changed in over 2,000 years, so we can stop all this hand-wringing over materialism and the evil power of the media, because civilization will simply carry on regardless, in the same way it always has?
RogerOThornhill18 October 2010 01:24PMDon't you mean Plato?
Yes, "Socrates said" is shorthand for "Plato wrote that Socrates said".
A bit like discussing Pericles funeral speech as "Pericles said" rather than what Thucydides wrote that Pericles said. Which are almost certainly two entirely different things.
CrewsControl18 October 2010 01:25PMThe polished, positive, empathetic, sincere political speech studded with an optimistic and memorable phrase wins every time; because we want to accept at face value exhortations to follow the speaker to the promised sunny uplands.
Packaging is vital; after all Corn Flakes don’t come in plain brown cardboard boxes. Don’t blame the political stars they represent the culmination of the process of natural selection in the art of persuasion.
The fault .......lies not in the stars but in ourselves. Now who said that?
seneca201018 October 2010 01:36PMI am confused is this an advertisement..........
poscopy18 October 2010 01:38PMThis comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
Tehillim18 October 2010 01:51PM@ freespeechoneeach
I think Buddha might have got there before you :)
Wonderful article, I suspect I'll buy the book; I'm still a little in awe of Bettany Hughes for getting C4 to commission a series of programmes on ancient history with each episode spanning at least two hours, what happened there? Very good they were too.
Henryplant18 October 2010 01:53PMRogerOThornhill
18 October 2010 1:24PM
´Don't you mean Plato?
Yes, "Socrates said" is shorthand for "Plato wrote that Socrates said".`
Indeed. Plato also wrote that Socrates said: "One must punish slaves justly, not spoiling them by admonition as though they were freemen."
Brusselsexpats18 October 2010 01:59PMSocrates was something of an agent provocateur, not that this should have resulted in his death but had he toned down his rhetoric a bit he probably would have survived his trial.
Even the playwright Euripides was threatened (for his anti-war stance) and some of his followers murdered.
The ancient Greeks weren't all reason and light.
gefreiter18 October 2010 02:02PM@freespeechoneeach
"In the future, we can find fantasies and fictions. But in order to experience the bliss of being, we have to be here and now"
You've been reading Megan Fox's thigh tattoos again haven't you?
fimbrethil18 October 2010 02:06PMFor anyone who's interested, two suggestions for (easy) further reading:
"The Last of the Wine" by Mary Renault, a novel which deals with the period of Athens where Socrates flourished and gives an amazingly vivid picture of life at the time, as well as a sympathetic portrayal of homosexual love as the Greeks saw it.
Any of Aristophanes' plays, which are hilarious, rude, silly, and full of knock-about comedy and bitchy comments about well-known Athenians (think "Up Pompeii" and you've got it). Get a modern translation - David Barratt's had me in stitches.
messy18 October 2010 02:12PMPeople tend to forget that Socrates was guilty. His close friends and followers Critias and Alcebieties were traitors to Athens and caused a reign of terror that rivals Pol Pot's Cambodia or 1994 Rwanda. Most of the so-called "Thirty Tyrants," of whom Critias was the ringleader, were also friends and followers of Socrates.
Homosexual love in ancient Greece was part of the reason Greek women of the time were so severely oppressed.
jae42618 October 2010 02:21PMOften I liked to pretend CiF is a socratic forum, where people build on each other's thoughts, and asking questions is just as important as answering them.
Unfortunately every third post tends to be by someone who comes here to be comforted in their opinions rather than challenged by others', or someone who thinks the point of the debate is simply to demolish the alternative and belittle he who offers it.
akaAJ18 October 2010 02:23PMIndeed we have always to say "Plato wrote that Socrates said", and Plato was as antidemocratic as you can get: philosopher kings feeding hoi polloi soothing lies, supporting the aristocratic party rooting for Sparta (now there was a "democratic" society for you) against his own city in time of war, and slavery of course (about a tenth of Athenians were citizens; women,slaves, the huge immigrant population, had no say).
Plato's works were polemics against other Greek philosophers who thought change was possible (and desirable).
ShinyBlue18 October 2010 02:24PMThere's certainly a lot of good that can be said of Socrates (or Plato), however his views on consumerism and his expressed opinion on an ascetic lifestyle have at least one major flaw. His ascetism was based on an admiration of Spartan ideals. The problem with this being Sparta's reliance upon a slave race (to do all the heavy lifting) and their renown for susceptibility to bribery.
A self-avowed desire for personal ascetism is fine. Requiring it of other people (who may not be in the same philosophical place as you) is something else altogether.
Oh, also the censorship. Socrates would have hated both the Guardian and Daily Mail equally - surely you should know that the media should only be about uplifting messages to strengthen the morality of our youth?
No?
Me neither.
thethief18 October 2010 02:28PMAll philosophies in the world are mental fabrications. There has never been a single doctrine by which one could enter the true essence of things.
The Garland Sutra 10 of Buddhism.
TerenceHale18 October 2010 02:30PMHi,
"Keep away from the gossip of people. For rumour [the Greek pheme, via fama in Latin,
gives us our word fame] is an evil thing; by nature she's a light weight to lift up,
yes, but heavy to carry and hard to put down again. Rumour never disappears entirely
once people have indulged her."
Socrates never wrote any think as such but was quoted, mainly by Plato. The statement above to day in our commutative world takes a new meaning. "If nobody talks about you , your not important".
Regards Dr. Terence Hale
jeronimo9718 October 2010 02:31PM@messy: errrr, just trolling around then?
hardatwork18 October 2010 02:37PMNot forgetting his 22 goals in 60 caps for Brazil.
And, at the age of 50, his single appearance for Garforth Town, coming on as a sub against Tadcaster.
ShinyBlue18 October 2010 02:46PMhardatwork
I don't know which is worse for a player of that stature: playing for Garforth Town, or not even making the 1st eleven for Garforth Town?
Not forgetting his 22 goals in 60 caps for Brazil.
And, at the age of 50, his single appearance for Garforth Town, coming on as a sub against Tadcaster.
Zagradotryad18 October 2010 02:49PMRogerOThornhill
18 October 2010 1:24PM
...A bit like discussing Pericles funeral speech as "Pericles said" rather than what Thucydides wrote that Pericles said. Which are almost certainly two entirely different things.
I tend to think it's accurate enough. I mean we all know that Thucydides is like an infatuated sixth former when it comes to Pericles but the funeral oration isn't much of a speech really. Thucydides probably just wanted a speech by Pericles at any price so siezed on that one.
I think it's a still a good insight into that class of Athenians' view of themselves though.
oliver4opinion18 October 2010 02:58PMFurther to freespeechoneeach's comment: it has been said that all the great belief systems of the world agree on two things. The first is some version of the Golden Rule ("Do unto others as you would they should do unto you"). The second is a belief in what you might call the sacredness of the moment.
Provide your own diacritics; and by the way, yes I know Shaw's (?) riposte, "Do NOT do unto others etc etc: their tastes may not be the same."
bighunk118 October 2010 03:10PMThis comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
MrCAW18 October 2010 03:13PMYes, this is a really wonderful article Bettany, thank you.
inkyblob18 October 2010 03:14PM@hardatwork,
Absolutely inspired comment! Thank you.
glendoan18 October 2010 03:19PMThe story above this is 'Jackass 3D tops US film charts'. We've come a long way since Socrates then...
naughtyfeast18 October 2010 03:21PMgreat article...thanks!
penileplethysmograph18 October 2010 03:24PMGood article / thread
For all that Socrates is largely filtered thru Plato he does not appear to simply be another version of Plato. One may represent another more or less validly.
Must say Socrates actions at Delium show B Hughes point that he was not just some waffley guy.
nickynak18 October 2010 03:41PMI first encountered the works of Socrates in the film 'Bill and Teds Excellent Adventure. As I recall, this is what happened in the film;
Bill and Ted are in Ancient Greece]
Bill: [approaching Socrates] How's it going? I'm Bill, this is Ted. We're from the future.
Socrates: Socrates.
Ted: [whispering to Bill] Now what?
Bill: I dunno. Philosophize with him!
Ted: [clears his throat, to Socrates] "All we are is dust in the wind," dude.
[Socrates gives them a blank stare]
Bill: [scoops up a pile of dust from the basin before them and lets it run out of his hand] Dust.
[he blows the remainder away]
Bill: Wind.
Ted: [points at Socrates] Dude.
[Socrates gasps]
sheffpixie18 October 2010 03:44PMVery enjoyable article
fimbrethil
"The Last of the Wine" by Mary Renault, a novel which deals with the period of Athens where Socrates flourished and gives an amazingly vivid picture of life at the time, as well as a sympathetic portrayal of homosexual love as the Greeks saw it.
Mary Renault was my introduction to the Greeks as a teenager - wonderful stuff. A word of warning though - when I mentioned this on another thread a while ago I was torn to shreds and laughed out of court by one of cifs self styled intellectual heavyweights.
I agree though - The Last of the Wine is a great read.
kizbot18 October 2010 03:47PMAncient Greece like modern England thought that intelligence was the key to greatness, and so they rejected the Gospel message as being"foolish"
Eh?
hardatwork18 October 2010 04:05PM@bighunk
thanks for that, especially the revisionist history lesson.
sheffpixie18 October 2010 04:26PMbighunk1
Ancient Greece like modern England thought that intelligence was the key to greatness, and so they rejected the Gospel message as being"foolish"
Intelligence does actually help a bit. Any particular gospel message you had in mind?
Halo57218 October 2010 04:32PMYeah, but the question is, which is better - Socrates or Harry Potter?
MiddleClassHero18 October 2010 04:38PMI think we would do well to remember Socrates' thoughts on trial by media when considering cases such as those of Michael Jackson and Amanda Knox
ForeignDevilGuyRico18 October 2010 04:41PMAn interesting article --- I do wonder about attributing views to `Socrates' when
it seems safer to invoke the `Platonic Socrates,' as others above have mentioned. And when the three dialogues The Apology, Crito and Phaedo are
taken together, covering his trial and imprisonment, it is crucial to consider his
response to being told friends had arranged an escape, which he declined.
According to Plato, Socrates declined because of his loyalty to Athens, as well
as his belief that his life would be inauthentic and not worth living if he was
unable to engage in philosophy.
Given the importance Socrates (according to Plato) gave to the conclusions he
reached while heeding his `inner voice,' how plausible is it to put it down to
undiagnosed catalepsy? Isn't this more a reflection of modern biases about
altered states of consciousness?
PrinceBishopofFulham18 October 2010 05:19PMJust like to add a further suggestion for a thorough and scholarly but easy to read novel on Socrates and the part of fate, of the inner voice, and of friendship: 'The Path of the Gods' by Joseph Geraci recently published [2009] and very much in the Renault tradition. I found it beautifully told, rich in detail and observation and it greatly and enjoyably enhanced my own understanding of Socrates life and death.
ElQuixote18 October 2010 05:46PMWhat a guy! I studied him long in Plato's and Xenophon's original Greek @ Heidelberg University. My favourite works? The Banquet and Phaedo. What tremendous prose that of Plato! Of course the trick is to get to Socrates through Plato! But the prose..the prose...If it's worth studying English to read Shakespeare, then it's worth studying Greek to read Plato and Homer.
Diodorus18 October 2010 06:17PMI want to second those who point out that a lot of what is attributed to Socrates here belongs to Plato's Socrates. We know almost nothing about Socrates the man, who wrote nothing; it comes from other authors, and Xenophon's, Plato's and Aristophanes' Socrates are all very different. What's more, Plato's Socrates changes his approach radically in the later dialogues.
The "daimonion" may be one reason why S. was accused of 'introducing new gods'.
Someone blamed homosexuality for the oppression of women in Athens and other Greek societies. I'd say it was rather the other way round (compare the tradition of dancing boys in modern Afghanistan). Respectable middle- and upper-class women were wives at 12 and mothers at 14 and never consorted with men outside their own family. So there were courtesans, and ordinary prossies, and slaves of both sexes—and boys and young men for certain circles, one of them pro-aristocratic. So swinging both ways was, for a while at least, quite normal. (Zeno the Stoic is reported to have had sex occasionally with a girl-slave just so as not to give the impression he was a misogynist.)
scribler9918 October 2010 06:23PMRebelspirit 12:53PM
I'm going out to spray this on the side of the train.
Let us not forget Epicurus
The wealth required by nature is limited and is easy to procure; but the wealth required by vain ideals extends to infinity.
Superb.
Comments on this page are now closed.
Find books to review, discuss, buy
This week's bestsellers
1. Send Up the Clownsby Simon Hoggart £8.99
- 2. History of the World in 100 Objectsby Neil MacGregor £20.00
- 3. Thinking Fast and Slowby Daniel Kahneman £25.00
- 4. Bedside Guardian 2011by Paul Johnson £14.99
- 5. Cyclebabbleby James Randerson & Peter Walker £7.99
Search the Guardian bookshop
On Books
1. Guardian Books on Twitter
Latest news and views from the Guardian's books team
Hannah_Freeman: Amazon Stops Hiding Competitors’ E-Reading Apps On The Kindle Fire http://t.co/OQkC6Z4t via @techcrunch #booksabout 1 day, 12 hours ago
GuardianBooks: Did David Bowie hold fascist beliefs? review of The Man Who Sold the World http://t.co/NJw9Xb2E #booksabout 1 day, 15 hours ago- GuardianBooks: Iain Sinclair on Savage Messiah and 'entropy tourism' http://t.co/7ysdCEbz via #booksabout 1 day, 15 hours ago
Buy tickets for top music events
Compare and buy tickets for thousands of events
Latest books added to lists
- Added by helenjbeal
- 23 December 2011 09:36AM
- East of Eden
by David Wyatt and John Steinbeck - List: 100 must-read novels
Take a look at the other books on this list
- Added by acorn01
- 21 December 2011 07:25PM
- The Lies of Locke Lamora
by Scott Lynch - List: Books I've reviewed
Take a look at the other books on this list
Have your manuscript read
The Guardian recommends TLC, the UK's leading manuscript assessment service, providing editorial appraisals to writers at all levels. Find out more
Latest reviews
-
In Defence of Learning edited by Shula Marks et al - reviewStefan Collini on the fascinating history of refugee scholars
Bestsellers from the Guardian shop
-
- Thermal lined leisure 'rugby' trousers. Buy one pair, get one free
- Our best selling fleecy lined outdoor trousers - buy one pair and get a second pair free.
- From: £29.99
Section classified
Buy now & get 12.5% off our entire range of gifts and homeware products. Use promo code DBDGIFT
Related information
Gay pride and prejudice
16 Nov 2003
Peter Conrad on two new books, Homosexuality and Civilisation and Strangers, which analyse how homosexuality has been viewed from ancient Greece to the present day
16 Nov 2003
Peter Conrad on two new books, Homosexuality and Civilisation and Strangers, which analyse how homosexuality has been viewed from ancient Greece to the present day
- 16 Aug 2009Put your trust in Socrates, not economists
- 10 Aug 2009Plato's Dialogues, part 2: Who was Plato's Socrates?
- 24 Oct 2009Et cetera: Steven Poole's non-fiction choice
- 4 May 2002The last word on confusion
This week's arts diary
16 Aug 2011
Charlotte Higgins: Tom McCarthy hits out, Caitlin Moran wants women to wash less, plus Socrates on the riots
16 Aug 2011
Charlotte Higgins: Tom McCarthy hits out, Caitlin Moran wants women to wash less, plus Socrates on the riots
- Hot topics
Louis-André Dorion The Socratic problem has quite a history, and is now perhaps only a part of history, since its desperately unsolvable nature does not seem to guarantee it much of a future. It would undoubtedly be presumptuous to claim that the Socratic problem is a closed issue simply because it is not amenable to a satisfactory solution, but it is certainly useful to identify the principal obstacles and pitfalls that render the discovery of a solution improbable, or even impossible. Socrates, as we know, wrote nothing. His life and ideas are known to us through direct accounts – writings either by contemporaries (Aristophanes) or disciples (Plato and Xenophon) – and through indirect accounts, the most important of which is the one written by Aristotle, who was born fifteen years after Socrates’ death (399). Because these accounts vary greatly from one another, the question arises as to whether it is possible to reconstruct the life and – more importantly – the ideas of the historical Socrates on the basis of one, several, or all of these accounts. The “Socratic problem” refers to the historical and methodological problem that historians confront when they attempt to reconstruct the philosophical doctrines of the historical Socrates. Any future stance on the Socratic problem, if it is to be an informed and well-grounded one, presupposes a full understanding of the origins and consequences of the proposed solutions of the last two centuries.1 Translated from the French by Melissa Bailar. 1 Reviewing all attempts at a solution would be tedious and useless. I will limit myself to those studies I find to be the most representative or the most significant. For an excellent overview of the literature on the Socratic problem, see Patzer 1987, pp. 1–40. Montuori 1992 pulled together a very useful anthology of the principal texts on the Socratic problem. 1 The Rise and Fall of the Socratic Problem © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information 2 Louis-André Dorion 1. The Genesis: Schleiermacher and the Critique of Xenophon According to the unanimous opinion of historians,2 the text that contributed the most to the development of the Socratic problem is Schleiermacher’s study entitled “The Worth of Socrates as a Philosopher” (1818).3 Although certain passages from this seminal work of Socratic studies are often cited, Schleiermacher’s work remains largely unappreciated. This lack of recognition is counterproductive because scholars attempting to solve the Socratic problem are often unaware that they are relying on arguments rooted in Schleiermacher that do not stand up to critical analysis.4 Schleiermacher starts from the observation that there is a contradiction between the importance of the new beginning attributed to Socrates in the history of Greek philosophy, on the one hand, and the banality of typical representations of Socrates, on the other. According to the latter, Socrates was occupied exclusively with moral questions, concerned himself above all with bettering his disciples, questioned his interlocutors on the best type of life available to mankind, and so on. If Socrates’ contribution to philosophy were limited to questions of this sort, we would no longer have any reason, according to Schleiermacher, to see in him the man who was the inspiration for a sort of second birth of Greek philosophy. Schleiermacher thus rejects in their entirety the principal characteristics that constituted the traditional representation of Socrates the “philosopher” at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Because until then scholars had turned primarily to Xenophon to determine the content of the historical Socrates’ ideas,5 it is hardly surprising that Schleiermacher distanced himself from Xenophon’s account. In fact, he criticized the author of the Memorabilia on two points: (a) Xenophon was not a philosopher, but rather a soldier and politician, and was thus not the most qualified witness to give a faithful account of Socrates’ principal philosophical positions (1818: 56 = 1879: 10). Schleiermacher’s criticism presupposes that philosophy 2 See Magalhães-Vilhena 1952, pp. 131, 138, 158, and 186; Montuori 1981a, p. 31; 1981b, pp. 7, 9, 11; 1988, pp. 27–28; Patzer 1987, pp. 9–10. 3 For the English translation of this text, see Schleiermacher 1879. See also Dorion 2001 for an analysis of this text by Schleiermacher. 4 In this way, Brickhouse and Smith 2000, pp. 38, 42–43, discredit Xenophon’s account by using two arguments that, although the authors seem unaware of it, could already be found in Schleiermacher. 5 For a study of the importance of Xenophon’s accounts before the start of the nineteenth century, see Dorion 2000, pp. VIII-XII. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information The Rise and Fall of the Socratic Problem 3 is essentially a speculative activity. Thus, since Xenophon’s Socratic writings are hardly speculative, Schleiermacher naturally concludes that Xenophon was not a philosopher and that he did not do justice to Socrates’ profound philosophical positions. This is in a way an unjust attack on Xenophon, whose admitted goal, as he proclaimed at the start of the Memorabilia (1.3.1 and 1.4.1), was to show how and to what extent Socrates was useful to others and contributed to the bettering of his companions through both his example and his words. Are not being useful to others and bettering them worthy objectives of a philosophy understood as a way of life? In any case, this criticism received great acclaim, and commentators seeking to discredit Xenophon’s account have used it ever since.6 (b) Xenophon was so zealous in defending his master against accusations regarding his subversive teachings that Socrates figures in his writings as a representative of the established order and the most traditional values. The positions that Xenophon’s Socrates defends are so conservative and conventional that it is impossible to understand how such a flat and dull philosopher could attract, captivate, and maintain the interest of naturally speculative thinkers, such as Plato and Euclid, the founder of the Megarian school. In short, if Socrates had resembled the Socrates of Xenophon’s writings, he would not have been surrounded by such disciples; he would instead have repelled them.7 At the start of the twentieth century, Xenophon’s detractors followed Schleiermacher’s lead and pushed his criticism of the apologetic nature of Xenophon’s Socratic writings even further, saying, for example, that Xenophon defended Socrates so well against the accusations against him that it is difficult to understand how Socrates could possibly have been sentenced to death. (See Burnet 1914: p. 149; Taylor 1932: p. 22.) It is thus clear to Schleiermacher that Socrates must have been more than what Xenophon said about him, because if Socrates only amounted to his portrait in the Memorabilia, the immense philosophical influence we attribute to him would be incomprehensible: “And not only may Socrates, he must have been more, and there must have been more in the back-ground of his speeches, than Xenophon represents.” (1879: 11 = 1818: 57) This harsh judgment is nevertheless belied by texts 6 See Dorion 2000, pp. XC-XCI, where I provide many references. 7 Brickhouse and Smith 2000, p. 43, made the same criticism in the same terms. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information 4 Louis-André Dorion and accounts that attest that the Memorabilia exerted a considerable influence on the first Stoics.8 But where does Schleiermacher intend to find this other dimension of Socrates that is presumably absent in Xenophon’s text? Schleiermacher intends to find the more philosophical dimension of Socrates – “philosophical” in the modern and speculative sense of the term – in Plato, of course. But whatever is found in Plato should not contradict certain given facts in Xenophon’s account that are widely recognized as reliable. Schleiermacher states in the form of a question his suggested method for reconstructing the philosophical content of the historical Socrates’ thought: The only safe method (Der einzige sichere Weg) seems to be, to inquire: what may Socrates have been, over and above what Xenophon has described, without however contradicting the strokes of character (Charakterzügen), and the practical maxims (Lebensmaximen), which Xenophon distinctly delivers as those of Socrates: and what must he have been, to give Plato a right, and an inducement, to exhibit him as he has done in his dialogues? (1879: 14 = 1818: 59) This “method” raises more problems than it can possibly hope to resolve. As far as the “practical maxims” or the “rules of life” (Lebensmaximen) are concerned, a single example will suffice to illustrate the pitfalls obstructing the application of Schleiermacher’s so-called method. Book IV, Chapter 5, of the Memorabilia is devoted to the way in which Socrates assisted his companions in regulating their behavior. In reading this chapter, it appears that self-mastery (enkrateia) is the surest foundation for behavior and action. If self-mastery is the sine qua non condition for all successful practical activity, it is hardly surprising that Xenophon affirms that enkrateia is the foundation of virtue (Memorabilia 1.5.4). Must we consider, then, that the principal role attributed to enkrateia has the value of a “practical maxim”? If so, Xenophon’s account would have precedence over Plato’s as far as this essential aspect of Socratic ethics is concerned. In fact, since Plato’s Socrates grants no theoretical importance to enkrateia – the term enkrateia is not found in Plato’s first dialogues, and the idea that moderation (sôphrosunê) is in any sense reducible to enkrateia is also not found in the Charmides – and because he attributes to knowledge the role that Xenophon attributes to enkrateia, his position appears irreconcilable with a practical maxim defended by Xenophon’s Socrates and must, in accordance with Schleiermacher’s method, be sacrificed. As can be seen, this “method” leads to results that are at times contrary to those that Schleiermacher 8 See D.L. 7.2; Sextus Empiricus, Adversus Mathematicos 9.92–101; Long 1988, pp. 162–163; Dorion 2000, p. 33 n. 231. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information The Rise and Fall of the Socratic Problem 5 had anticipated. The difficulties raised by this method notwithstanding, it did exert exceptional programmatic influence in as much as it defined the program of research followed by several generations of philosophers in their attempt to determine the philosophical content of the historical Socrates’ thought. Schleiermacher’s method enjoyed a considerable success, as is demonstrated by the very large number of historians who adhere to or refer to it.9 After a considerable time, Schleiermacher’s essay eventually led to the full rejection of Xenophon’s account. The critical movement he initiated grew over the course of the nineteenth century, and reached its height in 1915 when Xenophon’s Socratic writings had become completely discredited. To Schleiermacher’s two criticisms, nineteenthand early twentieth-century historians added eight others.10 Nearly a century after Schleiermacher’s seminal article and in the space of only a few years, scholars in France (Robin 1910); England (Taylor 1911; Burnet 1911 and 1914); and Germany (Maier 1913) published in rapid succession and completely independently from one another studies that were so critical of Xenophon’s Socratic writings that it was no longer clear what merit could possibly be attributed to the author of the Memorabilia. The consensus that emerged during this period is neither accidental nor a coincidence, and in fact represents the end result of the movement launched by Schleiermacher a century earlier. From there, it was only a small step to claim that Xenophon is completely worthless to us, as Taylor and Burnet did,11 and that the historical Socrates completely corresponded to Plato’s Socrates. Burnet and Taylor’s position thus seems to be the culmination and logical conclusion of Schleiermacher’s attack on Xenophon’s Socratic writings at the start of the nineteenth century. Even if it is generally agreed that Burnet and Taylor’s thesis is too extreme, and that Plato’s Socrates cannot be simply equated with the historical Socrates, twentieth-century scholarship has in a sense endorsed their work by ostracizing Xenophon’s Socrates and by deeming Plato’s Socrates the only one worthy of any interest whatsoever.12 Although the historical development of the Socratic problem has been 9 See the numerous references given by Dorion 2000, p. XIII, n. 2. 10 For a detailed presentation of these critiques, see Dorion 2000, pp. XVII-XCIX. 11 See Burnet 1914, p. 150: “It is really impossible to preserve Xenophon’s Sokrates, even if he were worth preserving.” 12 See, among others, Vlastos 1971, p. 2: Plato’s Socrates is “in fact the only Socrates worth talking about”; Santas 1979, p. X: “It is only Plato’s Socrates that is of major interest to the contemporary philosopher”; Kahn 1981, p. 319: “As far as we are concerned, the Socrates of the dialogues [i.e. Plato’s] is the historical Socrates. He is certainly the only one who counts for the history of philosophy.” © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information 6 Louis-André Dorion far from linear, the overwhelming majority of the scholarly work dating from the beginnings of the Socratic problem until 1915 completely reversed the prevailing situation of 1815 against which Schleiermacher rebelled, to the benefit of Plato. If the disgrace that Xenophon’s Socratic writings suffered were the immediate consequence of the birth and development of the Socratic problem, in contrast, the recent renewal of interest in them is largely due to the decline of this problem. 2. The Impasse and the Fall: the Fictional Nature of the LOGOI SOKRATIKOI The nearly unanimous discredit that befell Xenophon’s Socratic writings nonetheless did not bring about a solution to the Socratic problem. Historians continued to debate the value of the three other sources, with the majority of them giving priority to Plato, others to Aristotle,13 and a final few to Aristophanes.14 In short, if everyone, or nearly everyone, agreed to reject Xenophon’s accounts, no one was in agreement over the respective reliability of the three other sources. It is probably impossible to reconstruct the ideas of the historical Socrates from Aristophanes’ The Clouds, not only because the very genre of comedy lends itself to exaggeration and even excess, but also because there is good reason to believe that Socrates’ character in The Clouds is really a composite figure whose traits were gathered not only from Socrates himself but also from the physiologoi and the sophists.15 The case of Plato’s account especially highlights the absence of consensus; if we consider only those commentators who are inclined to grant priority to Plato’s dialogues, we notice that they do not turn to the same dialogues to reconstruct the historical Socrates’ theories. Some rely mostly on the Apology,16 many base their work on the entirety of the early dialogues,17 or on just a few of them, others still call on the apocryphal dialogues,18 and finally some consider that every word that Plato put in Socrates’ mouth, whether in an early, middle, or late dialogue, has a place in the record of the historical Socrates.19 It is quite surprising that there is 13 Joël 1893, I, p. 203. 14 See the numerous references indicated by Montuori 1988, p. 42, n. 36. H. Gomperz 1924 went so far as to claim that the historical Socrates was found not in The Clouds but in fragments of other comedies! 15 See Ross 1933, p. 10; Dover 1968, pp. XXXVI, XL; Guthrie 1971, p. 52; Vlastos 1971, p. 1, n.1 and the many authors mentioned by Montuori 1988, p. 41, n.35. 16 See infra pp.17–18. 17 See Maier 1913; Guthrie 1975, p. 67; Vlastos 1991, pp. 45–50; Graham 1992; Brickhouse and Smith 2000, pp. 44–49; 2003, pp. 112–113. 18 See Tarrant 1938. 19 This is the position defended by Taylor 1911, p. IX, and Burnet 1911; 1914. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information The Rise and Fall of the Socratic Problem 7 no consensus regarding the number and identity of Plato’s dialogues that would allow for the reconstruction of the historical Socrates’ ideas, but, in another way, this disagreement among interpreters is inevitable because of the doctrinal heterogeneity of Socrates’ character in the corpus platonicum.20 The lack of consensus and the proliferation of attempted solutions undoubtedly led to the scholarly works running out of steam, but this did not necessarily mean that the Socratic problem was a false problem to which a solution could never be found. The position that would finally evoke a lasting skepticism surrounding the Socratic problem was initiated in Germany in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. This major discovery, credited primarily to K. Joël (1895–1896), is that of the fictional nature of the logoi sokratikoi. The Socratic problem has all the makings of a false problem because it rests on a misunderstanding. This in turn entails an inevitable misinterpretation of the exact nature of the preserved “testimony” about Socrates. For the Socratic problem as it had been debated since the start of the nineteenth century to have meaning, the principal direct witnesses (Xenophon and Plato) must have intended to faithfully reconstruct Socrates’ ideas through writings that aimed to transmit at least the spirit and content, if not the exact words, of Socrates’ dialogues. If this had been their intention, we would be justified in asking which account best corresponds to the thought of the historical Socrates. Yet everything seems to indicate that neither Xenophon nor Plato set out with the intention of faithfully reporting Socrates’ ideas. Xenophon’s and Plato’s Socratic writings belong to a literary genre–that of the logos sokratikos, which Aristotle21 explicitly recognized and which authorizes by its very nature a certain degree of fiction and a great freedom of invention as far as the setting and content are concerned, most notably with the ideas expressed by the different characters. Yet, since Aristotle sees in the logoi sokratikoi a form of mimêsis (imitation), would we not be well justified in considering them faithful documents that aim to accurately reproduce the life and thought of Socrates? This is precisely how Taylor interpreted Aristotle’s account of the logoi sokratikoi: “Aristotle […] regards the ‘Socratic discourse’ as a highly realistic kind of composition. You cannot, of course, infer that he holds that the actual Socrates must have really made every remark ascribed to him in such a discourse, but 20 Montuori 1981a, p. 225: “It is important to underline that Plato does not give us a single image of Socrates, coherent and complete, but a disconcerting plurality of images, all of which have been noted by the critics, who in turn have taken one or the other as the most faithful description of the historical person of Sophroniscus’s son.” See also p. 226. 21 SeePoetics 1. 1447a28-b13; Rhetoric 3.16.1417a18–21; fr. 72 Rose (= Athenaeus 15.505c). © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information 8 Louis-André Dorion it would not be a proper ‘imitation’ of Socrates unless it were in all its main points a faithful presentation.” (1911, p. 55) A lot is at stake in the interpretation of Aristotle’s testimony, because if the mimêsis is understood as a faithful imitation of reality, in principle nothing keeps us from considering the logoi sokratikoi to be a reliable and privileged material aiming to reconstruct the life and thought of Socrates; on the other hand, if the mimêsis, as Aristotle understands it, is a creation that authorizes a degree of fiction and invention, the task of reconstructing the thought of Socrates based on the logoi sokratikoi seems doomed to fail. According to Joël, then, Aristotle’s account establishes that the logos sokratikos, classified as a form of mimêsis, allows for a substantial amount of fiction and invention, as far as both the setting and the ideas expressed by the characters are concerned. The recognition of the fictional character of logoi sokratikoi did not immediately gain acceptance without debate or controversy.22 It is to Joël’s immense credit that he brought this essential dimension of logoi sokratikoi to light; it is likewise unfortunate that this important discovery is not always credited to him.23 Since logoi sokratikoi are literary works in which the author can give his imagination free reign, while remaining within the plausible bounds of a credible representation of Socrates’ êthos, the degree of fiction and invention inherent in logoi sokratikoi means they cannot be considered as accounts written for their historical accuracy. This does not mean, of course, that the logoi sokratikoi contain no single authentic trait or accurate detail; but as the historical concern of logoi sokratikoi is only incidental, and since we do not have at our disposal the criteria that would allow us to separate invention from authenticity, it would certainly be more prudent to renounce any hope of finding the “true” 22 On the debate surrounding the nature and status of the logoi sokratikoi, see Deman 1942, pp. 25–33. In the years following the publication of Joël’s study, numerous commentators agreed with him and recognized the fictional nature of the logoi sokratikoi (see Robin 1910, p. 26; Maier 1913, p. 27, n.1; Dupréel 1922, pp. 457–460; Magalhães-Vilhena 1952, pp. 225, 326, 345, 351, 370, etc.). 23 Momigliano’s works 1971, pp. 46–57, are often cited to justify affirming the logoi sokratikoi’s fictional nature (see Vlastos 1991, pp. 49, n. 14, 99 n.72; Kahn 1992, pp. 237–238; 1996, pp. 33–34; Beversluis 1993, p. 300, n. 14; Vander Waerdt 1993, p. 7; 1994, p. 2, n. 6). In fact, searching Momigliano’s work for a precise argument that attempts to demonstrate the fictional character of the logoi sokratikoi is fruitless (see Dorion 2000, pp. CVIIICXI). Furthermore, Momigliano never refers to Aristotle’s account of the logoi sokratikoi, even though it is precisely this account that authorizes evaluating the logoi sokratikoi as literary creations. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information The Rise and Fall of the Socratic Problem 9 Socrates in these writings. Furthermore, if we consider the fact that many of Socrates’ disciples wrote logoi sokratikoi,24 and that there is good reason to believe that the portraits of Socrates differed greatly from one author to the next, and sometimes even within the same author’s writing,25 it is likely that Socrates rapidly became a sort of literary character (dramatis persona) endowed with his own existence and placed at the center of the polemics and rivalries that pitted one Socratic against another.26 Each author of logoi sokratikoi in this way created “his own” Socrates, whom he contrasted with the competing Socrates’ outlined by the other Socratics. Each laid claim to, and quarreled over, the heritage of their bygone master, as well as faithfulness to his memory and his teachings. If the logoi sokratikoi cannot be read or interpreted as historical documents in the strictest sense, but rather as literary and philosophical works that include a substantial degree of invention, even concerning the ideas expressed, then the Socratic problem seems hopelessly deprived of the “documents” from which the elements of a solution could be unearthed and the key to the enigma found. If our principal sources are already interpretations, we must recognize all that this entails: first, we cannot favor one interpretation over another, since nothing justifies such a bias on the historical level, and second, attempting to reconcile them all would be in vain, because such agreement would be either impossible or superficial. It is often impossible because of the many insurmountable contradictions in Plato’s and Xenophon’s accounts.27 It is not the case that the Socrates of Plato’s early dialogues agrees with the versions of Socrates in Xenophon, Antisthenes, Aeschines, and also the spurious Platonic dialogues (see D. Tarrant 1938), e.g. in practicing the style of refutation known as the 24 According to Diogenes Laertius, Antisthenes (6.15–18), Aeschines (2.60–63), Phaedo (2.105), and Euclid (2.108) composed Socratic dialogues. Diogenes Laertius (2.121–125) attributes logoi sokratikoi to several other Socratics as well (Crito, Simon, Glaucon, Simmias, Cebes), but this evidence should be treated with caution. It is generally accepted that Aristippus did not compose Socratic dialogues. 25 I am thinking primarily of Plato, whose representation of Socrates evolved so considerably from the early to the middle dialogues that we are really dealing with two Socrateses, irreducible and opposed to one another, as Vlastos clearly demonstrated (1991, pp. 45–80). 26 See Gigon 1947, p. 314: “The Socratic literature is primarily self-presentation of the Socratics, of their own philosophical thought and their literary (dichterisches) abilities.” 27 See the list of the seventeen major contradictions on the philosophical level (Dorion 2006, pp. 95–96). This list is not exhaustive. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-54103-9 - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates Edited by Donald R. Morrison Excerpt More information 10 Louis-André Dorion elenchus, professing ignorance of major questions, and having a philosophical mission. (Graham 1992, p. 143 n.9) This claim reveals a significant misunderstanding of Xenophon’s Socratic texts, for Xenophon’s Socrates hardly ever practices the elenchus, never acknowledges his ignorance regarding the most important questions, and in contrast to Plato’s Socrates, never identifies a philosophical mission. And when agreement is possible between Plato and Xenophon, it is more often than not superficial. Not only does such agreement not necessarily guarantee an objective fact; it is usually nothing but a superficial concordance that might mask more fundamental discrepancies. There are, of course, many Socratic themes common to Xenophon and Plato, but such overlapping does not indicate a common theory that could be attributed to the historical Socrates. To “demonstrate” a fundamental agreement between Plato and Xenophon, Luccioni (1953, pp. 48–56) was naïve enough to believe that drawing up a list of several dozen common themes (the divine sign, virtue as science, piety, self-knowledge, the dialectic, his rejection of the study of nature, etc.) would suffice. In fact, it is easy to demonstrate that Xenophon’s treatment of any one of these themes cannot be assimilated with Plato’s treatment of it. The differences in the treatment of these common themes are so important that the least common denominator amounts to very little in most cases. For example, self-knowledge is a privileged theme in the reflections of both Plato’s and Xenophon’s Socrates, but their respective conceptions of self-knowledge are so different from one another that it is impossible to tease out any features of a common theory. Furthermore, the sporadic agreements between Plato and Xenophon are not as significant as some might suggest. Take the case of the Delphic oracle: both Plato (Apology 20e-23b) and Xenophon (Apology 14–16) certainly attest to it, but this nevertheless does not mean that it constituted an actual episode in Socrates’ life. In fact, there is nothing to say that it is not a myth first invented by Plato and later taken up and reinterpreted by Xenophon. It would be a mistake to believe that an agreement between two texts allowing the use of fiction is indicative of an objective fact (see Joël 1895: 478). Moreover, the existence and significance of the many differences between these two versions are not really apparent without an exegetic study that would seek to understand them in light of the respective and consistent representations that Plato and Xenophon created of Socrates and the fundamentals of his ethics. The oracle’s response in Xenophon’s Memorabilia appears as a sort of condensed or concentrated version of the ethics defended by Socrates, which justifies the claim that, “Xenophon has reformulated Plato’s account of the oracle’s response in the service of his own understanding of Socratic ethics.” (Vander Waerdt 1994, p. 39) © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org
- Subscribe: Digital / Home Delivery
- tikakar
- Help
Wise Guy
By WALTER ISAACSON
Published: February 18, 2011
The problem with writing a biography of Socrates, as Bettany Hughes merrily admits, is that he’s a “doughnut subject”: a rich and tasty topic with a big hole right in the middle where the main character should be. Despite his fame and his insistence on an examined life, Socrates never wrote anything, and our knowledge of him comes mainly from three contemporaries — his devoted pupils Plato and Xenophon, and the parodist Aristophanes — each of whom had his own agenda. He produced no great answers, only great questions, and the most enduring image we have of his life is his leaving of it, as the title of this book suggests.
THE HEMLOCK CUP
Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life
By Bettany Hughes
Illustrated. 484 pp. Alfred A. Knopf. $35.
Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life
By Bettany Hughes
Illustrated. 484 pp. Alfred A. Knopf. $35.
Multimedia
How do we examine the life of the man who told us that the unexamined life was not worth living? Hughes, a British television host and popular historian known for her book on Helen of Troy, does it by concentrating on the shape of the doughnut around the hole. She outlines Socrates mainly by describing the sights, sounds, mores and facts that surrounded him.
For the most part, Hughes is successful, and even when not, she’s fascinating. What we get in “The Hemlock Cup” is many books interlaced: a biography of Socrates; a gritty description of daily life in Athens; a vivid history of the Peloponnesian War and its aftereffects; and — as an unexpected delight — a guide to museums, archaeological digs and repositories of ancient artifacts, as Hughes takes us by the hand while ferreting out her evidence. At one point we travel with her to the rear of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, England, to study a scrap of papyrus — Fragment 4807 — in the Sackler Library. It contains some lines, apparently by Sophocles, casting light on what life may have been like during the Peloponnesian War.
With great spirit and diligence, Hughes is able to piece together a surprisingly vivid portrait of the hairy, slovenly son of a stonemason and midwife, who spends a lot of time at the gymnasium and holds philosophical discourses at shoe shops. By necessity, the book has a lot of speculation, with phrases like “there is every possibility that he sailed from Piraeus” and “Socrates would certainly have participated in such communal activity.” Academic purists may chafe that Hughes makes such imaginative leaps. But by doing so, she helps us imagine Socrates as a body of flesh rather than a bust of marble.
Born around 469 B.C., Socrates grew up as democracy and great art were flourishing in Athens. But a three-day walk to the south lay a rival, Sparta, where most males between ages 7 and 30 lived in military camps that gave meaning to the phrase “Spartan existence”: barefoot and with just one cloak to wear year round, the men were trained relentlessly for war.
During his late 30s and into his 40s, Socrates fought in the Peloponnesian War. Hughes portrays him as a courageous warrior, but not a foolhardy one; he has enough wisdom to be among the Athenian soldiers who managed to survive the bloody defeat at Delion in 424 B.C. Socrates fights with determination, while his beautiful young companion, Alcibiades, watches, but he also leads a group of fellow soldiers to safety. As Hughes notes, “He was a man strong enough to fight when challenged, he was unflustered by the difficulties of the day, he is portrayed to us as having about him a peculiar serenity.” This is the foundation, she implies, for one of Socrates’ great pieces of advice: courage is the ability to distinguish between real and perceived threats, being able to know what should be feared and what should not be.
When Socrates returns to Athens he pursues an odd life, padding the streets barefoot and holding philosophical dialogues, not at schools or in homes where he would be paid, but in places like the shop of a shoemaker named Simon. Thus he creates the Socratic Method, as well as arousing suspicions among some citizens of Athens that he is a corrupter of youth.
Hughes does not present a methodical study of the philosophy of Socrates, nor does she deal much with the famous Socratic problem of how to distinguish the real Socrates from Plato’s portrait of him. But she does tie the philosophy to the facts of his life, insofar as we know them. Because his mother became a midwife, Hughes takes us to the National Archaeological Museum in Athens to rummage through a cabinet that contains images, social records and crude objects relating to childbirth in classical Greece. Some terra cotta pieces “remind us of what a lusty, messy business giving birth really is.” This is important, for midwifery forms the great metaphor Socrates uses to explain his method of extracting truth through questioning others, rather than giving birth to it himself. As Plato has him say: “I am so much like the midwife that I cannot myself give birth to wisdom. . . . Although I question others, I can bring nothing to light because there is no wisdom in me.”
Hughes spends less time exploring Socrates’ relationship with Plato than the one he had with Alcibiades. As far as Hughes can tell (or at least Plato tells), he resists the sexual lures of Alcibiades, famous even centuries later as the most beautiful and dissolute boy of Athens. “Alcibiades is a latter-day Adonis — all flowing golden locks, a fine profile and with androgynously smooth skin,” Hughes writes. “He lisped sensuously, he loved women, girls, men, boys, dogs.” He represented the opposite of the introspective, virtuous life that Socrates spent his life examining, “yet Socrates did not condemn the boy, he was fascinated by him.” Socrates sleeps by him during the war, becomes enamored with him and saves him on the battlefield. Why? Because, according to Hughes, Socrates very much lived in the real world, with real-world pleasures, “and Alcibiades was the Athens that Socrates was struggling to live with.”
We like to think of Athens as a place where robed citizens wandered thoughtfully through the Parthenon and agora. Hughes instead describes the smelly atmosphere of the neighborhood Socrates frequented, the Kerameikos. It was filled with prostitutes, male and female, with small stalls available for what Athenians called “middle-of-the-day marriages.” “The Kerameikos is a key clue to his story and to the story of Athens’ Golden Age. These visceral, vacillating lanes, nooks and crannies were his ethical nursery.” There were two or three slaves for every adult, so leisured citizens, Socrates included, spent most of their time at the gym honing their bodies or in discussions sharpening their minds.
Hughes intersperses the story of Socrates’ trial in 399 B.C. with some wonderful details. We learn, for example, about the workings of the mechanical device that randomly selected, from 6,000 names, the jury of 500 Athenian citizens (yes, 500) that assembled at the law court to hear the case. This kleroterion, a replica of which can be viewed at the Agora Museum in Athens, was a proto-computer that used carved slots to send metal disks down a chute. “Every means possible has been thought of to prevent corruption,” Hughes writes. “Alphabetical blocks of seats, secret ballots, random-selection machines.” Her quest for authentic detail even leads her to grind up hemlock and sniff it. “It releases a nose-wrinkling sour smell,” she reports.
I don’t think that Hughes is quite as successful, however, with the larger aspects of the death of Socrates. She tells us early in the book about his definition of courage — knowing which threats should be feared and which should not be — but she does not tie that into the burning question surrounding his death: Why did he not choose exile or escape, or offer a serious defense? There are many theories. According to his pupil Xenophon, Socrates felt that, at age 70, he would be better off dead than to linger in exile or confinement. Perhaps he suspected that by drinking the hemlock he would create the founding myth of philosophy. From Plato’s “Crito,” we get an explanation that forms the basis of social contract theory: Socrates explains why it would violate justice to flee the verdict of the citizens of Athens.
When Hughes describes Socrates’ speech defending himself, as reported in Plato’s “Apology,” she seems struck by how arrogant he is. “He reminds the court he is the wisest man on earth,” she says. But she doesn’t fully explain the depth of irony in his speech. It contains the most wonderful Socratic paradox: He has questioned all the wise people of Athens, he says, and realized that they were not truly wise because they mistakenly believed themselves to be wise; on the other hand, he knows full well that he is not wise, which makes him wiser than they are.
There are also smaller glitches in her treatment of Socrates’ final scene. At the end of the book, she quotes, without much analysis, the memorable last line in the “Apology”: “I go to die and you to live; who knows which is the better journey.” Yet in the introduction of her book, she quotes the same line with a significantly different (and more conventional) translation — “which of us is going to a better condition is not known to anyone except god” — with no apparent rationale for the disparity.
But these are minor issues. There are scores of other books — including a delightful one by the iconoclastic journalist I. F. Stone — that explore the philosophical issues surrounding the death of Socrates. What Hughes provides is something far more vital: a life and times of Socrates that is so richly textured, flavorful and atmospheric that it makes human this most enigmatic of all philosophers. By the end of her book, we can almost see and smell the man, with all of his quirks and foibles and questioning brilliance.
For the most part, Hughes is successful, and even when not, she’s fascinating. What we get in “The Hemlock Cup” is many books interlaced: a biography of Socrates; a gritty description of daily life in Athens; a vivid history of the Peloponnesian War and its aftereffects; and — as an unexpected delight — a guide to museums, archaeological digs and repositories of ancient artifacts, as Hughes takes us by the hand while ferreting out her evidence. At one point we travel with her to the rear of the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford, England, to study a scrap of papyrus — Fragment 4807 — in the Sackler Library. It contains some lines, apparently by Sophocles, casting light on what life may have been like during the Peloponnesian War.
With great spirit and diligence, Hughes is able to piece together a surprisingly vivid portrait of the hairy, slovenly son of a stonemason and midwife, who spends a lot of time at the gymnasium and holds philosophical discourses at shoe shops. By necessity, the book has a lot of speculation, with phrases like “there is every possibility that he sailed from Piraeus” and “Socrates would certainly have participated in such communal activity.” Academic purists may chafe that Hughes makes such imaginative leaps. But by doing so, she helps us imagine Socrates as a body of flesh rather than a bust of marble.
Born around 469 B.C., Socrates grew up as democracy and great art were flourishing in Athens. But a three-day walk to the south lay a rival, Sparta, where most males between ages 7 and 30 lived in military camps that gave meaning to the phrase “Spartan existence”: barefoot and with just one cloak to wear year round, the men were trained relentlessly for war.
During his late 30s and into his 40s, Socrates fought in the Peloponnesian War. Hughes portrays him as a courageous warrior, but not a foolhardy one; he has enough wisdom to be among the Athenian soldiers who managed to survive the bloody defeat at Delion in 424 B.C. Socrates fights with determination, while his beautiful young companion, Alcibiades, watches, but he also leads a group of fellow soldiers to safety. As Hughes notes, “He was a man strong enough to fight when challenged, he was unflustered by the difficulties of the day, he is portrayed to us as having about him a peculiar serenity.” This is the foundation, she implies, for one of Socrates’ great pieces of advice: courage is the ability to distinguish between real and perceived threats, being able to know what should be feared and what should not be.
When Socrates returns to Athens he pursues an odd life, padding the streets barefoot and holding philosophical dialogues, not at schools or in homes where he would be paid, but in places like the shop of a shoemaker named Simon. Thus he creates the Socratic Method, as well as arousing suspicions among some citizens of Athens that he is a corrupter of youth.
Hughes does not present a methodical study of the philosophy of Socrates, nor does she deal much with the famous Socratic problem of how to distinguish the real Socrates from Plato’s portrait of him. But she does tie the philosophy to the facts of his life, insofar as we know them. Because his mother became a midwife, Hughes takes us to the National Archaeological Museum in Athens to rummage through a cabinet that contains images, social records and crude objects relating to childbirth in classical Greece. Some terra cotta pieces “remind us of what a lusty, messy business giving birth really is.” This is important, for midwifery forms the great metaphor Socrates uses to explain his method of extracting truth through questioning others, rather than giving birth to it himself. As Plato has him say: “I am so much like the midwife that I cannot myself give birth to wisdom. . . . Although I question others, I can bring nothing to light because there is no wisdom in me.”
Hughes spends less time exploring Socrates’ relationship with Plato than the one he had with Alcibiades. As far as Hughes can tell (or at least Plato tells), he resists the sexual lures of Alcibiades, famous even centuries later as the most beautiful and dissolute boy of Athens. “Alcibiades is a latter-day Adonis — all flowing golden locks, a fine profile and with androgynously smooth skin,” Hughes writes. “He lisped sensuously, he loved women, girls, men, boys, dogs.” He represented the opposite of the introspective, virtuous life that Socrates spent his life examining, “yet Socrates did not condemn the boy, he was fascinated by him.” Socrates sleeps by him during the war, becomes enamored with him and saves him on the battlefield. Why? Because, according to Hughes, Socrates very much lived in the real world, with real-world pleasures, “and Alcibiades was the Athens that Socrates was struggling to live with.”
We like to think of Athens as a place where robed citizens wandered thoughtfully through the Parthenon and agora. Hughes instead describes the smelly atmosphere of the neighborhood Socrates frequented, the Kerameikos. It was filled with prostitutes, male and female, with small stalls available for what Athenians called “middle-of-the-day marriages.” “The Kerameikos is a key clue to his story and to the story of Athens’ Golden Age. These visceral, vacillating lanes, nooks and crannies were his ethical nursery.” There were two or three slaves for every adult, so leisured citizens, Socrates included, spent most of their time at the gym honing their bodies or in discussions sharpening their minds.
Hughes intersperses the story of Socrates’ trial in 399 B.C. with some wonderful details. We learn, for example, about the workings of the mechanical device that randomly selected, from 6,000 names, the jury of 500 Athenian citizens (yes, 500) that assembled at the law court to hear the case. This kleroterion, a replica of which can be viewed at the Agora Museum in Athens, was a proto-computer that used carved slots to send metal disks down a chute. “Every means possible has been thought of to prevent corruption,” Hughes writes. “Alphabetical blocks of seats, secret ballots, random-selection machines.” Her quest for authentic detail even leads her to grind up hemlock and sniff it. “It releases a nose-wrinkling sour smell,” she reports.
I don’t think that Hughes is quite as successful, however, with the larger aspects of the death of Socrates. She tells us early in the book about his definition of courage — knowing which threats should be feared and which should not be — but she does not tie that into the burning question surrounding his death: Why did he not choose exile or escape, or offer a serious defense? There are many theories. According to his pupil Xenophon, Socrates felt that, at age 70, he would be better off dead than to linger in exile or confinement. Perhaps he suspected that by drinking the hemlock he would create the founding myth of philosophy. From Plato’s “Crito,” we get an explanation that forms the basis of social contract theory: Socrates explains why it would violate justice to flee the verdict of the citizens of Athens.
When Hughes describes Socrates’ speech defending himself, as reported in Plato’s “Apology,” she seems struck by how arrogant he is. “He reminds the court he is the wisest man on earth,” she says. But she doesn’t fully explain the depth of irony in his speech. It contains the most wonderful Socratic paradox: He has questioned all the wise people of Athens, he says, and realized that they were not truly wise because they mistakenly believed themselves to be wise; on the other hand, he knows full well that he is not wise, which makes him wiser than they are.
There are also smaller glitches in her treatment of Socrates’ final scene. At the end of the book, she quotes, without much analysis, the memorable last line in the “Apology”: “I go to die and you to live; who knows which is the better journey.” Yet in the introduction of her book, she quotes the same line with a significantly different (and more conventional) translation — “which of us is going to a better condition is not known to anyone except god” — with no apparent rationale for the disparity.
But these are minor issues. There are scores of other books — including a delightful one by the iconoclastic journalist I. F. Stone — that explore the philosophical issues surrounding the death of Socrates. What Hughes provides is something far more vital: a life and times of Socrates that is so richly textured, flavorful and atmospheric that it makes human this most enigmatic of all philosophers. By the end of her book, we can almost see and smell the man, with all of his quirks and foibles and questioning brilliance.
Walter Isaacson is the chief executive of the Aspen Institute and the author of biographies of Benjamin Franklin and Albert Einstein.
A version of this review appeared in print on February 20, 2011, on page BR12 of the Sunday Book Review.
| Ads by Google | what's this? |
| Get $75 Free Advertising Try Google AdWords. Claim Your $75 Coupon Now! www.Google.com/AdWords | |
Get Free E-mail Alerts on These Topics
MOST POPULAR
- Paul Krugman: The Post-Truth Campaign
- David Brooks: The Sidney Awards, Part II
- Financial Aid Changes Game as Ivy Sports Teams Flourish
- App Smart: Best iPhone Apps of 2011
- You're the Boss: 10 Things Job Applicants Should Know
- 36 Hours: Cambridge, Mass.
- How Smart Is This Bird? Let It Count the Ways
- Many Ski Areas Lack an Essential Ingredient
- Abused and Used: In Treating Disabled, Potent Drugs and Few Rules
- Movie Review | 'War Horse': Innocence Is Trampled, but a Bond Endures
Advertisements
| Ads by Google | what's this? |
| 2012 Ford® Focus Deals Stimulating, Responsive, Intuitive. Learn More at Official Ford Site. www.Ford.com/2012Focus | |
Inside NYTimes.com
Opinion »Disunion: Onward Christian SoldiersThe story of the United States Christian Commission reveals how critical religion was during the Civil War. | Opinion »Threats to Religious Freedom?Room for Debate asks whether America falls short of its First Amendment ideals. | Opinion »Op-Ed: Gay and VilifiedFighting for gay rights means fighting for survival in Uganda, where homophobia is an import from the West. |
- Home
- World
- U.S.
- N.Y. / Region
- Business
- Technology
- Science
- Health
- Sports
- Opinion
- Arts
- Style
- Travel
- Jobs
- Real Estate
- Autos
- Back to Top
- © 2011The New York Times Company
- Privacy
- Your Ad Choices
- Terms of Service
- Corrections
- RSS
- First Look
- Help
- Contact Us
- Work for Us
- Advertise
- Site Map
Bettany Hughes on Socrates
The biographer and author of a new book discusses what new there is to learn about the ancient Greek philosopher
- By Megan Gambino
- Smithsonian magazine, April 2011, Subscribe
British historian Bettany Hughes brings Socrates to life 25 centuries after his death in The Hemlock Cup: Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life.
Sarah Turton / Eyevine / ReduxSubscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.More from Smithsonian.comSure, Socrates was one of the founders of Western philosophy, but what was he really like? The 42-year-old British historian Bettany Hughes, whose previous biography dealt with Helen of Troy, brings him to life 25 centuries after his death in The Hemlock Cup: Socrates, Athens and the Search for the Good Life. She spoke with the magazine’s Megan Gambino.
Why Socrates?
We think the way we do partly because Socrates thought the way he did. His basic idea—that the unexamined life is not worth living—is what it means to live in the modern world, to develop ideas and ask questions. Yet people imagine Socrates as this rather lofty graybeard dressed in a toga. He lived a very vigorous, quite gritty life.
How did you go about piecing together his life story?
I cannot write history unless I travel to the places where it happened. I spent a lot of time walking around the Eastern Mediterranean, going to all the shrines that Socrates would have worshiped at, going to all the battlefields that he fought on. Socrates was a great walker. They say he was a fiend for exercise. He was absolutely not shut away in some ivory tower somewhere.
What’s the most important thing to know about him?
He really challenged the status quo, and he was very brave in doing that. He was an activist in some ways, a philosophical activist.
What surprised you the most?
How much of his life he spent as a soldier. He would have seen appalling scenes in battle, and yet right until the end of his life he was still searching for the good. That was probably the most poignant thing for me.
How can we benefit from knowing more about him?
The value of wisdom. Socrates is fantastic at saying, “Look, I’m not saying that material comfort isn’t important. I’m not saying it’s not important to make beautiful statues and to have fine battleships and city walls. But none of this matters unless the people inside those city walls are happy.”
How did you end up feeling about him?
He could be infuriating. I’m sure if you went to a dinner party with him, he’d sit there and pick holes in your arguments. He would nail you. I’m sure he was quite an awkward person, but he was also electrifying. He was famously ugly. He didn’t fit in with what a beautiful, heroic Greek should be. He was the opposite of those things and yet everybody around him adored him.
What was the strangest thing you did to try to conjure up his world?
I ground up hemlock in a pestle and mortar. In Socrates’ day this was a new form of poison and capital punishment. I did that at home in my kitchen.
Is there a question you couldn’t get to the bottom of?
The key question is whether he was happy to die the way he did. Socrates was tried in a religious court. He was condemned for disregarding Athens’ gods. If you look at the way he speaks at his trial, according to Plato, there seems to be a moment when he realizes this isn’t just a game. I would love to know if he did die with equanimity, which is the picture we are given of him, or whether he thought he had a few more years of philosophizing in him and wished there hadn’t been that judgment for death.
Related topics: Philosophy Historians Philosophers
0digg inShare1
Comments (6)
Socrates teacher , is in all of us , it was the spirit of truth , all we have to do is just listen .Posted by demetrios corinthios on May 10,2011 | 02:28 AMA slight amendment or condition to add to my invitation to dinner.... Please leave the hemlock at home! Btw, one feels one must inquire...after preparing it...what did Ms Hughes DO with it? I imagine her holding the cup, like a brandy snifter, and sampling the aroma Socrates would have inhaled....Hmmmm, must try that...where DID I put that mortar and pestle...?Posted by Retro Richard Graham on April 21,2011 | 06:15 PMIf Brittany Hughes is free for dinner I'd love to have a discussion of the master in person. What a handsome, communicative woman. The gods spoken of being creations of the imaginations of his fellow Greeks was not lost on Socrates, I suspect his "religion" was the same one we would all do well to seek out in this day, a vastly more gritty time and much closer to the promised "end" than people are willing to admit. I shall seek out Ms Hughes book!Posted by Retro Richard Graham on April 21,2011 | 06:11 PMI disagree with Mr. Green. The apology lists three major charges: corrupting the youth, atheism, and going about with hishead in the clouds (asking questions instead of being "productive"). If true, all of these amounted to a general charge of impiety, or thinking he was a self-made man. The Greeks rightly judged that a person who didn't recognize what he owed to his god and his community, and who taught kids to be impious should not be among them. Of course, they condemned him unjustly. But Athens had just been humiliated and crushed by enemies, and the Athenians needed a scapegoat.
I also disagree with Ms. Hughes on one point at least: our world has not learned from Socarates. It still lives by greed, sophistry and sleek slogans.Posted by Donald Novak on April 14,2011 | 04:13 PMNo, sorry. Bettany Hughes is absolutely right: Socrates was charged by Meletus and Anytus with impiety and with corrupting the youth.Posted by Tom Powell on April 14,2011 | 02:20 PMMs. Hughes is absolutely wrong about why Socrates was condemned. The charge was corrupting the youth, not disregarding Athen's gods.Posted by Frank Green on March 28,2011 | 02:39 PM
(WOW - someone replying in a written form to an article that is extolling the virtues of Scorates in writing promoting a piece of writing on Socrates' importance now THAT'S a pharmakon!)