Socrates

Welcome to this topic, this lesson about Socrates! I am quite sure all of you are already familiar with the name Socrates. Socrates is such a very important philosopher that one cannot forego studying philosophy without encountering his name. An enigmatic figure known to us only through other people’s accounts (principally the dialogues of his student Plato), he is credited as one of the founders of Western Philosophy. He is considered by some as the very antithesis of the Sophists of his day, who claimed to have knowledge which they could transmit to others (often for payment), arguing instead that knowledge should be pursued for its own sake, even if one could never fully possess it. Hence, join me and together, let’s examine our own purpose in life.

“Know thyself…” ~ Socrates

Intended learning outcomes (ILOs)

At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:

  1. Discuss the philosophical concept of the knowledge of Truth and Goodness according to Socrates.

Who is Socrates?

Socrates (c. 469-399 B.C.) is widely considered as the first Athenian philosopher. He was deemed as the The Father of Ethics because he founded the first critical study of moral philosophy. He was a stonemason who inherited a modest fortune from his father, Sophroniscus, (a sculptor and stonemason) and his mother was Phaenarete, (a midwife). His family was respectable in descent, but humble in means. He appears to have had no more than an ordinary Greek education (reading, writing, gymnastics and music, and, later, geometry and astronomy) before devoting his time almost completely to intellectual interests.

He is usually described as unattractive in appearance and short in stature, and he apparently rarely washed or changed his clothes. But he did nevertheless marry Xanthippe, a woman much younger than he and renowned for her shrewishness (Socrates justified his marriage on the grounds that a horse-trainer needs to hone his skills on the most spirited animals). She bore for him three sons, Lamprocles, Sophroniscus and Menexenus, who were all were quite young children at the time of their father’s trial and death.

It is not clear how Socrates earned a living. Some sources suggest that he continued the profession of stonemasonry from his father. He apparently served for a time as a member of the senate of Athens, and he served (and reportedly distinguished himself) in the Athenian army during three campaigns at Potidaea, Amphipolis and Delium. However, most texts seem to indicate that Socrates did not work, devoting himself solely to discussing philosophy in the squares (called agora) of Athens.

He wandered about the city, engaging citizens in discussion and argument. He was a brilliant debater, and he was idolized by many young Athenians. He did not merely engage in sophistry—he was not interested in arguing simply for the sake of arguing—he wanted to discover something important, namely, the essential nature of knowledge, justice, beauty, goodness, and, especially, traits of good character such as courage. The method of discovery he followed bears his name, the Socratic method. Many philosophers equate proficiency within their own field with skill in the Socratic (or dialectic) method.

Socratic method

Perhaps Socrates’ most important and enduring single contribution to Western thought is his dialectical method of inquiry, which he referred to as “elenchus” (roughly, “cross-examination“) but which has become known as the Socratic Method. It has been called a negative method of hypothesis elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those which lead to contradictions. Even today, the Socratic Method is still used in classrooms and law schools as a way of discussing complex topics in order to expose the underlying issues in both the subject and the speaker. Its influence is perhaps most strongly felt today in the use of the Scientific Method, in which the hypothesis is just the first stage towards a proof.

At its simplest, the Socratic Method is used to solve a problem by breaking the problem down into a series of questions, the answers to which gradually distill better and better solutions. Both the questioner and the questioned explore the implications of the other’s positions, in order to stimulate rational thinking and illuminate ideas. Thus, Socrates would counter any assertion with a counterexample which disproves the assertion (or at least shows it to be inadequate). This would lead to a modified assertion, which Socrates would then test again with another counterexample. Through several iterations of this kind, the original assertion is continually adjusted and becomes more and more difficult to refute, which Socrates held meant that it was closer and closer to the truth.

Socratic/dialectic method is a search for the proper definition of a thing, a definition that will not permit refutation under Socratic questioning. The method does not imply that the questioner knows the essential nature of knowledge. It only demonstrates that the questioner is skilled at detecting misconceptions and at revealing them by asking the right questions. For instance:

  • Socrates: What is knowledge?
  • Student: You’re asking me what knowledge is? Well, when you believe something very strongly, that’s knowledge.
  • Socrates: But that would mean that kids who believe in fairies actually know there are fairies, if they believe this strongly.
  • Student: That’s a good point. To know something, then, isn’t just to believe it very strongly. The belief also must be true.
  • Socrates: That still doesn’t sound quite right. That means a mere hunch is knowledge, if a person believes it strongly, and it turns out to be correct.
  • Student: Well, you’re right again. So, for one to know something, one must believe it strongly, it must be true, AND it must NOT be a mere hunch. In other words, it must be based on good evidence or solid reasoning.

Socrates aptly called it intellectual midwifery. Just like a midwife who aids in the delivery of a newborn, a philosopher must likewise aid in the delivery of knowledge. Knowledge comes naturally out of every person, a philosopher just finds a way to let it come out naturally.

Illustration of Socratic Method during Socrates’s time

  1. A. question is posed (e.g., the question of what virtue is, or justice, or truth, or beauty);
  2. Socrates becomes excited and enthusiastic to find someone who claims to know something.
  3. Socrates finds “minor flaws” in his companion’s definition and slowly begins to unravel it, forcing his partner to admit ignorance.
  4. In one dialogue, Socrates’ target actually ends up in tears.
  5. An agreement is reached by the two admittedly ignorant companions to pursue the truth seriously.
  6. Almost all the dialogues end inconclusively.
  7. Each of them must find it out for themselves.

Contribution of Socrates to Philosophy

Like the Sophists, he didn’t study the cosmos, but study the purpose of life. But disagreed with them on the issue of relativity and objectivity. Ironically, Socrates himself professed to know nothing. The Oracle at Delphi said that therefore Socrates was the wisest of all men. Socrates at least knew that he knew nothing, whereas the others falsely believed themselves to know something. Socrates himself wrote no book, but his conversations were remembered by his disciple Plato and later published by him as  “The Dialogues” in which Socrates is the central character.

The Dialogues emphasize a specific philosophical question, such as:

  • “What is piety?” (in the dialogue titled Euthyphro),
  • “What is justice?” (in Republic),
  • “What is virtue?” (in Meno),
  • “What is meaning?”(in Sophist),
  • “What is love?” (in Symposium),
  • “What is good?” (In Apology), among others.

Apology: The Examined Life

“An unexamined life is life not worth living…”

Because of his political associations with an earlier regime, the Athenian democracy put Socrates on  trial. The speech he offered in his own defense, as reported in Plato’s Apology, provides us with many reminders of the central features of Socrates’s approach to philosophy and its relation to practical life.

Ironic Modesty:

Explaining his mission as a philosopher, Socrates reports an oracular message telling him that “No one is wiser than you.” (Apology 21a) He then proceeds through a series of ironic descriptions of his efforts to disprove the oracle by conversing with notable Athenians who must surely be wiser. In each case, however, Socrates concludes that he has a kind of wisdom that each of them lacks: namely, an open awareness of his own ignorance.

Questioning Habit:

The goal of Socratic interrogation, then, is to help individuals to achieve genuine self-knowledge, even if it often turns out to be negative in character. As his cross-examination of Meletus shows, Socrates means to turn the methods of the Sophists inside-out, using logical nit-picking to expose (rather than to create) illusions about reality. If the method rarely succeeds with interlocutors, it can nevertheless be effectively internalized as a dialectical mode of reasoning in an effort to understand everything.

Devotion to Truth:

Even after he has been convicted by the jury, Socrates declines to abandon his pursuit of the truth in all matters. Refusing to accept exile from Athens or a commitment to silence as his penalty, he maintains that public discussion of the great issues of life and virtue is a necessary part of any valuable human life. “The unexamined life is not worth living.” (Apology 38a) Socrates would rather die than give up philosophy, and the jury seems happy to grant him that wish.

Dispassionate Reason:

Even when the jury has sentenced him to death, Socrates calmly delivers his final public words, a speculation about what the future holds. Disclaiming any certainty about the fate of a human being after death, he nevertheless expresses a continued confidence in the power of reason, which he has exhibited (while the jury has not). Who really wins will remain unclear.

Plato’s dramatic picture of a man willing to face death rather than abandoning his commitment to philosophical inquiry offers up Socrates as a model for all future philosophers. Perhaps few of us are presented with the same stark choice between philosophy and death, but all of us are daily faced with opportunities to decide between convenient conventionality and our devotion to truth and reason. How we choose determines whether we, like Socrates, deserve to call our lives philosophical.

The Death of Socrates

In his quest for truth, Socrates managed to offend many of the powerful and pompous figures of Athens. Socrates’ enemies conspired against him, getting him indicted for teaching false doctrines, for impiety, and for corrupting the youth. The brought him to trial hoping to ask for forgiveness. But at his trial Socrates maligned his prosecutors and angered the unruly jury of 500 by lecturing to them about their ignorance. The enraged jury condemned him to death by a vote of 280 to 220.

They were ashamed of their act and embarrassed that they were about to put to death their most eminent citizen. Despite the pleas of his friends, Socrates refused to escape, saying that if he broke the law by escaping, he would be declaring himself an enemy of all laws. So he drank the hemlock and philosophized with his friends to the last moment. In death, he became the universal symbol of martyrdom for the sake of Truth.

References

  • Stumpf, Samuel Enoch. (2008). From Socrates to Sartre. New York: McGraw Hill Publishing.
  • Ramos, Christine Camela. (2004). Introduction to Philosophy. Manila: Rex Bookstore.
  • Gaarder, Jostein. (2004). Sophie’s World. Great Britain: Phoenix House.
  • http://www.plato.standford.edu
  • http://www.philosophybasic.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.