Socrates: Biography, Philosophy, and Objections - Essay Example

Socrates Socrates Biography Socrates was one of the famous Greek Philosophers and a main source of Western thought. Although quite little is known about his earlier life. Part of his biography was recorded by his students among whom included Plato, another Greek philosopher. From these notes, Socrates was born in Athens in 470 BC, as a son of Sophroniscus a Greek Mason and stone sculptor (Cohen, 23). Being from a rather poor family, Socrates must have received basic Greek education besides learning his father’s art from an early age. He is therefore believed to have worked as a mason for many years before engaging in a life of philosophy. It is however not well known how Socrates supported himself. Whereas some contemporaries point out that he got paid for teaching philosophy, others like Plato points out Socrates did not accept any payment, citing his poor status as a proof of lack of payment. During his late adulthood, Socrates married a young woman Xanthippe and together had three sons Lamprocles, Sophroniscus and Menexenus. Socrates however had little to do with the upbringing of his sons and more with the intellectual and philosophical development of the Athens youth. He also served as an Athenian soldier and participated in three military campaigns one in which he personally saved the life of a popular Athenian general (Cohen, 30). Socrates Philosophy Socrates’ philosophy was greatly preoccupied with the notion of the good and evil of the society. His aim was to bring about an ethical society that depended on the inner need to live ethically rather than being guided by theological or other perspectives (Abel, 430). Socrates work therefore founded a basis for the development of theories of ethics and republic that were coined by later philosophers. First, Socrates believed that the true value of life is in the pursuit of true knowledge. From his perspective, “the unexamined life is not worth living” (Cohen, 46). To stress on ethics as a concept to die for, he does not accept exile when convicted and chooses to remain in Athens and face death in an environment where he could cross-examine people as he wished. Although he feels that he is the one wronged by the state and those who brought him to trial ( Abel, 11). In the light of the ethics, he proposed, Socrates explained further the notion of soul and the body. The soul and the body exist separately. “An orderly soul will, therefore, be able to rule over bodily desires…” and lead the thoughts towards what is ethical and true (Cohen, 46). Socrates Accusations/Objections After the accusations and ultimate conviction, Socrates has a chance to leave the city. Crito, a friend of Socrates tries to convince him ti leave the city and hence avoid the death penalty. If Socrates decides to leave for Thessaly as proposed by Crito, their friendship will be separated by distance. Further, Crito and the rest of the friends who plan the escape will appear in a bad light in the perspective of the Athenians who have been convinced by the jury that Socrates is guilty and deserves the penalty for his mistakes. In addition, Socrates will stop having any “…obligation to raise his children” (Abel, 434). To them he will be as good as dead. According to Crito, the state has wronged Socrates “… it is Meletus who is guilty… of bringing men to trial” (Abel, 11). This means that accepting to remain in prison and collaborating his own death is shameful. Being the one wronged, he has no obligation to agree to his penalty. Socrates Replies Socrates replies to Crito is rather dramatic. First, the greatest harm is proving one to be foolish. Therefore, the opinion that the people will have to his friends is not important as it does not go to this extent. Anything that cannot make one wise or prove him or her to be foolish, according to Socrates is not important. This point proves Socrates value system. The philosopher prefers to be wise rather than to be alive. This can be regarded as ironical (Socratic irony) and a point through which Socrates tries to force Crito to focus more on the important issues. In his second reply to Crito, Socrates points out that the “…soul is the part of humanity that is concerned with justice” (Abel, 426). This implies that the soul is more important and valuable than the body. Since, in any case, the experts opinion is taken as superior, Socrates tend to suggest that his decision is in favor of the expert’s and majority opinion. “…If one is oneself mistreated it is right… to mistreat in return” (Abel, 426). However, the opinion of the soul being more important originates from himself and he is the expert he refers to. Key Arguments The key arguments posed by Socrates are that the public opinion concerning his escape or lack of will not prove his friends to be foolish and neither will it prove them to be wise. As such anything that has no such power is not important and should not be a concern for the people. This is a valid argument because if wisdom is taken as the true knowledge all that do not lead to this direction “…must be considered unimportant” (Abel, 431). His second key argument is that if he escapes, his wisdom and the power of the soul will be disputed. According to him, this is more destructive than facing death. This argument shows that the soul is more important than the body and can freely exist on its own. Further, Socrates declares that “…mistreating people is no different from wrongdoing” (Abel, 431). However, although a death of the body according to Socrates is not necessarily a death of the soul, no soul can exist on its own in normal life. Socrates even talks of his death “… Socrates…. you may arrive at fertile Phthia on the third day” (Abel, 426). This argument is, therefore, invalid since the wisdom contained in the soul does not help in death. Socratic Method and the Value of Philosophy The Socratic Method is an inquiry of hypothesis elimination. The method aims at leading to a conclusion by first eliminating those hypotheses that are contradictory. The method searches for the general truth that are responsible for shaping opinions and beliefs. This is in sharp contrast to the Value of Philosophy as described by Russell. According to Russell, the real value of philosophy is not to compare hypotheses but rather to overcome the narrowness of mind and contemplate a universe of impartiality. This is aimed at discovering unsuspected possibilities. Works cited Abel, Donald C. Fifty Readings in Philosophy. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. Print. Cohen, S M, Patricia Curd, and C D. C. Reeve. Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub, 2011. Print. Read More