The Four Doctrines of Socrates on Life - Report Example

Mike Vertucci Professor’s Name Philosophy 101 November 26, 2006 Four Doctrines of Socrates The philosopher Socrates (469-399 B.C.E.) never wrote anything himself, and he was despised and ridiculed in his own day. Now, however, he is considered to be one of the most influential figures in ancient, and even modern, philosophy.1 In almost every respect, Socrates was very different from the ideal Greek citizen. He was unattractive, he did not practice good hygiene, and he seemed to be untouchable by illness or drunkenness.2 While other Athenians were in pursuit of wealth, fame, and honor, Socrates chose a life of poverty, and he tried to escape being looked up to by students.3 He always claimed that he “was not a teacher,” and he refused to accept payment for any work he did.4 Socrates also seemed to value women more highly than did his contemporaries.5 Socrates was, it seems, a rebel – someone who went against the grain of Athenian culture and dared to think his own thoughts and be his own person. He attempted to instill this same desire into the hearts of all his “students.” His idealism and thirst for knowledge – at least as they are brought forth in Plato’s dialogues – appealed to Athenian youth of his day just as much as they appeal to scholars today. He is almost a mythic figure, often: encumbered with the admiration and emulation normally reserved for founders of religious sects—Jesus or Buddha—strange for someone who tried so hard to make others do their own thinking.1 Because Socrates has gained such status, and because he never wrote anything himself, it is almost impossible to separate the facts from the fiction.2 What we know of Socrates today, we know because of Plato’s written dialogues (which seem to be more accurate than any others), and interpretations of these by subsequent scholars.3 Obviously, this leaves a great deal of room for error when trying to figure out how the real, historical Socrates lived, believed, and acted. Socrates’ views on some things, however, remain undisputed in the academic world, including his four doctrines on life. These are: (1) virtue is knowledge; (2) the importance of the Elenchus; (3) the claim of ignorance; and (4) his view of the soul. Virtue is Knowledge Virtue is “the ability to do what is right and resist what is wrong.” 1 When Socrates discusses virtue, he is usually referring to courage, reverence or piety, wisdom, temperance, and justice.2 These aspects of virtue are mutually inclusive.3 If a person has one of these evidences of virtue they have them all. A person can attain virtue by constantly examining his/her life and belief systems, and then matching them up with the absolute truth.4 It is important to reiterate here that virtue, in Socrates’ eyes, is something that can be attained both by a man and a woman, and to the same degree.5 This assertion is in direct contrast to the views of his contemporaries, who believed that women were naturally limited in their capacity to attain virtue simply because their reproductive duties took so much out of them.6 This argument is discussed in detail in Socrates’ conversation with Meno. Meno says that a man is virtuous if he conducts city business well, while a woman is virtuous if she conducts the household efficiently.7 Socrates argues that virtue is not dependent on context, but rather individual qualities, like those mentioned above.1 A woman can be equally, less than, or more so wise, temperate, just, courageous, or pious. It is ridiculous to think that just because a woman bears children, she is not capable of exhibiting virtuous behavior. And it is also not likely that her virtuous behavior would be significantly different from that of a man’s. Socrates is attributed with the statement “virtue is knowledge.” 2 In this view, “the things that we think are good can either hurt us or harm us, depending on our understanding or knowledge of them.” 3 If virtue is knowledge, then people only do evil when they don’t know what is right, or good. 4 Virtue must be taught in order for it to be understood. This is one of the topics of Socrates’ with Meno. “Can virtue be taught, or does it come by practice, or nature, or some other way?” 5 Meno asks this question that starts off the conversation. Socrates replies in an enigmatic way, saying that he does not know what virtue is, or how to get it.6 It would appear that Socrates is toying with Meno by answering this way, and this perception is confirmed in the dialogue that follows. If virtue can be taught, there must be teachers to teach it. The men who try to teach it come at the topic from different angles and argue different things about virtue, so that it is not easily explained by any of them. Since it is not explained it is not really taught; therefore, there are no true teachers of virtue.1 If it cannot be taught (or learned) because there are really no teachers of virtue, then it cannot possibly be knowledge because knowledge is learned.2 “Virtue is right opinion, not knowledge, and as such it is a ‘gift from the gods.’” 3 This is the statement Socrates’ use of elenchus leads Meno to make at the end, even though it is contrary to all he believes. He puts aside his own beliefs in order to guide his “student” into thinking for himself. Elenchus Elenchus is also known as the Socratic method of questioning. An important rule for this method is that the student (or interlocutor) “must answer every question according to his own beliefs.” 4 Socrates usually waits for a student to make a virtue-related statement before he starts asking questions.2 His questions tend to take one of two directions. Either he stays with the initial claim and seeks clarification of it, or he will turn the claim around and cause the student to agree to beliefs that are completely opposite to the original, as is the case in the above-mentioned discussion with Meno.5 In either case, the goal is always to get the student to think differently about things. With this method, “Students are questioned until they come to reject their original beliefs.” 6 At this point, the students may or may not be led to adopt a belief set based on what is “true,” but they have at least been taught to question things and seek out answers for themselves.1 It is assumed that the teacher involved in the elenchus knows the correct answer, or at least has a sense of what the correct answer should be.2 If the teacher does not know the answer to the questions, chaos could ensue. Elenchus that does not give students any hope of figuring out the answer for themselves can be bad in that it causes them to become “frustrated and impatient” with themselves and their teacher.3 Even though the student is experiencing this mental anguish, the student is considered, by Socrates, to be better off simply because “recognizing one’s errors is clearly an intellectual improvement.” 4 The goal of elenchus, then, is not to find the answer, but to develop the process of finding the answer. Indeed, in the event that an answer is found, the elenchus would be dissolved.5 By claiming ignorance, Socrates can preserve the elenchus and keep the conversation going. Claim to ignorance To Socrates, ignorance and wisdom are inextricably entwined. “The pinnacle of human wisdom is the realization of human ignorance of virtue.” 1 According to this thought, humans are incapable, really, of achieving true wisdom. This is something that is available only to the supreme beings. Socrates appears to be conscious of his own ignorance, and he appears to become even more so in his discussions with others.2 Socrates, then, in his apparent quest for true wisdom, finds his own – and others’ – ignorance. And he becomes even more aware of how inferior his human capabilities are when compared to the gods’. Ignorance is to be feared, while wisdom is to be cherished. In the Charmides, Socrates says that “his self-examination results from a fear that he might unconsciously fancy that he knows something of which he is ignorant.” 3 This fear arises from the possibility that the awareness of ignorance can be lost, so that the individual is in no better position than he was before he gained the awareness and might, in fact, be in a worse position.4 To prevent this from happening to himself, Socrates participates in an almost obsessive self-examination.5 This fear of falling back into ignorance may also explain why Socrates so tirelessly asked probing questions of every ignorant person he met. He was afraid that their ignorance would infect his mind and possibly drag him back down.6 People who know they are ignorant can choose not to be ignorant.7 They are able to change their own behaviors in this way – with the help of a moral adviser.1 In Socrates’ view, people are happiest when they “are obtaining awareness of moral ignorance and [have] a moral adviser who has knowledge.2 If man is incapable of achieving true moral knowledge, where can he find a moral adviser who will be able to help him? Socrates suggests that he himself is a more than adequate moral adviser because he has the capability to communicate with the gods.3 Socrates calls himself “a gift of the gods to human beings, a gift through which we can have, though indirectly, access to the divine.” 4 According to Socrates’ theories, this search for knowledge and truth continues once a person’s soul has crossed over into the afterlife because it is the soul that searches for truth. View of the soul Unlike most of Socrates’ other theories, his conception of the soul was somewhat compatible to the beliefs of his day. By the end of the fifth Century B.C.E., the soul was believed to be “the distinguishing mark of living things.” 5 According to this view, the soul encompassed several of an individual’s emotions, and it was charged with the responsibility of planning and practical thinking.1 It was also the seat of all virtues.2 Socrates took this idea of the soul even further. He suggested that the soul is immortal, and that it “contemplates truths after its separation from the body at the time of death.” 3 According to his view of the soul, the soul has to be immortal because “life belongs to soul essentially.” 4 Additionally, the soul is considered to be synonymous with the intellect.5 This is where his theory differed from popular contemporary opinion.6 In the popular view, the soul was destructible and ethereal – incapable of the rational thoughts attributable to the mind.7 According to Socrates’ thinking, the soul is not only eternal and rational, but it is also changeable. Because the soul is life itself, before a person is born, that person’s soul exists, but it is effectively dead – it experiences a separation from the body.8 Then the soul enters the body and gives it life, and after the body dies, the soul returns to a separated state, until it enters another body.9 Socrates’ view of reincarnation of the soul, interestingly enough, applies to plants and animals, as well as people.1 Plant and animal souls differ from human souls in that they are not really capable of moral thinking, although they do have some “cognitive” abilities, such as desire. The rational, moral, human soul struggles against its instinctual, physical, “animal” desires.2 Socrates’ view of the soul is threefold. The soul is made up of reason, spirit, and appetite. Reason is “attached to knowledge and truth.” 3 It is this property that distinguishes the human soul from the animal soul. Reason is in charge of regulating the other two aspects of soul.4 The goal of spirit is to gain respect and recognition from others.5 It often acts as a mediator between the other two.6 Appetite’s main focus is on fulfilling the instinctual desires for food, drink, and sex.7 Appetite is primarily concerned with deriving pleasure from things that can be experienced within the natural world. In this sense, the soul is comprised of both rational and non-rational component. The same can be said of the body, in Socrates’ view. The soul (in humans, at least) regulates and controls the body’s non-rational emotions and desires in light of reasonable judgments and moral obligations.1 The immortal soul has the capability to reason and fulfill its moral obligations because it has already learned everything it needs to know from its many sojourns to the earth and back again.2 It is important to note here that “everything” does not include the trivial, historical details of everyday life. What is learned, and remembered, by the soul as it passes from life to life is “universal and abstract.” 3 The abstract is all that matters because it is the only wisdom that can lead to true knowledge. And knowledge, according to Socrates, really is the most important thing. It is the focus of all of Socrates’ doctrines on life. Works Cited Angus, Ian. “Socrates and the Critique of Metaphysics.” European Legacy 10.4 (2005): 299-314. Chandler, Martha. “Meno and Mencius: Two Philosophical Dramas.” Philosophy East & West 53.3 (2003): 367-398. Lorenz, Hendrik. “Ancient Theories of Soul.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2003 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), . Nails, Debra. "Socrates", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2005 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), . Scaltsas, Patricia Ward. “Virtue Without Gender in Socrates.” Hypatia 7.3 (1992): 126-137. Woodruff, Paul. "Plato's Shorter Ethical Works", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2005 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), . Yonazawa, Shigeru. “Socrates’s Conception of Philosophy.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 12.1 (2004): 1-22. Read More