Euthyphro, Apology, Crito Analysis

About Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo
Next
The philosophy of ancient Greece reached its highest level of achievement in the works of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. The influence of these men on the culture of the Western world can scarcely be overestimated. Each of them made significant contributions to philosophy, and it would be difficult to determine to which one of them we are most indebted. All three were original thinkers and great teachers. In point of time, Socrates was the one who appeared first. Plato became the most distinguished of his pupils, and Aristotle in turn received instruction from Plato. Both Plato and Aristotle were prolific writers, and what we know about them has been derived chiefly from their published works. In contrast to them, Socrates left no writings at all. Consequently, what information we have concerning him comes from the testimony of others who were associated with him and who were influenced both by the moral quality of his living and the significance of the ideas that he expounded.

On the basis of what has been reported concerning Socrates, we would judge that he made a profound impression upon a group of his followers
who were closely associated with his life and teachings. The name of Socrates has been revered throughout the centuries and he has been regarded as one of the greatest teachers of all time. Plato, in one of his best known dialogs, refers to Socrates as a friend "whom I may truly call the wisest, and justest, and best of all men whom I have ever known." Although Socrates was never deified by the Greeks in the sense in which Jesus has been deified by Christians, it is interesting to note some of the striking similarities that have characterized both of their lives. For instance, both men were teachers of great distinction. Neither of them left any writings of his own. Both conducted their teaching activities by means of conversations with individuals. Both men were critical of the religious and political leaders of their time. Each of them proclaimed by precept and example a standard of moral conduct above that which prevailed among the recognized leaders of the society in which he lived. Both of them suffered a martyr's death. Finally, there is a sense in which each of them arose from the dead by virtue of the fact that his teachings and the causes that he served became more alive and powerful after his death than during the times when he was living.

Plato and Aristotle have been held in high esteem because of their intellectual achievements and the fact that their ideas have been preserved through the writings that they produced. Socrates has also been recognized as an intellectual genius, but in addition, his career in the city of Athens has come to be regarded by many persons as an outstanding example of the virtues that he advocated. His humility, intellectual honesty, devotion to the public good, and loyalty to what he believed was morally right exemplify his conception of what constitutes the good life. Because of the quality of his living, along with the abiding truth of what he taught, the story of his trial and death is something that will continue to stir the imagination of people and to win for him their admiration and respect.

With reference to the trial and death of Socrates, there are four dialogs that are especially relevant. They are the Euthyphro, the Apology, the Crito, and the Phaedo. In the Euthyphro, an attempt is made to answer the question "What is piety?" It has a particular bearing on the trial of Socrates, for he had been accused of impiety and was about to be tried for a crime, the nature of which no one seemed to understand. The Apology contains an account of Socrates' defense of himself after he had been charged with being a corrupter of the youth and one who refuses to accept the popular beliefs concerning the gods of the city of Athens. It is generally regarded as the most authentic account on record of what Socrates actually said as he appeared before his judges. The Crito is an account of the conversation that takes place in the jail where Socrates is confined awaiting his execution. He is visited by Crito, an aged and trusted friend, who has come to the prison for the purpose of trying to persuade Socrates to avoid being put to death either by an escape from the prison where he is being held or by employing some other means. The dialog depicts Socrates as a man who has no fear of death and one who would rather die than commit an act that he believes to be morally wrong. The Phaedo is a narrative concerning the last hours in the life of Socrates. After an interval of years, the story is related to Echecrates by Phaedo, who was one of Socrates' beloved disciples. The narration takes place at Phlius, which is the home of Phaedo. The scene of the story is the prison where Socrates is held. Phaedo is one of a number of friends who have gathered for their last meeting with Socrates. Much of the discussion that takes place has to do with Socrates' attitude toward death, including his reasons for believing in the immortality of the soul.

Plato's dialogs have been translated into many different languages and have been published in a number of editions. One of the best known translations in English is the one made by Benjamin Jowett of Oxford University in England. It was first published during the latter half of the nineteenth century. Since that time, other translations have been made that are regarded as improvements in some respects over the one made by Jowett. So far as our study of the last days of Socrates is concerned, the changes that have been made in the more recent translations are of minor importance and for this reason our study of the four dialogs that are included in these notes will be based on the Jowett translation. The quotations that are used both in the summaries of the dialogs and the commentaries that follow are taken from this translation.

Summary and Analysis
Euthyphro
Summary and Analysis
Original Text
Previous
Next
Summary

Plato's dialog called Euthyphro relates a discussion that took place between Socrates and Euthyphro concerning the meaning of piety, or that virtue usually regarded as a manner of living that fulfills one's duty both to gods and to humanity. It is of particular interest in relation to the fate of Socrates inasmuch as he has recently been charged with impiety and is about to be tried before the Athenian court to determine his guilt or innocence of the crime attributed to him. Because he felt quite sure that the Athenian people in general did not understand the real nature of either piety or impiety, Socrates asks Euthyphro to answer the question "What is piety?" He has a real purpose in doing this, for Euthyphro, a Sophist, professes to be wise concerning such matters, while Socrates, making no such claim for himself, professes only to be ignorant. He wants to see if Euthyphro is as wise as he claims to be, and if he is not, Socrates will expose the shallowness of his claim.

Euthyphro has the reputation of being a wise person, a diviner, and a soothsayer. As a teacher, he gives instruction on moral and political matters, as well as the practical problems of everyday living. The discussion that is carried on between Socrates and Euthyphro takes place on the porch of King Archon.

Both Socrates and Euthyphro are involved in matters of a legal nature. Socrates has been accused of impiety and is facing a court trial. Euthyphro is the plaintiff in a forthcoming trial for murder. Socrates asks who it is who is being charged with this crime. He is surprised and shocked to learn that Euthyphro is bringing this charge against his own father. The circumstances bringing this about have a direct bearing on the case. It appears that a poor dependent of the Euthyphro family had killed one of their domestic servants. At the command of Euthyphro's father, the guilty person had been bound and thrown into a ditch. Messengers had then been sent to Athens to inquire of the interpreters of religion concerning what should be done with him. By the time these messengers had returned, the criminal had died from hunger and exposure. Euthyphro's father was, at least to some extent, responsible for the offender's death, and this was the basis for charging him with the crime of murder.

Socrates is impressed by the fact that Euthyphro is willing to perform his duty in the matter even though it means taking action against a member of his own family. Without any further discussion of the case involving Euthyphro's father, Socrates is anxious to pursue inquiry concerning the nature of piety since this is directly related to the fact that Meletus has accused him of the crime of impiety. Accordingly, he addresses this question to Euthyphro, "What is piety?" Euthyphro answers at once that piety is acting the way he is acting in bringing charges against one who has done wrong, even though that person happens to be his own father. Although admitting that Euthyphro is right in not allowing personal relationships to stand in the way of performing his duty, Socrates is not satisfied with the answer that has been given to his question. An example of the virtue of piety is not equivalent to a definition of that virtue. Euthyphro has given but one example, and even though he defended his statement by mentioning that certain of the Greek gods have acted in a similar manner, Socrates insists that a proper definition of piety must be sufficient to include all instances of that virtue. Euthyphro's statement has not been adequate for this purpose. Nevertheless, Socrates insists that, inasmuch as Euthyphro has brought a criminal charge against his own father, he must have known the nature of impiety or he would have been unable to decide that his father was guilty of it. Once again he urges Euthyphro to tell him what piety is. If he can obtain a satisfactory answer to this question, it will enable him to know whether the charge that Meletus is bringing against him is a well-founded one.

In reply, Euthyphro advances another statement. He says, "Piety is what is dear to the gods and impiety is that which is not dear to them." Upon examination by Socrates, this statement turns out to be no more satisfactory than the former one. It is not clear what makes anything dear to the gods, and besides, there is the question of whether that which is dear to some of the gods is dear to all of them or only to some of them. Euthyphro then insists that piety is that which is pleasing to all of the gods. He feels sure they all agree that murder is wrong. Socrates then points out that the circumstances under which killing takes place makes an important difference concerning the moral quality of the act. The same is true with reference to the motive that was involved. It is quite evident that so far the discussion has not produced any satisfactory answer to the question concerning the nature of piety.

To approach the subject in a different way, Socrates asks Euthyphro if people who are pious are also just. Yes, says Euthyphro, but at the same time he recognizes that it is not true that all just persons are pious. Socrates then wants to know if piety is a part of justice, and if it is, of what part does it consist? Euthyphro replies that piety is that part of justice that attends to the gods, just as there is another part of justice that attends to men. This, too, is unsatisfactory because we do not know what "attends" means. When applied to some things such as dogs, horses, and men, it implies some way of making them better. When applied to gods, it cannot have this meaning since there is no respect in which men can make the gods better than they are. At this point, Euthyphro states that there are various ways in which men can minister to the gods, but he does not have the time to point them out.

Socrates still insists that he does not know what piety is, and certainly Euthyphro has not revealed its true nature. The question is an important one, not only for Socrates, but for anyone who is called upon to make decisions relative to moral conduct. The dialog closes without any final answer to the question with which the discussion started. Socrates urges Euthyphro to continue the search for the meaning of piety. Until he has found it, there can be no justification for the decision he has made concerning his father.

Analysis

For those who are looking for a satisfactory definition of piety, the dialog is a disappointment, for no conclusion has been reached concerning the precise nature of that virtue. It has sometimes been maintained that the true purpose of philosophy is not to answer questions but rather to question the answers that have been given. At any rate, this is exactly what Socrates has been doing in this dialog. Euthyphro has presented several quick and ready answers to the question "What is piety?" but upon examination each of them has been shown to be unsatisfactory.

The method that Socrates has used is known as dialectic. It consists of pointing out the inconsistencies and self-contradictions involved in popular statements made without thinking about their logical implications. In this instance, the use of this method has not only brought to light the shallowness of popular conceptions held by many of the Sophists, but it serves as a defense of Socrates by revealing something of the character of the man and the type of work in which he has been engaged.

Socrates has been accused of teaching false doctrines and thereby corrupting the youth of Athens. This kind of charge has frequently been made concerning philosophers, and it is for this reason that action has often been taken against them. While it is admitted that everyone is entitled to think as they please, the trouble arises when one tries to persuade other people to think as he does. That Socrates is not guilty of the charges brought against him can be seen from the fact that he has not been trying to indoctrinate anyone. He does not claim that his own views are perfect or that he has arrived at the final truth concerning the matter under consideration. Instead, his role is that of the inquirer, and his purpose is to get people to think for themselves. In fact, one of his chief criticisms of the Sophists is that they accept too readily what has been told to them by others without ever stopping to consider the evidence upon which it has been based.

It is true that getting people to think for themselves does have its dangers, which to some extent accounts for the opposition that has been raised against Socrates.
Clear and correct thinking is bound to expose the errors upon which popular conceptions are often based. It also tends to bring to light the defects of those who pretend to know far more than is actually the case or who boast of qualifications that they do not possess. Those whose defects have thus been pointed out naturally have a feeling of resentment toward the person who has been responsible for bringing it about. This resentment is one of the reasons why Meletus has been bringing charges against Socrates. It is easier to find fault with the person who is your critic than it is to admit the truth of what the critic has been
saying.

Although Euthyphro as a Sophist exhibits some of the conceit and arrogance that is characteristic of that group as a whole, he is not to be regarded as a man who is altogether bad. He does have some redeeming qualities. He is a conscientious person and in this respect is ready to perform what he believes to be his duty to the gods — even though it involves bringing charges against his own father. It appears that what Euthyphro's father has done under the existing circumstances was justifiable under Athenian law, and it was quite unlikely that he would be punished. Nevertheless, Euthyphro believes it is his religious duty to report what his father has done, which is his main reason for doing it. Having fulfilled his duty in regard to the event, his conscience will be at peace. Furthermore, Euthyphro is very much opposed to Meletus and on many points is in complete agreement with Socrates.

In harmony with many of his fellow Athenians, Euthyphro conceives of piety in terms of religion, which involves a relationship between gods and humans. This relationship is understood to mean a process of giving and receiving. Prayers and sacrifices are given to the gods, who in return bestow material benefits on their worshipers. This relationship is obviously what Euthyphro had in mind when he stated that piety is doing that which is dear to the gods, and impiety is doing that which is not pleasing to the gods. When asked what it is that makes something dear to the gods, the reply is that it is attending to their wishes, which is accomplished by making sacrifices to them and by offering prayers of praise and thanksgiving.

One of the purposes of this dialog is to contrast two very different conceptions of religion. One of these is illustrated in Euthyphro's view of religion as a kind of mercenary process. It was a fairly popular view in the city of Athens, just as it has been held by many persons in other times and places. Making gifts to the gods and receiving benefits from them implied in Euthyphro's case a belief in the reality of the Athenian gods as set forth in popular stories concerning their behavior and their supernatural power. The other conception of religion is the one held by Socrates, who did not accept as literally true many of the popular tales concerning the activities of the gods. It was for this reason that Meletus and others had accused him of being irreligious and undermining the faith of the youth. The accusation was not a just one, for the fact that Socrates did not accept the conception of the gods held by other persons did not imply that he held no belief in divinity at all. As a matter of fact, Socrates was in one sense of the word a very devout and religious person. Evidence of this can be seen in his attitude with reference to the mystical voice that warned him not to do certain things. This voice, to which he often referred, was regarded as a divine voice, and he always paid heed to it. Further than this, Socrates held that a divine purpose was expressed in the creation of the world, and this purpose was directed toward the moral and spiritual development of human beings.

In the discussion that takes place about piety in relation to justice, Socrates rejects Euthyphro's distinction between service to the gods and service to people. He does so for several reasons. In the first place, he does not believe that one's duty toward a divine being should be regarded as something that is separate and distinct from his duty toward his fellow men. On the contrary, he holds that the only true way of rendering service to God consists in doing what one can to promote the moral and spiritual development of human beings. Second, Socrates regards the purpose and function of religion as something that is quite different from the view expressed by Euthyphro. Instead of religion being used as a kind of tool or device for getting what one wants, as was true in Euthyphro's case, Socrates believes the primary purpose of true religion is to bring one's own life into harmony with the will of God. Religion and morality, in his view, are so closely related that neither one can exist apart from the other. Unlike the Sophists, who were accustomed to think of the demands of morality as nothing more than the desires of the people who formulated them, Socrates believes in a standard of morality that is something more than human opinion. He identifies it with the will of God.
Socrates on the Definition of Piety:
Euthyphro 10A- 11 B
S. MARC COHEN
PLATO'S Et~rt~reHRo is a clear example of a Socratic definitional dialogue. The concept to be defined is that of holiness or piety (z6 r the need for a defini- tion is presented in a manner characteristic of the early dialogues. Euthyphro is about to prosecute his father on a charge of murder, Socrates expresses surprise at Euthyphro's action, and Euthyphro defends himself by saying that to prosecute his father is pious, whereas not to prosecute him would be impious. Socrates then wonders whether Euthyphro's knowledge of piety and impiety is sufficient to guarantee that he is not acting impiously in prosecuting his father. The trap has been set; Euthyphro's vanity is stung, and the search for a definition begins. The outcome of the search is also familiar; all of Euthyphro's efforts miscarry. The dialogue ends with no satisfactory definition of piety either produced or in the offing. The central argument in the dialogue is the one Socrates advances (10a-lib) against Euthyphro's definition of piety as "what all the gods love." The argument is interesting on several counts. First, the argument is sufficiently unclear as to warrant discussion of what its structure is. Second, it is at least open to question whether there is any interpretation or reconstruction of the argument according to which it is valid and non-fallacious. Third, there are a number of points of con- temporary philosophical interest that inevitably arise in any adequate discussion of the argument. Fourth, the argument has been traditionally thought to have an important moral for contemporary ethical theory, and not just for ancient theology. Before beginning a detailed examination of the argument itself, I will comment briefly on the moral the argument has been traditionally thought to have? For Euthyphro, the question whether or not he ought to prosecute his father is to be settled by determining whether or not it would be pious for him to do so.
Whether or not his doing so would be pious is determined by finding out whether t Cf. A. E. Taylor, Plato the Man and his Work (London: Methuen, 1949), p. 151, and
Robert G. Hoerber, "Plato's Euthyphro," Phronesis, III (1958), 95-107, esp. n. 1, p. 102, and
p. 104.
[1] 2 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY all the gods love it, or, as we might now say, approve of it. For Euthyphro, then, moral questions (such as "Ought I prosecute my father?") are settled by appeal to moral authorities--the gods. Euthyphro is offering an authoritarian normative ethical theory. But he apparently wishes to offer an authoritarian meta-ethical theory as well, since 'pious' is for him defined in terms of the approval of an authority. Moreover, Euthyphro's authorities must have been thought of by him to be pre-eminently wise and rational; after all, they are the gods. Their wisdom and rationality is part of what makes them moral authorities. It is their wisdom and rationality that enables them to perceive, where mere mortals may fail to perceive, whether a given act is pious. Socrates' argument may then be thought of as having the following force. If 'pious' is to be defined in terms of the gods' approval, then the piety of a given act cannot be that upon which the gods base their approval of it. If the gods' approval of a pious act has any rational basis, then, it must lie in their perception of some other features of the act. And then it is these features in terms of which 'pious' should be defined. In general, if one's normative ethics are authoritarian, and one's authorities are rational and use their rationality in forming moral judgments, then one's recta-ethics cannot also be authoritarian.
I want to argue in support of this somewhat traditional interpretation of the
Euthyphro. I shall try to show that Socrates" arguments should be taken as sup- porting this conclusion (indeed, that they cannot be taken to support anything else). Socrates begins his argument against Euthyphro's proposed definition by ask- ing him this question: "Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved? ''2 Socrates hopes to get Euthyphro to aifirm the first and deny the second of these two alternatives, but Euthyphro fails to understand the question. Socrates agrees to "speak more plainly" (~atp~ox~pov ~pp~crctt) and then produces the most baffling part of the argument. Before examining the ex- planation that Socrates offers, we might note that it seems somewhat surprising that Euthyphro does not realize that he cannot, consistent with his own definition, deny the second of these alternatives. For if 'pious' is to be defined as 'loved by all the gods', then surely, in some sense of 'because', it will be because it is loved that the pious is pious. But I think it is easy to see why Euthyphro cannot be expected to have realized this. First of all, it has not been explicitly stated that
Euthyphro was to be offering a definition. When the question was first raised,
Socrates simply asked Euthyphro to "say what the pious is" (x[ q)fl.q etvett xb
6otov : 5d7); later, Socrates asks for "the characteristic in virtue of which every- thing pious is pious" (x6 eItog ~ rrdvxa xdt 6ottt 6ctdt ~oztv: 6dl0-11). And it is not hard to imagine that Euthyphro, not appreciating the force of the phrase z6 ~I5o~ ~, would find it sufficient to produce a formula which he feels will serve to pick out all and only pious things. After all, the philosophical topic of definition was just being invented, and Euthyphro could hardly have been at home in it. And part of Plato's point will surely be that the definition of a term 'F' cannot be just a formula which applies to all and only F things. If this is a mis- take that Plato wants to show up, then Euthyphro must surely be given the oppor- tunity to make it. At this point in the dialogue Euthyphro is content to say that pious things are the ones the gods love; and if this is what he wishes to say, then he need not be expected to answer Socrates' question "Is the pious pious because it is loved?" in the affirmative, even if he understood the question. But he has not even claimed to understand it.
F. J. Church, revised by Robert D. Cumming (New York: Liberal Arts Press, 1956),
p. 12. a p. T. Geach, "Plato's Euthyphro: An Analysis and Commentary," The Monist, July,
1966, p. 378.
This opinion is not shared by Geaeh. Cf. ibid., bottom. s This has been noted by some translators of the Euthyphro. Pheretai is translated by
Fowler (Loeb Classical Library) as "one carries it" and by Cooper (The Collected Dialogues ol Plato, Hamilton and Cairns, ed.) as "something carries it.

B. Socrates: from Wikipedia

Socrates
Socrates (June 4, 470 – 399 BC) (Greek Sokrátes) was a Greek (Athenian) philosopher and one of the most important icons of the Western philosophical tradition.

1.Socratic method
2.His life
3.Philosophical Beliefs
4.Trial and execution
5.The Socratic Dialogues
6.Dialogues about the conviction of Socrates
7.Further reading Socratic method
His most important contribution to Western thought is his dialogical method of enquiry, known as the Socratic method or method of elenchos, which he largely applied to the examination of key moral concepts and was first described by Plato in the Socratic Dialogues. For this, Socrates is customarily regarded as the father and fountainhead for ethics or moral philosophy, and of philosophy in general.

The Socratic method is a negative method of hypotheses elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those which lead to contradictions. The method of Socrates is a search for the underlying hypotheses, assumptions, or axioms, which may unconsciously shape one's opinion, and to make them the subject of scrutiny, to determine their consistency with other beliefs. The basic form is a series of questions formulated as tests of logic and fact intended to help a person or group discover their beliefs about some topic, exploring the definitions or logoi (singular logos), seeking to characterise the general characteristics shared by various particular instances. To the extent to which this method is designed to bring out definitions implicit in the interlocutors' beliefs, or to help them further their understanding, it was called the method of maieutics. Aristotle attributed to Socrates the discovery of the method of definition and induction, which he regarded as the essence of the scientific method. Oddly, however, Aristotle also claimed that this method is not suitable for ethics.

A skillful teacher can actually teach students to think for themselves using this method. This is the only classic method of teaching that is known to create genuinely autonomous thinkers. There are some crucial principles to this form of teaching:

The teacher and student must agree on the topic of instruction.

The student must agree to attempt to answer questions from the teacher.

The teacher and student must be willing to accept any correctly-reasoned answer. That is, the reasoning process must be considered more important than facts.

The teacher's questions must expose errors in the students' reasoning or beliefs. That is, the teacher must reason more quickly and correctly than the student, and discover errors in the students' reasoning, and then formulate a question which the students cannot answer except by a correct reasoning process. To perform this service, the teacher must be very quick-thinking about the classic errors in reasoning.

If the teacher makes an error of logic or fact, it is acceptable for a student to correct the teacher.

Since a discussion is not a dialogue, it is not a proper medium for the Socratic method. However, it is helpful -- if second best -- if the teacher is able to lead a group of students in a discussion. This is not always possible in situations that require the teacher to evaluate students, but it is preferable pedagogically, because it encourages the students to reason rather than appeal to authority.
More loosely, one can label any process of thorough-going questioning in a dialogue as an instance of the Socratic method.

Socrates applied his method to the examination of the key moral concepts at the time, the virtues of piety, wisdom, temperance, courage, and justice. Such an examination challenged the implicit moral beliefs of the interlocutors, bringing out inadequacies and inconsistencies in their beliefs, and usually resulting in puzzlement known as aporia. In view of such inadequacies, Socrates himself professed his ignorance, but others still claimed to have knowledge. Socrates believed that his awareness of his ignorance made him wiser than those who, though ignorant, still claimed knowledge. Although this belief seems paradoxical at first glance, it in fact allowed Socrates to discover his own errors where others might assume they were correct. This claim was known by the anecdote of the Delphic oracular pronouncement that Socrates was the wisest of all men.

Socrates used this claim of wisdom as the basis of his moral exhortation. Accordingly, he claimed that the chief goodness consists in the caring of the soul concerned with moral truth and moral understanding, that "wealth does not bring goodness, but goodness brings wealth and every other blessing, both to the individual and to the state", and that "life without examination [dialogue] is not worth living". Socrates also argued that to be wronged is better than to do wrong.

His life
Socrates left no writings; references to military duty may be found in Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War. He was prominently lampooned in Aristophanes's comedic play The Clouds produced when Socrates was in his mid-forties. Socrates appeared in other plays by Aristophanes such as The Birds because of his being a philodorian, and also in plays by Callias, Eupolis and Telecleides, in all of which Socrates and the Sophists were criticised for "the moral dangers inherent in contemporary thought and literature". The main source of the historical Socrates, however, is the writings of his two disciples, Xenophon, and Plato. Another important source is various references to him in Aristotle's writings.

Sculptures and busts of Socrates depict him as a rather ugly man. These portraits were largely based on descriptions given by his disciple Plato, rather than on direct examination of the philosopher by the sculptor or sculptors.

Socrates' father was Sophroniscus, a sculptor, and his mother Phaenarete, a midwife. He was married to Xanthippe, who bore him three sons. By the cultural standards of the time, she was considered a shrew. Socrates himself attested that he, having learned to live with Xanthippe, would be able to cope with any other human being, just as a horse trainer accustomed to wilder horses might be more competent than one not. Socrates enjoyed going to Symposia, drink-talking sessions. He was a legendary drinker, remaining sober even after everyone else in the party had become senselessly drunk. He also saw military action, fighting at the Battle of Potidaea, the Battle of Delium and the Battle of Amphipolis. We know from Plato's Symposium that Socrates was decorated for bravery. In one instance he stayed with the wounded Alcibiades, and probably saved his life. During such campaigns, he also showed his extraordinary hardiness, walking without shoes and a coat in winter.

Socrates lived during the time of the transition from the height of the Athenian Empire to its decline after its defeat by Sparta and its allies in the Peloponnesian War. At a time when Athens was seeking to recover from humiliating defeat, the Athenian public court was induced by three leading public figures to try Socrates for impiety and for corrupting the youth of Athens. He was found guilty as charged, and sentenced to drink hemlock.

There is a theory held by some historians that Socrates was a fictional character, invented by Plato and plagiarised by Xenophon and Aristophanes, who was used to articulate points of view which were considered too revolutionary for the author to admit to holding them himself. However, this remains a minority view.

Philosophical Beliefs
Socrates believed that his wisdom sprung from an awareness of his own ignorance. “He knew that he knew nothing” (Thomas 83). Along these lines, Socrates also taught that all wrong doing by man could be attributed to a lack of knowledge (“Socrates” 3). In simpler terms, if a person made an error, Socrates would have believed the error must have been due to ignorance of some sort. Most of his brilliant insights such as these came from the counterexamples he asserted while in debate with another Athenian. Sometimes, Socrates’ questioning of others would lead him to the unexpected acquisition of knowledge. Although he never focused on one specific issue, most of Socrates' debates were centered around the characteristics of the ideal man as well as what form the ideal government would take. (Solomon 44).

Socrates believed that the best way for people to live was to focus not on accumulating possessions, but to focus on self-development (Gross 2). He always invited others to try and concentrate more on friendships and a sense of true community, for Socrates felt that this was the best way for people to grow together as a populace. 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, truth lies beneath the shadows of existence, and that it is the job of the philosopher to show the rest how little they really know.” (Solomon 44)

Socrates believed that “ideals belong in a world that only the wise man can understand” making the philosopher the only type of person suitable to govern others. Socrates was in no way subtle about his particular beliefs on government. He openly objected to the democracy that was running Athens later in his life. Athenian democracy was not exclusive; Socrates objected to any form of government that did not conform to his ideal of a perfect republic led by philosophers (Solomon 49), and Athenian government was far from that. During the later stages of Socrates' life, Athens was in continual flux due to political upheaval. Democracy was at first overthrown by a faction known as the Thirty Tyrants, led by a man named Critias, who had been a student of Socrates at one time. The Tyrants ruled for a short time before the Athenian democracy was reinstated, at which point it acted to silence the voice of Socrates.

Trial and execution

The Death of Socrates, by Jacques-Louis David (1787)

The trial of Socrates gave rise to a great deal of debate, giving rise to a whole genre of literature, known as the Socratic logoi. Socrates' elenctic examination was resented by influential figures of his day, whose reputations for wisdom and virtue were debunked by his questions. The annoying nature of elenchos earned Socrates the moniker "gadfly of Athens." Socrates' elenctic method was often imitated by the young men of Athens, which greatly upset the established moral values and order. Indeed, even though Socrates himself fought for Athens and argued for obedience to law, at the same time he criticised democracy, especially, the Athenian practice of election by lot, ridiculing that in no other craft, the craftsman would be elected in such a fashion. Such a criticism gave rise to suspicion by the democrats, especially when his close associates were found to be enemies of democracy. Alcibiades betrayed Athens in favour of Sparta, and Critias, his sometime disciple, was a leader of the 30 tyrants, (the pro-Spartan oligarchy that ruled Athens for a few years after the defeat), though there is also a record of their falling out.

In addition, Socrates held unusual views on religion. He made several references to his personal spirit, or daimonion, although he explicitly claimed that it never urged him on, but only warned him against various prospective events. Many of his contemporaries were suspicious of Socrates' daimonion as a rejection of the state religion. It is generally understood that Socrates' daimonion is akin to intuition. Moreover, Socrates claimed that the concept of goodness, instead of being determined by what the gods wanted, actually precedes it.

According to Plato's "Apology," Socrates' three accusers, Meletus, Anytus, and Lycon, all leading members of Athenian political society, indicted him on the basis that he 'corrupted the youth' of Athens and denied the power of the state gods. The offenses charged did not necessarily carry the death penalty, and Socrates himself suggested to his jury that he should be fined thirty minae (the equivalent of approximately eight years of wages for an Athenian artisan). The "Apology" also suggests that the vote on Socrates' guilt was very close, and that his jokes about his punishment resulted in more jurymen voting for his execution than had voted to convict him.

Apparently in accordance with his philosophy of obedience to law, he carried out his own execution, by drinking the hemlock poison provided to him.

Socrates has been revered since his execution as a beacon of free speech.

The Socratic Dialogues
The Socratic Dialogues are a series of dialogues written by Plato in the form of discussions between Socrates and other figures of the time. The ideas that Plato communicates are not placed in the mouth of any specific character, but emerge via the Socratic method, under the guidance of Socrates.

In Plato's philosophical system (Socrates himself left no writings, so the actual content of his teaching is debated), learning is a process of remembering. The soul, before its incarnation in the body, was in the realm of the ideas (or Heaven). There it saw things the way they should really be, 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.

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 phases of refining the answer to Socrates' question, "What is piety?"

The following quotations are from the character of Socrates in Plato's writing. In this context, it should be noted that the early works of Plato are generally considered to be close to the spirit of Socrates, whereas the later works — including Phaedo — are not.

• The life which is unexamined is not worth living. — Apology, 38

• False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.
— Phaedo, 91

• So now, Athenian men, more than on my own behalf must I defend myself, as some may think, but on your behalf, so that you may not make a mistake concerning the gift of god by condemning me. For if you kill me, you will not easily find another such person at all, even if to say in a ludicrous way, attached on the city by the god, like on a large and well-bred horse, by its size and laziness both needing arousing by some gadfly; in this way the god seems to have fastened me on the city, some such one who arousing and persuading and reproaching each one of you I do not stop the whole day settling down all over. Thus such another will not easily come to you, men, but if you believe me, you will spare me; but perhaps you might possibly be offended, like the sleeping who are awakened, striking me, believing Anytus, you might easily kill, then the rest of your lives you might continue sleeping, unless the god caring for you should send you another.

• Crito, I owe a cock to Asclepius; will you remember to pay the debt? — Last words.

• Really, Ischomachus, I am disposed to ask: "Does teaching consist in putting questions?" Indeed, the secret of your system has just this instant dawned upon me. I seem to see the principle in which you put your questions. You lead me through the field of my own knowledge, and then by pointing out analogies to what I know, persuade me that I really know some things which hitherto, as I believed, I had no knowledge of.

Socrates (quoted in Oeconomicus by Xenophon, tr. The Economist by H.G. Dakyns)

Dialogues about the conviction of Socrates

Euthyphro
Apology
Crito
Phaedo

Further reading

• The Dialogues of Plato
• The writings of Xenophon; such as the Memorablia and Hellenica.
• An Introduction to Greek Philosophy, J. V. Luce, Thames & Hudson, NY, l992.
• Introduction to Philosophy, Jacques Maritain

• Greek Philosophers--Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, C. C. W. Taylor, R. M. Hare, and Jonathan Barnes, Oxford University Press, NY, 1998.

• The Trial of Socrates, I. F. Stone, Little, Brown & Co., Boston, MA, l988.
Taylor, C. C. W. (2001). Socrates: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. top C. Socrates: Philosophical Life

Socrates
The most interesting and influential thinker in the fifth century was Socrates, whose dedication to careful reasoning transformed the entire enterprise. Since he sought genuine knowledge rather than mere victory over an opponent, Socrates employed the same logical tricks developed by the Sophists to a new purpose, the pursuit of truth. Thus, his willingness to call everything into question and his determination to accept nothing less than an adequate account of the nature of things make him the first clear exponent of critical philosophy.

Although he was well known during his own time for his conversational skills and public teaching, Socrates wrote nothing, so we are dependent upon his students (especially Xenophon and Plato) for any detailed knowledge of his methods and results. The trouble is that Plato was himself a philosopher who often injected his own theories into the dialogues he presented to the world as discussions between Socrates and other famous figures of the day. Nevertheless, it is usually assumed that at least the early dialogues of Plato provide a (fairly) accurate representation of Socrates himself.

Euthyphro: What is Piety?
In the Euqufrwn (Euthyphro), for example, Socrates engaged in a sharply critical conversation with an over-confident young man. Finding Euthyphro perfectly certain of his own ethical rectitude even in the morally ambiguous situation of prosecuting his own father in court, Socrates asks him to define what "piety" (moral duty) really is. The demand here is for something more than merely a list of which actions are, in fact, pious; instead, Euthyphro is supposed to provide a general definition that captures the very essence of what piety is. But every answer he offers is subjected to the full force of Socrates's critical thinking, until nothing certain remains.

Specifically, Socrates systematically refutes Euthyphro's suggestion that what makes right actions right is that the gods love (or approve of) them. First, there is the obvious problem that, since questions of right and wrong often generate interminable disputes, the gods are likely to disagree among themselves about moral matters no less often than we do, making some actions both right and wrong. Socrates lets Euthypro off the hook on this one by aggreeing—only for purposes of continuing the discussion—that the gods may be supposed to agree perfectly with each other. (Notice that this problem arises only in a polytheistic culture.)

More significantly, Socrates generates a formal dilemma from a (deceptively) simple question: "Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?" (Euthyphro 10 a) Neither alternative can do the work for which Euthyphro intends his definition of piety. If right actions are pious only because the gods love them, then moral rightness is entirely arbitrary, depending only on the whims of the gods. If, on the other hand, the gods love right actions only because they are already right, then there must be some non-divine source of values, which we might come to know independently of their love.

In fact, this dilemma proposes a significant difficulty at the heart of any effort to define morality by reference to an external authority. (Consider, for example, parallel questions with a similar structure: "Do my parents approve of this action because it is right, or is it right because my parents approve of it?" or "Does the College forbid this activity because it is wrong, or is it wrong because the College forbids it?") On the second alternative in each case, actions become right (or wrong) solely because of the authority's approval (or disapproval); its choice, then, has no rational foundation, and it is impossible to attribute laudable moral wisdom to the authority itself. So this horn is clearly unacceptable. But on the first alternative, the authority approves (or disapproves) of certain actions because they are already right (or wrong) independently of it, and whatever rational standard it employs as a criterion for making this decision must be accessible to us as well as to it. Hence, we are in principle capable of distinguishing right from wrong on our own.

Thus, an application of careful techniques of reasoning results in genuine (if negative) progress in the resolution of a philosophical issue. Socrates's method of insistent questioning at least helps us to eliminate one bad answer to a serious question. At most, it points us toward a significant degree of intellectual independence. The character of Euthyphro, however, seems unaffected by the entire process, leaving the scene at the end of the dialogue no less self-confident than he had been at its outset. The use of Socratic methods, even when they clearly result in a rational victory, may not produce genuine conviction in those to whom they are applied.

Apology: The Examined Life
Because of his political associations with an earlier regime, the Athenian democracy put Socrates on trial, charging him with undermining state religion and corrupting young people. The speech he offered in his own defense, as reported in Plato's Apologhma (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.

Crito: The Individual and the State
Plato's description of Socrates's final days continued in the Kritwn (Crito). Now in prison awaiting execution, Socrates displays the same spirit of calm reflection about serious matters that had characterized his life in freedom. Even the patent injustice of his fate at the hands of the Athenian jury produces in Socrates no bitterness or anger. Friends arrive at the jail with a foolproof plan for his escape from Athens to a life of voluntary exile, but Socrates calmly engages them in a rational debate about the moral value of such an action.

Of course Crito and the others know their teacher well, and they come prepared to argue the merits of their plan. Escaping now would permit Socrates to fulfil his personal obligations in life. Moreover, if he does not follow the plan, many people will suppose that his friends did not care enough for him to arrange his escape. Therefore, in order to honor his commitments and preserve the reputation of his friends, Socrates ought to escape from jail.

But Socrates dismisses these considerations as irrelevant to a decision about what action is truly right. What other people will say clearly doesn't matter. As he had argued in the Apology, the only opinion that counts is not that of the majority of people generally, but rather that of the one individual who truly knows. The truth alone deserves to be the basis for decisions about human action, so the only proper apporoach is to engage in the sort of careful moral reasoning by means of which one may hope to reveal it.

Socrates's argument proceeds from the statement of a perfectly general moral principle to its application in his particular case:

One ought never to do wrong (even in response to the evil committed by another).
But it is always wrong to disobey the state.
Hence, one ought never to disobey the state.
And since avoiding the sentence of death handed down by the Athenian jury would be an action in disobedience the state, it follows Socrates ought not to escape.

The argument is a valid one, so we are committed to accepting its conclusion if we believe that its premises are true. The general commitment to act rightly is fundamental to a moral life, and it does seem clear that Socrates's escape would be a case of disobedience. But what about the second premise, the claim that it is always wrong for an individual to disobey the state? Surely that deserves further examination. In fact, Socrates pictures the laws of Athens proposing two independent lines of argument in favor of this claim:

First, the state is to us as a parent is to a child, and since it is always wrong for a child to disobey a parent, it follows that it is always wrong to disobey the state. (Crito 50e) Here we might raise serious doubts about the legitimacy of the analogy between our parents and the state. Obedience to our parents, after all, is a temporary obligation that we eventually outgrow by learning to make decisions for ourselves, while Socrates means to argue that obeying the state is a requirement right up until we die. Here it might be useful to apply the same healthy disrespect for moral authority that Socrates himself expressed in the Euthyphro.

The second argument is that it is always wrong to break an agreement, and since continuing to live voluntarily in a state constitutes an agreement to obey it, it is wrong to disobey that state. (Crito 52e) This may be a better argument; only the second premise seems open to question. Explicit agreements to obey some authority are common enough—in a matriculation pledge or a contract of employment, for example—but most of us have not entered into any such agreement with our government. Even if we suppose, as the laws suggest, that the agreement is an implicit one to which we are committed by our decision to remain within their borders, it is not always obvious that our choice of where to live is entirely subject to our individual voluntary control.

Nevertheless, these considerations are serious ones. Socrates himself was entirely convinced that the arguments hold, so he concluded that it would be wrong for him to escape from prison. As always, of course, his actions conformed to the outcome of his reasoning. Socrates chose to honor his commitment to truth and morality even though it cost him his life.
top