How significant was Socrates?

[Gidge]

Significant enough that all Philosophy 101 students are introduced to him via the dialogues of Plato that are usually required reading in these survey classes.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Gidge

Significant enough that all Philosophy 101 students are introduced to him via the dialogues of Plato that are usually required reading in these survey classes.

True. Yet he may not be as significant as Plato made him out to be, since we will never know how much of Socrates is Socrates and how much of him is Plato.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

The people of Athens thought he was significant enough to kill.

 

[Gidge]

Yet he may not be as significant as Plato made him out to be, since we will never know how much of Socrates is Socrates and how much of him is Plato.

Good point. I think it’s great that pagan philosophers arrived at the concept of God (e.g. Aristotle’s “Unmoved Mover”)

Furthermore, God’s law is written on every human heart, WRT knowing right from wrong.

The people of Athens thought he was significant enough to kill.

True enough.

 

[tonyrey]

If we are to judge by this discussion Socrates must have been quite significant! His impact on his own society led to his death. Scholars argue about whether it was his political or theological ideas that aroused antagonism but it was probably a combination of both. The truth in any aspect of life is not always palatable…

 

[spockrates]

spock

** However, I was unaware of any criticisms he had of scientists. Please enlighten me. **

sparknotes.com/philosophy/phaedo/section9.rhtml

Thanks, I’ll reread Phaedro and see what I missed.

**Wisdom is knowledge of how to obtain knowledge. **

Yes, with the caveat that it is not the knowledge of how to obtain itself. That is to say, consistent with what we are taught as Catholics, wisdom is a gift. It is given to some in greater portion than it is given to others. When we receive the Sacrament of Confirmation we seek this as the first of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit: Wisdom, Understanding, Counsel, Fortitude, Knowledge, Piety, and Fear of the Lord.

Sorry for taking so long to respond. Had pressing matters to which I had to attend. What you said sounds wise to me. Please help me consider what you’ve said. Would you say that understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord are each types of knowledge? If so, do you think wisdom is the knowledge of how to acquire understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord?

Also, wisdom cannot be separated from virtue. All wisdom is rooted in holiness. We never think it good or admirable or noble to be unwise. Socrates was a holy man constantly in search of Truth. He was loyal to the city state of Athens, and he venerated the gods (Asclepius, anyway, the god of healing). Some would say he was a foolish man who got himself executed for nothing. That would be about as reasonable a thing to say as that Jesus was a foolish man who got himself executed for nothing. There are hardly two men more memorable and admired for their martyrdom than Socrates and Jesus.

Yes, I believe Socrates would agree that wisdom cannot be separated from virtue, for he said at the trial that led to his death:

I am called wise, for my hearers always imagine that I myself possess wisdom which I find wanting in others: but the truth is, O men of Athens, that God only is wise; and in this oracle he means to say that the wisdom of men is little or nothing… as if he said, He, O men, is the wisest, who like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing. And so I go on my way, obedient to the god, and make inquisition into anyone, whether citizen or stranger, who appears to be wise; and if he is not wise, then in vindication of the oracle I show him that he is not wise; and this occupation quite absorbs me, and I have no time to give either to any public matter of interest or to any concern of my own, but I am in utter poverty by reason of my devotion to the god.

(Apology)

To me, Socrates seems to be to the pagan Greeks what Saint John the Baptist was to the ancient Jewish people–a voice of one crying in the wilderness. As John guided people to the truth that Jesus was the Messiah, Socrates pointed people to the truth that there is only one true God who alone is wise–God of both men and gods. For his God was the source of all true wisdom, both human and divine. To say that his God was superior to Zeus and the other pagan dieties is the crime for which he was tried and martyred, though I strongly suspect his showing arrogant men they were not as wise as they supposed had a good deal to do with the decision to silence the Father of Philosophy.

 

[spockrates]

Can’t compare Socrates with Jesus.

I believe Socrates would agree with you, and I agree too.

I didn’t read Socrates and what I know is from other people’s interpretations. I think Socrates operated whitin the natural law. Telling young to question everything might not be such a good ideea, after all they had a hard time to make a living and there is no time to think all in advance; plus not all of them were brilliant. Questioning everything was like playing Socrates’s game by his rules in his backyard. From the point of view of a society that strugles for existence, and keeping together is essential, the "waves’ made by Socrates might have been to much. The most of the people thoght Socrates would go away for a while, recant and come back. I might have voted to “kick his butt out of the town” too

You should try reading some of Plato’s Socratic Dialogs. I find them both enlightening and entertaining. Let me know if you would like a link to some you may read online.

I hear what you are saying, but I wonder if Socrates got a bum rap. There is a difference between questioning for the sake of being disagreeable and asking questions for the sake of being mindful of the truth. Don’t you agree?

 

[spockrates]

Ion

I might have voted to “kick his butt out of the town” too.

Do you also object to 1st Amendment rights?

Freedom of speech, as Socrates spoke his mind? Or freedom of religion, as Socrates dared to believe there is only one true God who alone is wise?

 

[spockrates]

If we are to judge by this discussion Socrates must have been quite significant! His impact on his own society led to his death. Scholars argue about whether it was his political or theological ideas that aroused antagonism but it was probably a combination of both. The truth in any aspect of life is not always palatable…

You might be right, Tony, but I wonder if Socrates knew the true reason why he was murdered:

I certainly have many enemies, and this is what will be my destruction if I am destroyed; of that I am certain; not Meletus, nor yet Anytus, but the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more; there is no danger of my being the last of them.

(Apology)

I wonder if the envy of his enemies was his downfall, as it was for Christ. For like Christ, he was liked by many not because of what he knew but because of his righteous character, sincerity and humility. Unlike Christ, he admitted he was not wise but was sincerely seeking truth. (For Christ is the wisdom of God and knows all truth.) I suppose one might say Jesus was the God Socrates worshipped, but did not know.

I thought to myself: I am wiser than this man; neither of us probably knows anything that is really good, but he thinks he has knowledge, when he has not, while I, having no knowledge, do not think I have.

(Apology)

 

[Charlemagne_II]

spock

** If so, do you think wisdom is the knowledge of how to acquire understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord?**

You raise an interesting question that I really can’t answer. Maybe someone wiser than me could!

The eminence of wisdom certainly is suggested by the fact that it is listed first as a gift.

If I’m not mistaken, it is also the virtue most often identified with the Holy Spirit.

 

[tonyrey]

You might be right, Tony, but I wonder if Socrates knew the true reason why he was murdered:

I certainly have many enemies, and this is what will be my destruction if I am destroyed; of that I am certain; not Meletus, nor yet Anytus, but the envy and detraction of the world, which has been the death of many good men, and will probably be the death of many more; there is no danger of my being the last of them.

(Apology)

I wonder if the envy of his enemies was his downfall, as it was for Christ. For like Christ, he was liked by many not because of what he knew but because of his righteous character, sincerity and humility. Unlike Christ, he admitted he was not wise but was sincerely seeking truth. (For Christ is the wisdom of God and knows all truth.) I suppose one might say Jesus was the God Socrates worshipped, but did not know.

I thought to myself: I am wiser than this man; neither of us probably knows anything that is really good, but he thinks he has knowledge, when he has not, while I, having no knowledge, do not think I have.

(Apology)

There is a fascinating book - with substantial online extracts - on the subject of Jesus and Socrates which discusses their similarities and differences:

books.google.co.uk/books?id=I6Nq9882rXoC&pg=PA57&lpg=PA57&dq=the+similarities+between+socrates+and+jesus&source=bl&ots=LgQaXmrQkn&sig=R2guJGV2M8KzEHSxZqVsFEzABYE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kAb4UaXvHMevPJ7agJgL&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=the%20similarities%20between%20socrates%20and%20jesus&f=true

Socrates has been likened to a prophet because he stressed the importance of truth, goodness and justice but he also anticipated cross-examination and the development of logical analysis which we now take for granted.

 

[spockrates]

spock

** If so, do you think wisdom is the knowledge of how to acquire understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety and fear of the Lord?**

You raise an interesting question that I really can’t answer. Maybe someone wiser than me could!

The eminence of wisdom certainly is suggested by the fact that it is listed first as a gift.

If I’m not mistaken, it is also the virtue most often identified with the Holy Spirit.

http://www.empowernetwork.com/joranzas/files/2013/05/gold-rush4.gif

I’d say this is what wisdom is, if wisdom is in fact knowledge of how to obtain knowledge. For knowledge is knowledge, and understanding, counsel, fortitude, piety and fear of the Lord are all types of knowledge. That is, they are, if what one knows is what knowledge is.

So if we cannot say for certain that wisdom is the knowledge of how to obtain these things we know, then what we probably mean is that we do not know for certain what wisdom is. You know?

We are prospectors looking for the gold of truth we call wisdom. We cannot settle for any rock that sparkles in our pans, for not all that glitters is gold! So then, shall we continue to defend the idea that wisdom is knowledge of how to acquire knowledge, or should we drop this idea–as we’d drop a nugget of fool’s gold we’d find in a stream–and keep panning for another?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

spock
**
So then, shall we continue to defend the idea that wisdom is knowledge of how to acquire knowledge, or should we drop this idea–as we’d drop a nugget of fool’s gold we’d find in a stream–and keep panning for another? **

Wisdom is gold. It is nor fool’s gold. I’d not try to limit the definition of wisdom to anything too specific, such as that it is “knowledge of how to acquire knowledge.” Yes, that is a form of wisdom that one person can teach other, as when an English teacher explains to his students how to write a research paper. But wisdom can transcend what we are taught. That is, it can be the innate power of discerning truth from falsehood, real gold from fool’s gold. How else do we explain the phenomenon of the student who outperforms his teacher?

 

[spockrates]

spock
**
So then, shall we continue to defend the idea that wisdom is knowledge of how to acquire knowledge, or should we drop this idea–as we’d drop a nugget of fool’s gold we’d find in a stream–and keep panning for another? **

Wisdom is gold. It is nor fool’s gold.

Yes, true wisdom is gold, but isn’t false wisdom is fools gold? What we are looking for is the true meaning of wisdom. We are panning for the truth about wisdom. Any false idea of wisdom is fools gold and should be discarded. Don’t you agree?

I’d not try to limit the definition of wisdom to anything too specific, such as that it is “knowledge of how to acquire knowledge.” Yes, that is a form of wisdom that one person can teach other, as when an English teacher explains to his students how to write a research paper. But wisdom can transcend what we are taught. That is, it can be the innate power of discerning truth from falsehood, real gold from fool’s gold. How else do we explain the phenomenon of the student who outperforms his teacher?

Yes, let’s consider that nugget to see if it is the truth about wisdom, or merely a stone that only looks like gold.



Wisdom can be the power of discerning truth from falsehood.

This seems to me to be a better way of describing wisdom. For when I was considering your previous description I thought to myself, “If wisdom is the knowledge of how to obtain knowledge, then does it make fools of some of us, Spockrates? For some knowledge that some acquire is foolishness, such as the knowledge that there is no God, and some atheists are extremely adept at knowing how to acquire such false knowledge!”

I suppose, then we might combine the two descriptions of wisdom and amend our definition this way:

Wisdom is the power of discerning truth from falsehood, and is the knowledge of how to acquire such true knowledge.

Rather than limiting our definition, we are expanding it, I think, and we might be getting closer to the truth. What do you think?

 

[spockrates]

There is a fascinating book - with substantial online extracts - on the subject of Jesus and Socrates which discusses their similarities and differences:

books.google.co.uk/books?id=I6Nq9882rXoC&pg=PA57&lpg=PA57&dq=the+similarities+between+socrates+and+jesus&source=bl&ots=LgQaXmrQkn&sig=R2guJGV2M8KzEHSxZqVsFEzABYE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=kAb4UaXvHMevPJ7agJgL&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAzgK#v=onepage&q=the%20similarities%20between%20socrates%20and%20jesus&f=true

Socrates has been likened to a prophet because he stressed the importance of truth, goodness and justice but he also anticipated cross-examination and the development of logical analysis which we now take for granted.

Interesting article, Tony. It might be fascinating to ask the author questions about what he or she wrote. For example, the author states that the agreements between Socrates and Jesus were merely superficial, as they disagreed on nearly everything.

One example cited: Jesus taught that wrongdoing was sin, but Socrates taught wrongdoing was ignorance. I’d ask the author, “Are these two ideas really opposed to one another?” Lets you and I consider that question. Socrates said to one of his friends:

Evils, Theodorus, can never pass away; for there must always remain something that is antagonistic to good. Having no place among the gods in heaven, of necessity they hover around the mortal nature, and this earthly sphere. Wherefore, we ought to fly away from earth to heaven as quickly as we can; and to fly away means to become like God, as far as this is possible; and to become like him, means to become holy, just and wise. But O, my friend, you cannot easily convince mankind that they should pursue virtues or avoid vice, not merely in order that a man may seem to be good, which is the reason given by the world.

Whereas, the truth is that God is never in any way unrighteous—he is perfect in righteousness. He of us who is the most righteous is of all things most like him. Herein is seen the cleverness of man, and also his nothingness and want of manhood. For, to know this is true wisdom and virtue, and ignorance of this is manifest folly and vice.

(Theaetetus, 176)

What do you think, Tony? If a man like Socrates genuinely desires to be like God and sincerely tries to be like God, and if the God he seeks to imitate is in no way unrighteous, then what would be the cause of him failing to be like God by committing some unrighteous act?

For example, let’s say Socrates believed, as some believe he believed, that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. (Socrates was married and had children, but he also knew several homosexual men and had some as followers.) Now on the other hand, followers of Jesus, such as Saint Paul the Apostle, disagreed and saw homosexuality as wrong. Upon what would you say Socrates’ acceptance of homosexuality was based–ignorance, or something else?

 

[spockrates]

Tony:

I guess I’m wondering what you think the answer to this broader question might be: Is sinful behavior sometimes a kind of ignorance, or is it something else? Answering this question will be one small step in the right direction of discerning whether Jesus and Socrates disagreed on nearly everything.

 

[tonyrey]

Tony:

I guess I’m wondering what you think the answer to this broader question might be: Is sinful behavior sometimes a kind of ignorance, or is it something else?

“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance” suggests that Socrates would agree. Moral laws are not arbitrary rules but truths about personal development and fulfilment. It doesn’t pay to be proud, vain, selfish, lazy, greedy, envious, cynical or materialistic because we alienate others and become isolated. The Greek concept of Nemesis and the Indian belief in Karma support this view but on the other hand there is also such a thing as culpable ignorance. Even if we don’t realise our vices will lead to misery for ourselves we know it is wrong to inflict unnecessary misery on others.

I’ll answer your other post later.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

spock
**
One example cited: Jesus taught that wrongdoing was sin, but Socrates taught wrongdoing was ignorance. I’d ask the author, “Are these two ideas really opposed to one another?” Lets you and I consider that question. Socrates said to one of his friends:**

In that we try to catechize our Catholic children to the truth, I think there is some merit in what Socrates says.
**
For example, let’s say Socrates believed, as some believe he believed, that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality.**

I have read all of Plato’s dialogues, but I don’t remember Socrates affirming homosexuality. Do you have the passage at hand, or do you know which dialogue is supposed to be the source of that view of Socrates?

 

[spockrates]

“There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance” suggests that Socrates would agree. Moral laws are not arbitrary rules but truths about personal development and fulfilment. It doesn’t pay to be proud, vain, selfish, lazy, greedy, envious, cynical or materialistic because we alienate others and become isolated. The Greek concept of Nemesis and the Indian belief in Karma support this view but on the other hand there is also such a thing as culpable ignorance. Even if we don’t realise our vices will lead to misery for ourselves we know it is wrong to inflict unnecessary misery on others.

I’ll answer your other post later.

Well, Tony. There seems to be some indication that some are not culpable for sins committed in ignorance. Saint Paul wrote:

In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.
(Acts 17:30)

And he said of himself:

Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief.
(1 Timothy 1:13)

But please tell me why you believe God holds people accountable for things they do that they do not know are wrong.

 

[tonyrey]

Well, Tony. There seems to be some indication that some are not culpable for sins committed in ignorance. Saint Paul wrote:

In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.
(Acts 17:30)

And he said of himself:

Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief.
(1 Timothy 1:13)

But please tell me why you believe God holds people accountable for things they do that they do not know are wrong.

I have not said God holds people accountable for things they do that they do not know are wrong. In this context “culpable ignorance” means we don’t know all the consequences but we know that what we are doing is wrong.

Even if we don’t think something is wrong we are not always innocent because we may be inconsiderate - which is a moral defect. If some one dies because of our negligence we are guilty of manslaughter.