Socrates (469 - 399 BC)

§Most of what we know
about Socrates comes from
Plato’s “Socratic dialogues.”

§His great contribution was
to ethical thought.

§Believed nothing should matter more than, “How should one live and what things are really worth caring about.”

Definitive Events

§Delphic oracle’s
pronouncement that
no one was wiser than he.

§His defense against charges of corrupting the young and impiety.

§His refusal to plead for mercy or
to escape from prison when both were possible.

§His philosophizing up to the last.

What we know of Socrates:

§Like the Sophists, Socrates was a sort of professional educator.

§But unlike the Sophists, he did not demand fees for his moral-educative services and he was concerned with helping people to better understand the nature of virtue, not in helping them to acquire the ability to speak well in public. He was a sort of professional educator, who believed that virtue was a kind of skill, a skill that required practical intelligence. He accepted the traditional Greek virtues of justice, piety, courage, good sense (or wisdom), and moderation but he gave a somewhat different account of these virtues by insisting that each of them required having knowledge of what is good and what is evil. Furthermore, in Socrates' view, it is rational for a person to want to be just whatever hi/her cicumstances, to want to pursue a certain kind of life and to culitvate a certain kind of character. He believesd that persons by nagure have an interest in psychological harmony and this interest is stronger than the person's interest in material goods and an "outsider's" point of view on the person's circumstances. So Socrates was after universal definitions of the virtues that could preserve the soul from wrong-doing. He believed that there were ojbective answers to ethical questions, even if these answers remain elusive for human beings.

According to Plato’s
Apology (Defense)…

§Socrates approached
political figures, poets,
craftsmen and subjected them to what is called
“cross-examination”.

§These cross-examinations apparently embarrassed and angered those whom he questioned. And this is part of the reason that he was brought to trial.

Socrates’ Apology

§Courtroom drama.

§Plato was present.
(34a)

§Thought to reliably
represent Socrates.

Older Charge

Socrates is a busybody.

Socrates’ method of
dealing with older charge

§He does not deny
the charge.

§He explains how he came
to have this reputation.
He wants to show that his past behavior should be regarded in a positive, not negative, way.

Socrates says…

§He acquired the reputation
as a result of having a
‘kind of’ human wisdom.
(Please look at the Apology 20e, 21d for a description of ‘human wisdom’.)

§Socrates’ ‘human wisdom’ was in turn acquired as the result of his attempting to understand the Delphic oracle’s report that no one was wiser than Socrates.

As he explains his attempt to understand the oracle, he says that…

§He interrogated politicians,
poets, and artisans.

§From this activity, he left thinking “I am wiser than that man. Neither of us probably knows anything worthwhile; but he thinks he does and does not, and I do not and do not think that I do.” (Apology 21d)

Thus, he concluded that:

§The oracle’s proclamation was probably intended to get him to go about “searching and inquiring” among human beings in order to show that the wisest human being is one that recognizes “that he is truly worth nothing in respect to wisdom.” (See Apology 23b for this quote.)

§So he claims that his examination of himself and others is really a god-inspired mission and a genuine way of serving god. (23b, 28e, 29d-30a, 33c)

As Socrates says… (30a)

§“I believe this service of
mine to god is the most
valuable asset you in this
city have ever yet possessed.”

§Note Socrates here speaks of his “service to god”. This is exactly the same phrase he uses at Euthyp. 13d in reference to the nature of holiness/piety. So he seems to believe that by cross-examining people he is being pious/holy. See also 33c, p. 89. He says that he has been ordered to do this [that is, to cross-examine people] by God --"in oracles, in dreams, , in every way in which other divine apportionment orders a man to do anything."

It is essential to
realize that…

§Socrates claims to have no expert knowledge of virtue in general. (See Apology 20a-e)

§He has only
‘human wisdom’, that is, he realizes that he knows nothing of genuine importance.
(See Apology 20d, 21d)

To review Socrates’
approach to earlier charge…

Socrates doesn’t attempt to deny it. Rather he puts his behavior in a positive light by explaining his cross-examination activity in terms of a god-sanctioned mission. He maintains that he is only trying to show himself and others that humans have only he has only human wisdom (20d, 21d). And that with respect to matters
of genuine importance, none of us have
expert knowledge.

Among Socrates’
guiding principles are:
He adopts only
reasoned beliefs… (28d)

“Where a man takes up a position
- in the belief that it is best -
there he should stay.”

He obeys experts… (29b)

“It is an evil to do wrong and disobey one’s superiors, divine or human, that I do know.”

He regards injustice as
being the greatest evil…
(28b)

“You are wrong if you think
that a man who is worth anything
at all should take into account [anything other than] whether
he is acting rightly or wrongly.”

In sum, he implies that
his earlier behavior
reflects…

§His belief about what
is best for his soul.

§His obedience to a divine authority.

§His avoidance of intentional injustice.

Current Charge

§Corrupts the young.

§He believes in new gods.
(This is the charge of
impiety.)

Socrates’ method of
dealing with current
charges

§He doesn’t deny the charges.

§He tries to show that his
accusers do not know what
they profess to know.

§He provides an example of
how he carries out his service
to the god.

To perform his service to god, Socrates uses two methods:

§Cross-Examination

§Induction from analogous cases.

Cross-Examination

Socrates gains an
interlocutor’s assent to
some statement -
often a statement about one of the virtues - and from that statement, along with other statements to which the interlocutor assents, Socrates deduces either the contrary or the contradiction of the interlocutor’s initial statement.

. . . For example, Soc. cross-examines Euthyp.

§Soc: What is holiness, Euthyp?

§Euthyp: Doing what I am doing, namely, prosecuting murder and things of this sort.

§Soc: But there are many other things in addition to prosecutions that are holy, aren’t there?

§Euthyp: Yes

§Soc: So prosecuting murder and other such things cannot be the essence of holiness/piety.

Induction from
analogous cases

A number of particular
cases are mentioned.

From these cases, a
general principle is deduced.

The general principle is, then, applied to the case under examination.

For example…

From particular cases of
experts who benefit in a
particular field of service
- like, doctors benefit patients,
trainers benefit horses -
Socrates infers that it is the few,
not the many, who provide benefit
in a particular field of service.
This general principle is, then, applied to the field of improving young men.

Socrates uses both
methods in dealing
with Meletus

He cross-examines Meletus,
first on the question of who benefits young men,
and second on the question of whether he (Socrates) believes in some or in no gods.

The cross-examination on the question of who benefits young men pertains to the charge of corrupting the young, the cross-examination on the question of whether he (Socrates) believes in some or in no gods pertains to the charge of impiety.

Cross-Examination 1 (on the charge of corrupting the young.)
(24d-25c)

§Meletus claims that
everyone, with the exception
of Socrates, improves the young.

§Using induction from analogous cases, Socrates gets Miletus to agree that only the few improve the young.

§Miletus thereby commits himself to contrary claims: that the many benefit the young and that only the few benefit the young.

Cross-Examination 1 (24b-25b)

§Soc.: Who improves the young?

§Meletus: laws, judges, members
of the council, and assembly
(i.e., most people).

§Soc.: What about horses and other animals? Is it not only the few who improve them? Of course it is, whether you agree or not.

So in Cross-Examination 1
(24d-25c)…

Socrates uses induction from analogous cases to show the jury that Meletus does not know what he claims to know, namely, who benefits and who corrupts the young. But Socrates does not directly deny the charge of corrupting the young.

Cross-Examination 2… (on the charge of impiety)
(26b-27c)

§Meletus claims Socrates believes in no gods and is, therefore,
an atheist.

§Socrates then gets Miletus to agree that since he (Socrates) believes in supernatural activities, he must also believe in gods.

§So Meletus is here led by Socrates to make contradictory claims.

So in Cross-Examination 2 (26b-27c) Socrates again uses induction from analogous cases:

§Soc.: Is there any man who acknowledges that there
are things pertaining to men, but
not men; things pertaining to horses or flutes, but not horses or flutes.
If not, then can one acknowledge things pertaining to divinities and
not acknowledge divinities?

…Induction from
analogous cases in 2

§Soc.: You say that I
acknowledge things
pertaining to divinities, so
I must acknowledge divinities.

To sum up Cross-Examination 2…
(26b-27c)

§It pertains the charge of impiety but does not actually address the charge that Socrates believes in new gods. Instead, Socrates gets Meletus to agree that he (Socrates) believes in no gods at all. It is then this different charge of impiety that cross-examination 2 addresses.

§So Socrates never addresses the actual charge,which is that he believes in different gods than those that the city acknowledges. (p. 83)

§Instead, Socrates again shows that Meletus does not know what he professes to know, namely in this case, Socrates’ attitude toward gods.

By leading Meletus
to affirm inconsistent
statements in both cross-examinations…

Socrates defends himself against the current charges of corrupting the young and impiety by showing that one of his accusers lacks knowledge and simultaneously demonstrates to the court how he carries out his “service to god.”

In the final judgment

§If 500 jurors, Socrates is
convicted by 280 to 220.

§Socrates offers one mina
as counter-penalty to death.

§Socrates is sentenced to
death by hemlock.

§Socrates agrees to abide by the penalty. (39d)

A Socratic paradox
(25b-d)

§If I do harm to those with
whom I associate, then
I shall likely be harmed
in returned.

§No one wishes to be harmed.

§So rationally speaking, I ought not to intentionally harm anyone.