History of Philosophy Lecture 7 Socrates

1. History of PhilosophyLecture 7Socrates By David Kelsey

2. Socrates: 469-399 B.C. Very frugal. Temperate in his desires. Didn’t work. Spent days having conversations in the public places of Athens His father was a stonemason and he was married to Xanthippe Served in the army on several occasions with distinction. Wrote very little. What we know of him come from what others wrote, most notably Plato. Socrates

3. Plato’s dialogues & Socrates • Plato’s dialogues: • Not literal; Plato’s interpretation • All written after Socrates’ death… • Conversations… • Examples: Euthyphro, Crito, Apology… • In the early dialogues (the first 3) Socrates’ views are well represented, but in the later dialogues Plato’s ideas are more prevalent (in Socrates’ words)

4. Socrates the midwife • Socrates calls himself a midwife: • Socrates doesn’t himself give birth to true ideas • Instead, Socrates claims to be able to deliver the ideas of others and determine the truth of those ideas. • Socratic examination…

5. Socrates & the Sophists • Socrates vs. the Sophists: • Both concerned with virtue but the Sophists taught it. • Socrates didn’t claim to teach it because he claims not to know it… • Socrates didn’t claim to be a teacher and never charged $ for his conversations… • While the Sophist was a relativist and a skeptic, Socrates was neither. • Objective facts of the matter… • So while the Sophist is concerned with winning the argument as opposed to gaining truth, Socrates has truth as his only concern.

6. The Socratic Method • The Socratic Method: • Asks Questions • Never lectures. • Always cooperating through open dialogue with the goal of attaining truth • Asks of a participant in a dialogue or conversation: • Be open and honest… • No Dogmatism • you must be open minded… • Proceeds in a Dialectic • The process is better at detecting falsehoods than truth • The aim: progress toward the truth • Involves 2 or more people…

7. The Socratic method & the Dialectic • The Socratic method and the Dialectic: • Starts with some question. For example, “What is piety?” • An answer is put forward. • This is some proposal: some definition. • For example… • The proposal is examined through a series of questions. • Socrates is looking for a refutation of the answer in virtue of some counterexample or inconsistency. • A new proposal is brought up. • The new proposal is one which escapes the difficulties of the first. • The process is then repeated… • Socrates is usually left without an unproblematic proposal or definition

8. What Socrates knows • What Socrates knows: • He claims to not know anything, to be ignorant. • His role in the dialogues: ignorant inquirer. • Something can only be known if it survives his Socratic dialogues. • There are several propositions Socrates does claim to know in the dialogues: • 1. We will be better people if we never give up the search for truth. • 2. Human excellence is knowledge. • Human excellence is a techne which is the Greek word for applied skill or knowledge. • Human excellence is knowledge of what to do and how to do it. • Analogy between shoemaker and one who lives well:

9. What Socrates Knows Cont. • What Socrates knows cont.: • 3. All wrongdoing is due to ignorance. • Socrates believes we never intend to do wrong. So we always act out of a belief that what we are doing is good. And we always do good to the best of our ability. • So we only perform evil acts when what we believe falsely… • Moral Education… • 4. The most important task for your or I is to care for your soul. • Socrates thought that you can’t construct a good life unless you know yourself • We must know both what we do know & what we don’t know… • So he says: • Know thyself

10. Euthyphro • Euthyphro: • 2c-3b: we find out that Socrates has been indicted. • Miletus has charged Socrates with corrupting the youth of Athens and for ungodliness. • Socrates’ ungodliness: • Not believing in the Gods and being a maker of Gods • 4a: we find out that Euthyphro is at court to prosecute his own father for the murder of a laborer. • The laborer is himself a murderer. The laborer killed one of his father’s household slaves… • Euthyphro’s father then bound the laborer and threw him in a ditch where he wasn’t cared for until he died… • 4d-e: Euthyphro’s family is angry he is prosecuting his father for murder given: • He let him die… • The laborer was a murderer… • It is impious for a son to prosecute his father for murder.

11. The Search for aDefinition of Pious • Socrates has been charged with Ungodliness or Impiousness. • So he asks: What is it for something to be pious or impious? • Proposal 1: The pious is to prosecute the wrongdoer, whatever the wrong action is and whoever the wrongdoer is. Not to prosecute is impious. • Offered by Euthyphro (6e) • Counter: there are many other pious actions… • The Problem with Proposal 1 (6d-e): • Socrates doesn’t want an example of a pious action. • Socrates wants a definition of Piety.

12. The Definition Socrates is after • The Definition of Piety Socrates is after: • Socrates wants a definition of Piety that meets 3 conditions: • 1. The definition will pick out some feature that is the same in every pious action. • 2. This feature will not be shared by any impious action. • Recognizing Piety when it appears… • 3. This feature makes an action pious. • This is asking for the form or nature of piety. • This is what makes a pious action, pious. • The form of something is its defining feature… • The form of mammal…

13. A Second Proposal • Euthyphro offers a second attempt at defining Piety (7a): • Second Proposal: what is dear to the Gods is pious and what is not dear to the Gods is impious. • Socrates gives the following argument to show this definition inadequate: • 1. The Gods are in a state of discord and are at odds with each other on certain matters. (7b) • 2. The subjects of this discord are: justice, beauty, uglyness, goodness and badness. (7e) • Thus, 3. The Gods disagree about these subjects (7e) • 4. The same things are considered just by some Gods and unjust by other Gods. (8a) • Thus, 5. The same things are loved by the Gods and hated by the Gods (8a) • Thus, 6. The same things are both pious and impious. (this follows from the second proposal & 5) (8a)

14. Euthyphro’s reply to Socrates • Euthyphro’s reply to Socrates’ counter to the second proposal (8b): • The Gods would all agree that certain actions are just or unjust. • For example • This leads Euthyphro to a third Proposal (9d): • What all the Gods hate is impious & what all the Gods love is pious. What some Gods love and others hate is neither or both. • Socrates response to the third proposal (10a): • Is the pious loved by the Gods because it is pious or is it pious because it is loved by the Gods?

15. Examining the 2 horns of the dilemma • The first horn of the dilemma: The Pious is pious because it is loved by the Gods • If so, then, according to Socrates, it’s nature or form has not been made clear. (11b) • Instead, we are told only of an affect or quality of all pious matters. (11b) • Only a necessary condition… • Only something external to Piety… • But the question remains: what is the pious and what makes it so? (11b) • A further problem with this definition: • What if the Gods loved lying, stealing or cheating?

16. The Second Horn • The Second Horn of the dilemma: • Horn 2: The Pious is loved by the Gods because it is pious • Can there be an ethics independent of what God or the Gods disapprove or approve of? • If there is an ethics independent of Religion would chaos result?

17. A Fourth Proposal • A fourth Proposal: • The Pious is a part of the Just (12d) • All Pious actions are just although not all just actions are pious. (12d) • 12e: Euthyphro suggests that the Pious is the part of the just that is concerned with the care of the Gods. • 13b: Piety is the care of the Gods • That which is concerned with the care of men is the other part of the just • 13d-e: Euthyphro says Pious actions provide a kind of service of the Gods • As slaves take care of their masters…

18. Care for the Gods • Socrates presses the issue though (13e-14b): • Socrates asks: what is the excellent aim that the Gods achieve using us as their servants? (13e-14a) • As Generals aim at Victory… • 14b: The advantage produced by piety is: • Preserving both private houses and public affairs of state. • So Pious actions preserve…& Impious actions destroy… • 14c: Socrates turns away from this suggestion altogether. • Might this suggestion work? • Melchert (page 86): • Socrates turns from this suggestion so quickly because of the trouble Athens was in, following the Pelopennisian war and the reign of terror caused by the Thirty.

19. The fifth and final proposal • Euthyphro suggests a fifth and final proposal at 14c: • Piety is prayer and sacrifice • Pious actions: ones in which a man knows how to say and do what is pleasing to the Gods at prayer and sacrifice. (14b) • Socrates response to the final proposal: • 1. Assume Piety is prayer and sacrifice. • 2. To sacrifice is to make a gift to the gods & to pray is to beg from the gods. (14d) • 3. To beg correctly would be to ask from them things that we need & to give correctly is to give them what they need from us. (14d-e) • 4. To give what they need would be to benefit them. • 5. We cannot benefit the Gods. (14e-15a) • 6. If our giving doesn’t benefit the Gods it must please them. (15b) • 7. To say that what is pious pleases the Gods is just to say that the pious is dear to them, that they love it. (15b) • 8. But we already showed that Pious cannot mean what is loved by the Gods. (15c)

20. Final thoughts about Piety • What about premise 5 of Socrates’ counter? • Premise 5: We cannot benefit the Gods. • Does this premise seem problematic? • 13c: Euthyphro agrees with Socrates that one cannot make the Gods better in his actions. • But why think this? • Why think the immortal Gods would have needs that mere mortals could satisfy. • But couldn’t a God be pleased if his subjects acted rightly? • Free will as a test of faith…

21. The Apology • The Apology: • A record of the actual speech that Socrates delivers in his own defense at his trial. • The jury was composed of 501 Athenians: jury and judge… • Socrates is charged with corrupting the youth of Athens and with not believing in the city’s Gods

22. Is Socrates the wisest of all? • Socrates considers early on just why such charges have been brought against him. • He says that it is a result of his reputation. • And what has caused this reputation was this: • Chairephon went to the Oracle at Delphi and asked if anyone was wiser than Socrates. The Oracle said no. (21b-c) • Socrates then went about investigating the claim so he might be able to go to the Oracle and bring a man forward who was wiser than he. (21d)

23. The search for a man wiserthan Socrates • Socrates began the search for a man wiser than he: • Socrates found himself wiser than anyone he investigated because: although Socrates and such men know nothing worthwhile, other men think they know things when they do not, whereas when Socrates does not know, neither does he think he knows. (21d) • So Socrates is wiser in this small extent… • But in his investigation, Socrates attempted to show such men that they merely thought themselves wise, when in fact they aren’t. (21d) • Unpopularity and dislike…

24. Only God is wise • So Socrates is wisest because he knows he lacks knowledge. • Only God is wise • Only God has knowledge of the forms… • Human knowledge is worth little or nothing • Men know very little... • So the wisest of men recognizes the limitations of his knowledge • “This man among you mortals, is wisest who, like Socrates, understands that wisdom is worthless.” (23b)

25. The Unexamined life is not worth living • Human knowledge is limited: • But since our human knowledge is so limited Socrates decides to continue this dialectical examination. • He will seek out anyone who he thinks wise and come to the assistance of God and show him he isn’t wise after all. (23b) • It is the examination that will rid humans of false beliefs… • The examination and Humans attaining as much wisdom as they can • Thus, the unexamined life is not worth living. (38a) • We must always seek to gain self knowledge, to know thyself • We must know both what we do and don’t know… • Thus, “there is no greater blessing for the city” than his examination of its citizens. (30a) • Thus, condemning Socrates is mistreating God’s great gift and harming Athens itself…(30e)

26. God’s command • Socrates: “I was attached to this city by God”. (30e) • Socrates thinks it is God’s plan for him that he do philosophy in Athens. • “I was attached to this city by the God…as upon a great and noble horse which was somewhat sluggish because of its size and needed to be stirred up by a kind of gadfly…” (30e) • “I never cease to rouse each and every one of you, to persuade and reproach you all day long and everywhere I find myself in your company.” (30e) • A divine sign… (31d)

27. Never stop doing Philosophy • 28e-31d: Socrates considers stopping doing philosophy altogether • Socrates considers whether he should stop being occupied with Philosophy: • It is dangerous (28b) • What if he were acquitted (29d) • His argument: • 1. It is wrong to disobey one’s superior be he God or man. (29b) • 2. One shall never fear or avoid things he doesn’t know, rather than things he knows to be bad. (29c) • 3. No one knows whether death may not be the greatest of all blessings for a man. (29b) • 4. Wherever a man takes a position he believes to be the best, or placed by his commander, he must remain there in the face of danger. (from 1-3) (28e) • 5. Socrates feels it is God’s command that he practice philosophy. (29d, 30a & 30e) • 6. Thus, Socrates should never cease practicing philosophy.

28. Socrates’ argument againstMeletus • Meletus charges Socrates with corrupting the youth of Athens and with not believing in the gods of the city: • Socrates replies by asking Meletus to come forward. He then offers several arguments opposing Meletus’ claims. • We will look at just one of these arguments: • 1. The wicked do harm (25d) • 2. No man exists who wants to be harmed (25d) • 3. Meletus’ charge: Socrates corrupts the young of Athens and makes them worse deliberately as opposed to unwillingly • 4. If Socrates makes one of the youth wicked, it is possible that Socrates will be harmed by this youth. (follows from 1) (25e) • 5. Socrates knows this • 6. Thus, either Socrates doesn’t corrupt the youth of Athens or he does so unwillingly. (from 2, 4 & 5) (26a) • 7. But if Socrates corrupts unwillingly then he must be acquitted. (26a)

29. The trial ends • After Socrates finishes giving his defense, the jury then convene to consider their verdict. • The jury delivers the verdict of guilty. • Custom had it that both the prosecution and defense propose appropriate penalties. • What does Meletus ask for? • And what does Socrates ask for? • The jury then votes again and sentences Socrates to death. • Socrates is sent to prison to await death. • A religious mission to Delos begins on the day of his trial. • But executions weren’t allowed during religious missions. • So Socrates waits in prison for a month before being executed. • Crito visits Socrates in prison…

30. Crito • Crito: • This dialogue is said to be a report of a conversation between Crito and Socrates. • Crito tries to convince Socrates to escape prison • Arrangements have been made for Socrates’ escape • Crito gives Socrates many reasons for escaping including: • Crito will be deprived of a friend (44b) • Crito will gain a bad reputation (44c) • The guards can be bribed… (45b) • Socrates would be betraying his family (45c) • Socrates only question: Is it just to escape? (48a-c)

31. Is escaping just? • Socrates considers whether escape is just. He considers one key argument which we will look at: • 1. One must never do wrong. (49a) • 2. One must never return wrong for wrong done. (49b-c) • 3. To injure others is to do wrong. • 4. One must never injure others. (49c) • 5. To escape would be an injury to the laws. • Argument 1: • To escape would be to violate a just agreement with the laws & one should never violate a just agreement. • Argument 2: • By escaping Socrates is nullifying the court’s verdict (50b) • If the courts verdicts are nullified then the laws and city are destroyed (50b) • By escaping Socrates would be destroying the city and its laws • To destroy the city and laws is to cause injury • 6. To escape would be wrong.

32. The execution of Socrates • Socrates find the argument quite convincing. • What do you think? • What about premise 1? • Can we say this about every case? • What about premise 5? • Is violating an agreement ever just? • Is escape really nullifying the courts verdict? • So Socrates remains in prison. • The ship arrives from Delos later that day (43d) • Socrates is executed the next day • The year was 399 B.C.