The Last Days of Socrates
A Brief Introduction and Study Guide
Socrates is, without a doubt, the most pivotal philosopher in history. I use the word “pivotal” quite literally. The shift in the kind of philosophical inquiry taking place, because of the work of Socrates (and his student Plato), was so dramatic that we speak of all the philosophers before Socrates as “the pre-Socratics”. Prior to Socrates the predominant focus of philosophy was what was then called “natural philosophy.”1 This kind of philosophy is, of course, quite important too and it did not go away with the rise of Socrates. Inquisitiveness concerning the natural world continued and is to be greatly encouraged. Nonetheless, philosophy was forever changed by Socrates. Socrates, himself, had been a natural philosopher to begin with. In Aristophanes’ play, The Clouds, Aristophanes makes fun of his friend Socrates by portraying him busily measuring the distance fleas can jump.
Somewhere in Socrates’ career, however, his philosophical interests took a turn. Socrates became entranced with questions about things that go beyond the physical world to a more transcendent and intransient reality. His inquiries took him to the realm of what is now called Metaphysics. Aristotle (who is essentially Socrates’ philosophical grandson) wrote a treatise by the name Metaphysics and the name has something of a double meaning. The Greek, τά μετά τά ϕυσιχά, literally means “after the physics”. On one hand, the title could be taken quite literally as Aristotle wrote his Metaphysics after his treaty on Physics. On the other hand, the word μετά can also mean something like “beyond.” So Metaphysics is to speak of that which is beyond the physical (material) world.2
Socrates largely, although not entirely, left behind questions about measurements, the behavior of animals, what causes clouds to form in the sky, etc. He traded these in for questions about the nature of knowledge, of goodness, and beauty. He asked questions about how individual particular objects all share one and the same essence (How is it that this human and that human are both human but not identical to one another?).
From time to time he certainly drew upon his knowledge of the natural world. He would make use of mathematics, of various trades like house building, husbandry, skills like horse riding or lyre playing, and he certainly loved a good discussion on the etymology of words, but these were always employed to get beyond and behind the mere appearance of things. Socrates was after the source and explanation of all things, the backstop of reality itself, beyond which nothing else lies. He wanted to understand and behold that reality, naked, as it is. He was seeking what Thomas Aquinas would have called “the beatific vision” (though Socrates didn’t know it as such).
As it turns out, no one could really give Socrates what he wanted. Not even Socrates himself could quite get at it but, as he states in Plato’s Apology, he at least knew that he did not know. It was for this reason (his awareness of his ignorance) that the Oracle at Delphi told Socrates he was the wisest man in the world. Socrates thought this could hardly be true for there were surely innumerably more men in Greece alone that knew more than he. Such being his conviction he set off to prove the Oracle wrong.
Socrates began asking questions of those whom the people deemed wisest among men. He spoke with politicians, he spoke with poets, he spoke to professional rhetoricians, he spoke with musicians, he spoke with grammarians and mathematicians, he spoke with various kinds of philosophers, and with artists too. Every time he began a conversation he started it with the assumption that they would be able to teach him something of what they certainly knew about their area of expertise. If they could do so then he would learn something he did not know. If he could find anyone with any true knowledge of their discipline then he would prove he was lacking in wisdom and that others were truly more wise than he. This would mean the Oracle was wrong. Every time, however, he found that what people confidently claimed to know, they did not.
If Socrates is famous for anything (and indeed he is famous for many things) it is his question asking. Relentless…question…asking. What has come to be known as the “Socratic Method” is a means of learning through asking questions, important questions, the right questions. This method is employed by classical educators today to help students discover truth for themselves (while exposing faulty ideas) without simply lecturing to them and telling them what is true. It is a great tool.
Ironically, whereas classical Christian educators use Socratic discussion to help students discover truth, goodness, and beauty, Socrates had the habit of using his questions to lead people into darkness, confusion, and frustration. In fact Socrates made some powerful enemies through his questioning, people who didn’t like to be embarrassed by seeming not to know anything at all about that which people had formerly considered them authorities in. Along with this animosity eventually came charges that led to a trial. Socrates was charged with “corrupting the youth of Athens” and also with being “an inventor of gods.”
Socrates, in his endless questioning, though rarely actually making claims, nevertheless made clear some things he didn’t believe (and arguably a few that he did). He didn’t believe the gods of Homer should be accounted as real. Certainly not as they were portrayed by him. He did not believe the gods would be petty and bickering beings like us humans. In fact he seems to have reasoned that God and “the good” are one and the same. Therefore the gods who were imperfect, even wicked, were no gods at all. The good, absolute being and reality, was truly God.
Socrates had developed quite a following over the years. Many young men in Athens had begun taking up his approach. They began questioning their elders and leaders and it was beginning to seem like an insurrection of sorts. A strange insurrection, to be sure, but an insurrection all the same.
Some would call Socrates a skeptic. I think this is a mistake. While he was clearly skeptical of the confident claims people like to make he is certainly not to be identified with the kind of skepticism that came out of (and continues on from) the Enlightenment Period. Enlightenment skepticism originally produced some good results insofar as it questioned bad assumptions and made room to discover a more accurate account of the way things are. Nonetheless, Enlightenment skepticism went awry when it began questioning the first principles of knowledge. The fruit of this trajectory, which began with questioning the receiving of knowledge by authority, quickly turned into questioning our ability to trust our senses. Hume argued that we must rely purely upon reason because our senses are unreliable. In the end this skepticism terminated in post-modernity’s total abandonment of the idea of objective truth and its knowability. Those who think carefully enough about subjectivism realize that personal truths are no truths at all and, if this doesn’t not drive them back towards the actual truth, this leaves them in the despair of nihilism.
Abandonment of Authority (Scripture/Church) —> Abandonment of the Senses —> Abandonment of Reason —> Abandonment of Hope (despair)
Socrates was not this kind of skeptic.
Despite the fact that Socrates constantly deconstructed the confident assertions of “the experts” one thing is utterly clear in his work, Socrates believed truth was real and could (indeed should) be sought after. In fact, if you read enough Plato, you can’t help but conclude that Socrates knew a lot more than he let on. No one could penetrate the confusion like he did and expose it without having some idea of the truth. The earnest pursuit of truth, wherever it lies, separates Socrates from the other kind of skepticism.
Christians may benefit greatly from reading Plato and learning about the Socratic method. But one thing which sets apart Christian inquiry from the pagans is that it should always be filled with hope and we should never leave our interlocutors in despair. It turns out that the backstop of all reality, the ground of all truth and meaning, and the source of all beauty is a person and we may know him as he is in Jesus Christ.
The Last Days of Socrates is a collection of four Platonic dialogues concerning Socrates’ final days. Euthyphro records a discussion before his trial, Apology records the trial itself, and then Crito and Phaedo take place after his trial. Despite being the end of Socrates these dialogues are actually a fantastic place to begin reading Plato.
PDF’s of each dialogue will be posted below for your convenience as the study guides are made available. Enjoy!
Apology: (coming soon)
Crito:
Phaedo:
“Natural Philosophy” has been largely replaced by the term “Science” in the modern era. Science comes from that Latin word scientia which essentially means “knowledge”. I greatly prefer the former term for reasons I may have to rant about in another post some day.
Hence the reason why Metaphysics refers both to a branch of philosophy and also that really weird section of bookstores about tarot cards, mediums, and other new age guru nonsense. Both philosophers and necromancers are looking beyond the natural world to things which are immaterial but they have pretty different objects in mind when they are doing this.