Many people have remained recorded in history because of great deeds that made them famous. Some became famous for their heroism, others for their artistic abilities, third for their new inventions, fourth for social and political reforms, fifth for their religiosity, but few have enriched the world with “ordinariness” and simplicity. One of them, and probably the most famous, was a Greek from the ancient period, an Athenian citizen, a member of the third citizen class, known as Socrates.
We know Socrates as a philosopher who, as Cicero says, “first brought philosophy down from the heavens to earth, gave her a dwelling in cities, even introduced her into homes, and forced her to examine life and morality, good and evil.” He is attributed with the creation of dialectics and inductive-definitional methods, which will become indispensable in the philosophical thinking of Western civilization, so he is called the father of Hellenistic ethics. The Megarian, Eleatic, Cynical, Cyrenaic, and Platonic philosophical schools, which emerged after Socrates’ death, They will take Sokrates for their founder. However, none of that was Sokrates’ aspiration or guiding principle. Sokrates did not write anything, did not define any method, nor did he establish any philosophical school. Although he engaged in philosophy, it was not his goal but rather a means to achieve a certain aim. We can call him a charismatic individual. He himself said that at one point he felt a calling and since then he abandoned his house and property and dedicated himself to befriending the citizens of Athens.
However, this friendship was not reduced to mere and empty socializing, but it demanded a lot from Sokrates, as well as from other Athenians. True friendship can only exist among truth-seeking individuals, and virtue is the only reliable path to acquire friends. True friends are those who are willing to do anything for each other, and the importance Sokrates attached to this idea is evident throughout his whole life. In the most challenging situations, he will not give up on what he deems right. I am honest and honorable, even if it costs me my life, because it is “wrong and shameful when someone does wrong and does not listen to someone better, be it God or man.” He spent his whole life on the streets and markets, workshops and training grounds, talking to young men and old men, men and women, freelancers and slaves, craftsmen, artists, statesmen, etc., people who differed in age, position, and occupation, always addressing individuals, trying to convince them of the importance of “caring for the soul.”
Without mincing words, he shook false self-confidence and mercilessly shattered the arrogant omniscience and apparent wisdom of his interlocutors, which caused a double mood among them. In those who were eager for knowledge and instruction, it awakened the desire for change and learning, and in others, it evoked hatred as a consequence of wounded vanity. Thus, it happened that in his seventieth year of life, the latter brought him to trial and sentenced him to death. But even in that situation, he cannot give up on what he believes in. not the only correct one. In Plato’s Defense of Socrates, we read these words: “… and if you were to say to me: Socrates, now, admittedly, we won’t believe Anita but we will release you under one condition (…) that you no longer engage in this questioning and steer clear of the love of wisdom; if we catch you once again in this activity, you will certainly lose your head; – if you were to, therefore (…) absolve me of the charges under those conditions, I would reply to you: I greet you, citizens of Athens, and have great respect for you, but I will obey the gods more than I will obey you, and as long as I have breath in me and as long as I have strength, I will not cease to engage in the pursuit of truth, and advise you, and teach, when I meet with any of you, speaking in my usual way: “My honorable man, you are an Athenian, a citizen of the greatest and most powerful state both in wisdom and in strength, and are you not ashamed that you care about how to accumulate wealth and fame and honor, but you do not care at all about intelligence, about truth, and about the soul, for it to be as good as possible?”- And if Someone among you challenged that and claimed to take care of it, I will not let him leave right away (…) instead, I will question and interrogate him extensively; so if I get the impression that he lacks virtue, but claims to have it, I will reprimand him for valuing the most important things the least and the less important things more.”
Century of Glory – Century of Misery
For Athens, the 5th century BC was a century of the greatest prosperity but also the greatest downfall from which it will never rise to its former glory.
Parallel to the growth of Athenian power, the enlightening role of traveling teachers, sophists, was being lost. By selling wisdom for money – which was a novelty at that time – they became more actors than enlighteners. They praised their own knowledge, used rhetoric in their speeches, focusing on technique rather than content. Speaking for or against a certain proposition, they brought doubt to every knowledge, as any argument could be made stronger by rhetoric depending on the need. Traditional Greek morality was shaken. . Moral impotence, debauchery, and the rule of the masses prevail. Instincts overpower reason.
At the beginning of the Peloponnesian War, Socrates rises against sophistic hypocrisy and skepticism, and sets himself a task: to break down false perceptions and find a solid foundation for true knowledge.
How should one live?
If we were to summarize the essence of Socrates’ endeavor, it would be the search for an answer to the question: how should one live?
In seeking this answer, Socrates starts with opinion. Pre-Socratic thinking neglects, namely, the process of argumentation, or it is reflexive, imposed from outside, as is the case with sophistical thinking.
Thus, the liberation of thinking begins with Socrates. He believes that true knowledge exists and searches for it, managing to avoid numerous traps that thinking sets before a person. Namely, a person believes that their thoughts are a reflection of themselves, but they often are merely “adopted” and represent thinking that a person has not personally convinced themselves of, but rather just accepted.
He simply adopts and assumes it without verification.
Therefore, if an idea seems familiar and likeable, it does not necessarily mean that it is correct and accurate. People often deceive themselves and convince themselves of the correctness of their views, not because of their truthfulness, but because of fashion, conformity, or the path of least resistance. They accept certain positions and aspirations due to their current popularity, even if they may not agree with them. Often, they accept certain ideas simply because they are presented in an appealing way, allowing themselves to be misled by others’ opinions, often not even attempting to understand them on their own. Socrates rejects such traps, believing that truth and reality can only be revealed through thorough thinking without deception. He does not allow himself to deviate from this process and opposes instinctive pleasures, desires, and narrow-mindedness of existential interests with such thorough and correct thinking. Based on analogies, he arrives at definitions, defining the concept as the basis of thinking.
Taking into account Examples from everyday life, Socrates finds the answer to the question of how one should live through analogy. Humans exist within the same limits and boundaries as everything else in nature. For example, the land on which we stand is necessary for human existence. We cannot ignore or deny that. By enabling our existence, the land also obligates us. The human body, hands, legs, eyes, ears, tongue, mouth, even eyebrows and eyelashes have their roles and need to fulfill them, especially reason and soul, which allow humans to perceive all of that.
Through their actions, humans must not deny themselves, because that means losing the ground beneath their feet and disappearing into nothingness. That means ceasing to be human. In order for this not to happen, action must be the result of correct thinking, and according to Socrates, it is the unconditional responsibility of every thinking person.
And not only does Socrates liberate thinking, but he also transcends it. By delving deep into his intimate nature, he finds a voice within himself that, as he says, has been accompanying him all along. from youth and which deters him from bad actions. “That is a voice that can only be heard as a warning, to deter from some intention; never, however, in the sense of persuasion.” And that is one of Socrates’ great qualities. On one hand, giving reason the right to “science”, but on the other hand not agreeing that only factual knowledge has the right to discern what is right and humane. He deeply believes in the meaning of his own existence and the divine creation that enables that existence: “And otherwise, you think, there is no reason anywhere, and that when you know that even a small part is found in your body from the earth (…) and that you have received a small part from water (…) and probably also a small part from everything else (…) and that your body is composed of that? Then you only believe that reason does not exist anywhere, but that you somehow luckily grabbed it, and all these large and countless celestial bodies, do you think, are by some unreasonable chance in such a beautiful order?… My dear, understand that even your mind directs your body as it wishes. Therefore, it should be believed that the mind also governs the The divine mind arranges everything as it pleases…” (Xenophon: Memorabilia of Socrates).
For Socrates, the meaning of life lies in achieving oneself as an ethical being who, together with all other people, lives and moves towards immortality, guided by virtues that are reflections of the divine. However, one cannot know for certain that this is the case, and therefore one must take the risk of believing that through one’s own correct actions and efforts, one can attain the truth.
“I know that I know nothing”
In order for a person to begin the process of correct thinking, they must first descend from the pedestal of presumptuous knowledge and accept their own ignorance. Only then, through the effort of seeking, is it possible to find the truth. And not in a way that someone else transmits it to us, but each person must find it within themselves, based on their own insights.
Starting from this fundamental realization of ignorance, Socrates’ quest for the meaning of life leads him to try to show others the importance of correct thinking, because anyone who desires good for themselves must also desire it for others. to him. If someone behaves differently, they do not realize that they are causing harm to others as well as themselves. It happens that a person makes mistakes, not out of intention, but solely due to their own ignorance and making choices based on poor judgment.
Just like a traveler who looks into the distance may perceive a nearby rock as bigger than a faraway mountain, people often prioritize immediate benefits over long-term good. What is lacking is true knowledge that would enable us to evaluate what is better. Therefore, when a person does harm to others, focusing solely on personal gain, they lack the ability to measure and understand what is truly better for them.
People forget that happiness is not found in external, fleeting goods, but rather in internal and everlasting ones. This is what everyone should seek and discover within themselves, while striving to improve in righteousness and virtue, because the nature of Socratic ethics is the happiness of the community, achieved by individuals doing what is beneficial for everyone, not just themselves. He is a person who acts in such a way that he makes himself and everyone else happy.
In his defense in court, Socrates claims that the reason for his actions was the answer his friend Herefont brought from the Delphic Oracle. Herefont asked the oracle if there was anyone wiser than Socrates. The answer was: “Sophocles is wise, Euripides is even wiser, but of all men, Socrates is the wisest.” This was the cause of much hatred towards Socrates: “…I approached one of those who have a reputation for wisdom, so that I could refute the oracle’s pronouncement…(). As I talked with him, I came to the conclusion that this man, although he appears wise to many others and even to himself, is not truly wise. I then proceeded to try and prove to him that he (…) thinks he is wise, but he is not. And so, I grew to hate both him and many others who were present. On my way back, I reflected to myself that I am, in fact, wiser than this man because (…) neither of us knows anything truly good and valuable, but he thinks he knows something when he actually does not. while I, as I don’t know and don’t think I know. I am, it seems to me, at least a little wiser than him, precisely because I don’t even think I know what I don’t know. From this I went to another (…) and got the same impression. And so I have come to dislike him and many others.
If he was not aware of the truth, Socrates knew the way to it very well and helped many to discover it within themselves. Through his questioning, he would first convince a person that both of them know nothing, using what would later be called Socratic irony: “It seems to me that both of us are weak in knowledge. You don’t know, and neither do I.” Those who conversed with him felt like they were left with no foundation, as if the ground was slipping from under their feet. In that state, Teetetus says his head is spinning, and Socrates responds that it is the beginning of philosophy.
Teetetus tries to find an answer, but he can’t discern it; he tries to find it from others, but he fails, and in the end, he thinks he is incapable of finding it, but he still cannot stop searching. “You have labor,” Socrates replies. Socrates tells him, “Because you are not empty, but burdened.” Socrates then explains that he is a midwife like his mother, Phaenarete, but instead of delivering bodies, he delivers souls. And his greatest merit is in checking and examining whether someone gives birth to a deformity and lies or to fruit and truth, which later became known as Socratic maieutics. He himself does not give birth to wisdom, but he helps others in delivery, “if they are burdened.”
Example to the End
The above conversation shows Socrates’ magnificent simplicity and ordinariness. He never emphasized himself, and we could think that he knew nothing more than his interlocutors. Maybe he didn’t know, but he differed in one thing: what he knew, he also did. And his most visible, yet perhaps least noticed characteristic, is the harmony between thoughts, words, and actions.
Without this characteristic, nothing of what he said and demanded from others would have pedagogical weight, nor could it lead to genuine friendship. Socrates followed moral principles until the end. Not only in everyday life, but also in those difficult situations where the vast majority of others, faced with the choice between life and death, would certainly give in. The first time, when he alone opposed the furious crowd that wanted to unjustly condemn the military commanders after the lost battle at the Argin islands. The second time, when he refused to carry out the orders of the Thirty, and the third time when he was sentenced to death in a court trial, not succumbing to flattery and dishonorable means that would have softened the judges, but firmly insisting on justice. “What punishment or fine have I deserved for thinking that in my life I should not remain idle, but rather neglect what many worry about: the accumulation of money, running a household (…) statesmanship and all other services (…) that happen in public life? I considered myself too upright to be able to preserve my own safety by devoting myself to those things, so I did not strive for what would be of no use to you or myself, but rather I chose a different path: I spoke out for To whom, in particular, I believe, I am doing the greatest good; I have tried to advise each of you not to care about anything of your own, before taking care of how to be better and wiser oneself, and not to worry about the state of affairs before worrying about the state itself, so that by doing so, one takes care of everything else as well.” It is precisely in these words that the value of Socrates’ friendship is contained, for which he was condemned by an unjust punishment. Shortly after his death, the Athenians regretted and erected a bronze statue of him, the work of the famous Lysippos.
Socrates’ friendship has certainly indebted Western civilization, and all those who know and feel it can find their starting point and inspiration in the last words he directed to his judges: “But, I beg of you one more thing: when my sons grow up, avenge yourselves on them, people, by annoying them just as I annoyed you, if it seems to you that they care more about wealth or anything else, rather than virtue. And if they consider themselves something when they are nothing, Scold them as I scolded you, if they don’t want to take care of what needs to be done, and if they think they’re something when they’re worth nothing. And if you continue to act like that, then I have received full justice from you, both me and my sons. But, it is time for me to go – me to death and you to life. And who among us will reach a better end, only God knows.”
In ancient Athens, one of the fifty state councillors was questioned, who, through their president, governed the provisions of the assembly and ensured order within it.