Socrates is such a fundamental figure of the West that we can speak of a period “before” and “after” Socrates. Nevertheless, we only know him indirectly. Everything we know about him comes from others, from those who knew him, who talked with him or clashed with him. He himself did not leave any writings because, it seems, he didn’t care about that. His main concern was to develop love for the good, the beautiful, and the just through dialogue. It can be said that in a way we have all encountered Socrates. Because we all strive to get to know and approach, no matter how small, that genuine, good, and just. We all encounter Socrates – at least the one that lives within each of us.
Socrates lived in the 5th century BC, a period that is extremely important for the history of Greek and Western thought. It is an era of both brilliance and great upheaval. The great wars against Persia, the most powerful Asian force of that time, end in the victory of Greece, thereby eliminating the threat of falling under the influence of the Eastern Mediterranean for a long time. Early under Asian influence.
Greece, appearing in the beginning of the 5th century, somewhere around the time of Socrates’ birth (470 BC), however, questions its past. The cities are stirred by the emergence of a new form of government – democracy. This glorious period will be called the century of Pericles, the golden age of Athens and Greece. This is the era when the Parthenon and the Propylaea were built on the Acropolis, which are still visited by so many of our contemporaries in search of the original spirit of Western thought. Although today there is so much reference to that Greek spirit, it is not experienced as it was in Socrates’ time.
Although the war against the Persians ended with the Greeks’ victory, that war, whose modern equivalent would be the First World War, left the cities lifeless, Athens burned, and the population decimated. However, the Greeks will quickly recover. As a seafaring people, they had a developed sense of trade and travel, and by eliminating the Persian threat, they secured a strong economic expansion in the Mediterranean and the Middle East.
Fascinating and perplexing personality
The rivalry between Greek cities, which was a constant in their history, was the cause of the Peloponnesian War, during which Sparta and Athens clashed for thirty years. Socrates participated in this war three times as an Athenian hoplite.
Socrates, who was neither bellicose nor violent, fulfilled his military duty as a citizen of Athens in order to protect his homeland and fellow citizens. He was a brave man and excelled in battle. Although a free citizen, he could not afford a horse or a shield-bearer to carry his spear and shield. He saved the lives of many people, without seeking any reward or fame for it. Among them were Alcibiades, whom we will speak about later, and the historian Xenophon.
In times of peace, this peaceful man “fought” with words and conversation. His questions disturbed people, and one of those to whom Socrates revealed ignorance lost his composure and struck him. “It’s unbelievable!” remarks Socrates, “There are days when I wonder if it would have been better to go out with a helmet!”
On another occasion, one of those whom he had offended kicked him.
“Do something!” his followers shouted. “Should I file a lawsuit if someone trips over me while I’m walking down the street?” Sokrat replied.
That’s what Sokrat was like, brave and peaceful.
When we talk about Sokrat, the man proclaimed by the oracle as the wisest Athenian, we imagine someone exceptional, but that was not the case. He was unattractive in appearance, and his behavior was confusing. One day he was walking down the street bouncing in full armor with a helmet, shield, and spear. When asked why he was doing it, he replied, “I’m having a dialogue with my stomach!” In other words, realizing that he was overweight, he decided to exercise to lose weight. Sokrat’s unpredictable behavior was so confusing that it was disturbing. You never knew what he would say.
He was unfamiliar with any dogmatism. He claimed to have no teachings to pass on. Like a midwife He helped his students find the truth within themselves. No one can give anyone else anything except what they themselves are capable of finding within. Socrates can be described as a “catalyst” for the truth that everyone carries. His presence and actions allowed those who wished to find a fragment of the truth within themselves, which is the root of all future wisdom. Socrates is not a professor who teaches a specific theory, but a teacher who confronts everyone with themselves. His role is like that of a mirror in which everyone can see themselves. Alcibiades said that behind Socrates’ physical ugliness was the most beautiful soul of the Athenians. He compared Socrates’ appearance to Silenus. Silenus belonged to Dionysus’ retinue, he had a repulsive appearance with a stubby nose and a large belly. The Athenians kept small figurines of gods in Silenus-shaped boxes, symbolizing the beauty of the soul which does not necessarily have to align with the appearance of the body.
The basic idea of Socrates was that truth cannot be expressed by formulas and thus transferred from one switched places with others.
Therefore, he would confuse his conversation partner at the moment when they least expected it, in order to awaken awareness in them. Not caring about the opinion others would form of him, he was preoccupied with giving everyone an opportunity for realization, which is both the worst and the best thing that can happen to someone. The worst, because the revelation of one’s own ignorance and everything that was previously refused to be seen, causes shock and pain. This is an endless path because behind one ignorance, there is always something new to discover. However, awareness of what is unknown or misunderstood implies a long process through which it is possible to attain the experience of truth. All interpreters of Socrates agree on this.
Socrates’ Three Crises and Socratic Method
Three significant moments in Socrates’ life will lead to the development of the Socratic method. Contrary to popular belief, great individuals are not born fully developed: they have a life that has shaped them and, like everyone else, they experience doubts, difficulties, crises, and pain. However, they make use of these crises. react in an exceptional way: they surpass their crises by learning through the pain they have experienced. Like all people, Socrates also had problems, but he decided to learn from life, pain, and crises. He noticed that not only does he not know everything, but he realized that he actually knows nothing. That is why he is so close to us and represents a constant measure for all Western philosophers. Although he left no writings, everyone refers to Socrates.
Jean-Baptiste Regnault: Socrates pulling Alcibiades out of the embrace of sensual pleasure, 1791.
First Crisis: Alcibiades
Socrates experienced three major crises, the first of which relates to the controversial character of the Athenian Alcibiades. He belonged to one of the wealthiest and most respected city families and even as a child was destined for a high political career – the successor to Pericles. He was known as extraordinarily good and gentle, a student that Socrates could only wish for. Socrates will try to interest him in practicing virtue, mastering oneself, and living harmoniously. He will. Over a period of twenty years, Sokrat endeavored to lead a young man towards becoming aware of his own ignorance and become a philosopher. However, when Sokrat was around forty-seven years old and Alkibiad was less than thirty, Sokrat, realizing his failure, announced to Alkibiad that each of them would follow their own path and inspiration. As Alkibiad distanced himself from Sokrat, his true nature emerged. He went so far as to betray Athens and had to flee to the Persians. He transformed into the opposite of an exemplary Athenian citizen: seeking power for power’s sake, seeking honor and wealth. Instead of being Sokrat’s disciple, Alkibiad proved to be his shadow and antithesis: good, but easily influenced, mild-mannered, but intemperate, brave, but a traitor. After twenty years of trying, this represented a downfall for Sokrat. He then experienced his first crisis.
He came to the realization that if someone refuses to progress, even the proximity of the highest virtue, the best learning, and the utmost care will not yield results. Neither love nor virtue can be transmitted. You can love, but you cannot influence someone else to love. You can know, but you cannot make someone else wise. You can possess virtues and be an example, but that will not awaken virtue in others. In order to help someone, they must be willing to become better. That is why Socrates claimed that there is no teaching that he could pass on. This does not mean that he had nothing to offer, but rather that transmission is only possible if the other person has an interest, a desire to learn, understand, and apply it. Socrates becomes aware of the mistake he made in thinking that he could save Alcibiades from himself, despite himself. One cannot save someone who does not want to be saved. One cannot help someone who does not want to help themselves. This failure, caused by Socrates’ kindness, leads Socrates to doubt himself. He embarks on a profound self-reflection, which leads to discussions about Socrates’ melancholy as a philosophical “illness,” a kind of return to the source in order to determine one’s state and establish a connection. Hello there. In order to achieve a radical change in behavior, one must first reach the bottom, go back to the time that preceded the current state, when things were still in potential, in order to understand what went wrong from the very beginning. It is not about piecing together fragments of a broken vase that came out of the oven, but about going back to the beginning, shaping a new vase cleansed of impurities that led to its breaking.
This is the first phase of Socrates’ method: the examination of consciousness, the need to delve deep into oneself, knowing that what is not desired cannot be changed, and in order to evolve, one must awaken the catalyst for transformation within oneself. Socrates is not an intellectual, but a practical man. He is demanding of himself just as he is demanding of those willing to embrace the adventure of his method. Demanding, because it involves intense questioning that challenges firmly established beliefs. Things, you see, appear differently depending on how one looks at them, whether from the outside or from within. i iznutra.
Because of that, Socrates decides that he will no longer be a teacher to anyone and that his actions will not be limited only to young men from the ruling class, as those who want to change themselves are everywhere. Since then, he seeks conversation partners everywhere and offers them his knowledge without charge – unlike the sophists who taught the skill of being right instead of truth. Thus, Socrates devotes himself to the youth and the not-so-young, asking questions to everyone.
Second crisis: The prophecy in Delphi
A few years later, when he was in his fifties, Socrates experiences a second crisis. One of his friends led a delegation to Delphi to consult the oracle about the future of the city of Athens, as was the custom at that time. He decided to seize the opportunity and ask the Pythia an additional question: “Who is the wisest man in Athens?” The answer was: “Sophocles is wise, Euripides is wiser, but Socrates is the wisest of all people.” Happy, his friend rushed back to Athens. Socrates receives the voice of the prophecy. Socrates, disturbed, does not understand why he would be considered the wisest man in Athens. He decides to visit all the people who are known as the most knowledgeable, the best in their disciplines. He questions them about their exceptionalism. Why are they the best? And each of them gives him their answer. Socrates continues with further questions, which irritates his interlocutors because they are finally forced to admit their own ignorance. Some accept it calmly, others resent him, which will later cost Socrates dearly. At the end of his journey, he realizes why the prophecy proclaimed him the wisest man in Athens: only he knows that he knows nothing. The difference is not in the extent of knowledge, but in the fact that he, unlike others, is aware of his own ignorance.
This realization strengthens his belief that he is wise precisely because he acknowledges his own ignorance. Recognizing one’s own ignorance and mistakes opens up the mind. Without that, attention cannot be directed to anything else, except for what is only believed to be known. Accepting one’s own ignorance awakens love for wisdom. Then one can become enamored with what is unknown, a fan of the mystery of the unknown. This is the love for wisdom that is the foundation of philosophy. To be a philosopher, that is to awaken love for the unknown within oneself, can only be done by those who have recognized their own ignorance and are able to question accepted beliefs.
Then one can move on to the second stage of Socrates’ method: the purification of thought, of prejudices. From this purification, light is born. Just as day arises from night, and metals are refined from ore, wisdom is born from ignorance. In order to achieve this, all impurities must be removed through successive purifications. This involves testing one’s own ideas to see if they are correct.
And so, dialogue is born, the philosophical phase of Socrates’ method. Dialogue assumes the existence of two intelligent individuals who agree to discuss the same topic and are willing to listen to each other, allowing for a true dialogue to take place instead of mere Two monologues. A Socratic dialogue assumes agreement on the topic and a desire to collectively reach a goal. This can be achieved by embarking on a journey up the mountain of knowledge, climbing together and conversing in order to ascend a little higher than the starting point. After a true dialogue, both interlocutors become better because they have overcome the obstacle that hindered their progress. It doesn’t matter that the summit was not reached; progress was made together, despite the differences. That is the essence of dialogue, and practicing it is both an art and a science. It is not enough to say what one thinks; it is necessary to also say what needs to be said and have the necessary discernment to contribute intelligently to the dialogue. It is not about arguing or showing off, but about an act of love that enables transcendence.
That is the nature of a Socratic dialogue, which had a strong influence on the youth of that era.
A young man of twenty meets Socrates in such circumstances and shares with him the last ten years of Socrates’ life. This young man was Plato. he felt such deep respect for Socrates that he would never say “I” in his works, but rather “Socrates says…”.
This is how Socrates resolves his second crisis.
Third Crisis: Trial
The third and final crisis for Socrates precedes his death. As he had gained many enemies, Socrates is accused of impiety, immorality, and corrupting the youth. He is accused by those who will take advantage of this situation to advance their careers. A rigged trial is initiated against Socrates in front of the Athenian court. He is accused of speaking against the city’s gods and introducing new gods, resulting in his death sentence. He, who was against superstition, anthropomorphic gods, and the trade that had conquered religion.
Socrates spoke about the existence of an inner voice, which he claimed was between the divine and human, a voice that always advised him on what not to do. He called this inner voice a daimon: a conscience that enables a person to preserve their dignity and be true to themselves. Indeed. He puts the essence of divinity into the daemon that each person carries within themselves and explains that through this divinity or inner being, a person connects with the spirit and the universe. Socrates did not invent a new deity – he “invented” conscience. Conscience was born with Socrates. Since then, the voice of the individual can be distinguished from the voice of society. For the authorities who fear individuals, Socrates represented a danger. He was an individual in the true sense of the word – he valued his inner freedom more than external freedom. He encouraged the Athenians to listen to their daemon and thus learn to have a dialogue with themselves, establishing an internal connection, the source of every dialogue.
He explained to young people that society in its current form is not acceptable: positions cannot be bought, and voting should not be influenced by mere words. When he criticized the political customs of the time, he was accused of corrupting the youth.
Socrates did not run away from condemnation to death because he respected the laws and loved his city. The death penalty was rarely imposed in ancient times, and and could have been replaced by exile, which would result in the loss of civil rights. Socrates did not want to be exiled from the city for which he had borne arms three times. Since he had advocated respect for the law and civic spirit throughout his life, he would rather die as a citizen than live as an exile. It is this crisis that he overcame and that will make him Socrates. During the thirty days he spent in jail before his execution, he spends his time talking to his friends, explaining to them why they should not fear death and comforting those who were grieving.
Jacques-Louis David: The Death of Socrates, 1787
His third fundamental lesson is that one cannot truly live if they do not know how to die. The best philosophy is one that teaches how to die in order to learn how to live. When one dies to their own ignorance, weaknesses, and attachments, new perspectives open up and a person is born anew. Experience can make us a different person, multiple times throughout one’s life. “This is the third phase of Socrates’ method: maieutics, the skill of giving birth to oneself. He said that he had the same profession as his mother, a midwife. She assisted, he explained, in the birth of the body, while he assisted in the birth of the soul. The birth he spoke of was the birth of oneself. Because, as already mentioned, in this process one can do nothing else but assist, just as a midwife assists the mother and the child. A person, born of oneself, becomes self-created. One cannot give birth to oneself without engaging in dialectics. One cannot become a philosopher without recognizing one’s own ignorance. One cannot recognize one’s own ignorance without feeling the need for transformation.
This is what Socrates has left us: a simple, yet strict method. It is also demanding because it requires individuals to be responsible for themselves and learn to grapple with themselves.
“Walking the streets, I have no other goal,” Socrates says in The Apology, “than to convince you not to give in to the body and wealth, but to strive fervently.” “Improve the soul. I repeat to you that it is not wealth that gives virtue, but rather that virtue gives rise to wealth and everything useful for the individual as well as the state. I am like a tireless bee. I never stop waking you up.”
“Socrates awakens people who, even with friendly guidance, still have to carry out the work that no one else can do for them.”