Everyone obtains their knowledge in different ways and each person has their beliefs of what is right. Socrates was a wise philosopher from Athens who was known for delineating arguments in which a dedicated student of his named Plato wrote down. Pre-Socratic concepts explored the nature of things through inquiry exposing that much of what we know are just simply dogmas with no definite answer. Through Socrates’ use of the Socratic Method and Socratic Irony he pretends to be ignorant to reveal the ignorance in others using a series of questions resulting in them learning they know nothing; therefore, Socrates inspires us to do the same, regardless of the fact that there is always something we don’t know. Socrates’ wisdom mainly comes from him knowing what he does not know. This relates to Socratic Irony because he uses his ignorance to reveal the ignorance in others. He will accept the person's claim regardless of him knowing it will be unsatisfactory. Socrates demonstrates this in the dialogue “Euthyphro” when he says to Euthyphro,” I cannot do better than assent to your superior wisdom. What else can I say, confessing as I do, that I know nothing about them?” (Euthyphro 127). Here Socrates is giving Euthyphro the confidence that he is an expert in what he knows and admitting that he knows nothing. Socrates being ignorant all comes to play into the use of the Socratic Method. In order for someone to come to the realization that they are ignorant, Socrates uses his
Most of the information that we learn about Socrates comes from the work and writings of one of his students, Plato. It has been alleged that the great Philosopher wrote nothing down for others to read, and as such, the knowledge and the teachings from Socrates that is relied upon to convey his philosophy and the epic story of his life comes not from himself, but his students who attempt to provide and accurate picture of the methods and philosophical beliefs held by their mentor and teacher.
Through several dialogues Plato gives readers accounts of Socrates’ interactions with other Athenians. While some may think of him as a teacher of sorts, Socrates is adamant in rejecting any such claim (Plato, Apology 33a-b). He insists that he is not a teacher because he is not transferring any knowledge from himself to others, but rather assisting those he interacts with in reaching the truth. This assistance is the reason Socrates walks around Athens, engaging in conversation with anyone that he can convince to converse with him. An assertion he makes at his trial in Plato’s Apology is at the center of what drives Socrates in his abnormal ways, “the unexamined life is not worth living for a human being” (38a). Socrates, through aporia, looks to lead an examined life to perfect his soul and live as the best person he can be. This paper looks to examine the ‘unexamined life’ and the implications rooted in living a life like Socrates’.
Socrates was a great thinker and debater dedicated to truth. He spent his golden years walking the streets of Athens in pursuit of wisdom. Socrates lived the destiny that was revealed to him in the Oracle. He created and perfected his own cross-examination technique; we today know it as the Socratic Method. He was thorough and unrelenting. His subjects were often humiliated. Socrates would methodically disprove anyone he thought was wrong. In his eyes, most of the people he interviewed were blind. It did not matter if one was wealthy and influential or if they were young and impressionable. Socrates could question anyone and turn him or her inside out. Unfortunately, he did so without regard to the
Socrates put one’s quest for wisdom and the instruction of others above everything else in life. A simple man both in the way he talked and the wealth he owned, he believed that simplicity in whatever one did was the best way of acquiring knowledge and passing it unto others. He is famous for saying that “the unexplained life is not worth living.” He endeavored therefore to break down the arguments of those who talked with a flowery language and boasted of being experts in given subjects (Rhees 30). His aim was to show that the person making a claim on wisdom and knowledge was in fact a confused one whose clarity about a given subject was far from what they claimed. Socrates, in all his simplicity never advanced any theories of his own
The problem with Socrates concerns the problem with the role of value and reason. Nietzsche believes that the bulk of philosophers claim that life is a corrupt grievance for mankind. Nietzsche reasoned that these life deniers were decadents of Hellenism, as a symptom of some underlying melancholy. For someone to paint life in such a negative light they must have suffered a great deal through the course of their own life. Furthermore, these no-sayers agreed in various physiological ways and thus adopted the same pessimistic attitudes towards life. Socrates was ugly, alike decadent criminals and by ways of these similarities was decadent as well. Nietzsche also claims ugliness as a physiological symptom of life in its decline supported by studies in phenology.
Socrates thinks that it requires wisdom to know the difference between the knowledge and an opinion. And what he means by that is knowledge is based on reasoned ideas beliefs, and can be proved and confirmed by rational arguments, where’s other opinion is not proved. For Socrates, the reason is the bigger way to show the truth. Socrates explained that role model is how to act well for example an equivalent way, knowledge is in an unqualified manner, according to Socrates statement beauty and wealth could benefit us sometimes if we used correctly, however, also harm to us if we did not use it the right way. This is means with knowledge we know how to act well. Socrates explained of wisdom and knowledge, as expressed by Plato in The Apology (StevenM. Cahn 29p-30), is sometimes interpreted as an example of a humility theory of wisdom Socrates and his friend Chaerephon visit the oracle at Delphi. As the story goes Chaerephon asks the oracle
In Plato’s Apology, the Oracle at Delphi asserted that Socrates is the wisest man of them all, Socrates was confused because he believed that wisdom is what you know is the only thing that you know and he claimed that he knows nothing. Socrates was aware that he was not the wisest of them but did not understand what they meant when they said he was the wisest “For surely he does not lie” (Plato Pg. 26). With great confusion Socrates would then try to challenge what the Oracle had said and proved him wrong. I agree with Socrates belief in wisdom and what wisdom is all about, because knowledge is acquired when you admit to yourself that you know nothing. That knowledge you have already obtain will be the only knowledge you can declare until you are than shared with new knowledge.
In order to do this, he goes about Athens questioning those he believes to be wiser than him, including politicians, poets, and craftsmen. Upon this questioning, he discovers that even those perceived as the wisest actually know far less than one would expect. Even the craftsmen, who have much practical wisdom in their respective fields, see their success as merely a tribute to their vast knowledge of many subjects. This, Socrates claims, is not true wisdom. Human wisdom can be described as the acknowledgement and acceptance that one does not know everything, nor is one capable of knowing everything. This, however, does not mean that people should sit idly by, never pursuing wisdom, for it is still vital to the attainment of a good life, which should be the ultimate goal of mankind.
In Socrates’ mind education is not simply an information exchange; rather it is a painful experience, since all that one had previously believed is typically wrong. This painful experience can be seen as the “philosopher” turns around and stares into the light and eventually learning that everything he had experienced in life were just shadows.
Isn’t that the case, Meletos, both with horses and with all other animals?” (Plato, 512). In a nutshell, the Socratic Approach initiates with an allegory or question, expecting an answer which will lead Socrates to another question, and another, until finally any argument to the initial question is squashed and disproven,without finding an actual solution to the original question. This leaves listeners with an open ended question to find an answer for themselves based on personal knowledge and beliefs. “Socrates’ teaching method does not treat students as empty vessels to be filled with knowledge of facts, formulae and theorems. Rather, the teacher and students embark on a voyage of discovery. The teacher does not so much impart knowledge as elicit knowledge,” (Masud). Overall, his teaching method was a very introspective method that keeps great minds challenged to this day.
Socrates had a unique way of teaching and expressing his thoughts and ideas. He taught by constantly posing questions with the assumption that any person could approach the truth through logic if he set aside ingrained prejudice and received knowledge (Hattersley 17,18). His dialectic method of questioning consisted of a subject being broken down by one or more people, in search of the same truth but with differing views. Instead of merely trying to convince listeners, Socrates would approach others by questioning what they felt to be true and therefore would be able to determine that person’s true feelings and the basis for those feelings. Socrates was open to receive knowledge wherever he could find it, yet when he approached people who claimed to be wise, he found they really knew nothing. He would challenge preconceived opinions, based on the words of others and fallacious logic. Many felt that he was attacking their identity and security causing them to resent Socrates when he pointed this out. Due to his search for truth, Socrates would, eventually, pay the ultimate price. Socrates teaches us to assume nothing and to question everything. In scientific study today, this is a fundamental element of scientific study, starting with a theory and afterward refining it to the point of when a decisive conclusion is made.
If Socrates were alive today, how must he feel about the Delphic inscription of “Know thyself” would still be a relevant question in which our society is still trying to answer in 21st Century living? In today’s fast paced society, the individual can easily get dehumanized by their work, technology, family commitments and the political process. A person is easily swayed by public opinion and not be able to think for themselves in fear of retribution and conflict. Sometimes it is easier to go with the mass than being the obstacle in the river that moves the water move in a different direction. If one seeks to attain self-knowledge before commenting on other matters I believe that our society today would be a more compromising and better place.
Socrates, in skepticism, began a search for those with a reputation of wisdom. After studying men and their knowledge, he reasoned that the only true wisdom consists in knowing that you know nothing. Although one may have extensive understanding in one area, there is way too much knowledge in the world to be contained by one man. Socrates stated, “I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish, and that some inferior men were really wiser and better” (Plato, 23). Those who believed that they knew it all could not be more ignorant, and those who admitted ignorance achieved the highest wisdom attainable on earth. Socrates accepted the idea that he, just like all men, contained very little or no wisdom at all. He was content with knowing this, and upon meeting others that lacked this philosophy, felt he was superior to them. He was unsure of the limitations the afterlife had on wisdom, but he was aware of it’s constraints on earth. This self awareness is what gifted him with the highest sense of enlightenment.
He did not feel that he was even slightly wise let alone the wisest man. He tried to prove the oracle wrong by examining reputedly wise men and he realized that they thought that they knew things that they did not and this made them unwise. It was after these encounters that Socrates realized that the oracle "meant that human wisdom is worth little or nothing."(19) It was this realization that made Socrates wise.
Socrates faces a lot of opposition from the public because of the nature of his teachings as he attempts to demonstrate the value of knowledge and justice. In his apologia, having been charged with “corrupting the young” (Aen. 24b), Socrates questions Meletus mercilessly, forcing him into contradicting himself and leaving him speechless with “nothing to say” (Apo. 24d). Much of Socrates’ teachings revolve around making others aware of their own ignorance, as he does with the politician, “[trying] to show him that he supposed he was wise, but was not” (Apo. 21c). Plato’s Symposium recounts the speech of Alcibiades in which Alcibiades describes “what an extraordinary effect [Socrates’] words always had” (Sym. 215d). According to Alcibiades, Socrates “makes it seems that his life isn’t worth living” (Sym. 216a). These kinds of lessons