If Socrates delineated a feasible path to happiness, millions of people would be interested in applying his doctrines, but in spite of his extraordinary reputation as a thinker, his advice about happiness is only lightly presented in philosophy books.

I do not think that it is asking too much from thinkers to provide solid evidence for their recommendations. In the case of Aristotle (384-322 BC), we can easily see that his logic system is solid, and his ethical views consistent. I am confident in their ability to deliver beneficial results.

What about the path to happiness conceived by Socrates and popularised by Plato (427-347 BC) in his dialogues? Is it solid enough to guide us today, does it have no practical application?

I view it as crucial to answer this question properly because, if Socrates’ ideas do not rest on solid ground, we should figure out where he went wrong, so that we do not repeat his errors.

Reason as the driving element

In Plato’s “Republic,” Socrates describes the three elements of the human soul: the appetites, the rational and the spiritual. He then calls for keeping the three elements under the control of reason, enabling them to fulfil their mission, but remaining under control.

Socrates defines virtue as the lifestyle in which those tree elements work properly; happiness is the automatic outcome of the proper functioning of the three elements. If we let them do what they are supposed to do, we will become happy.

The political ideals of Socrates and Plato attempt to ensure that each element will be taken care of by a particular segment of a city’s population. In this way, Plato argued, we could make sure that the city functions well and produces the maximum happiness for all citizens.

I would not comment here about Plato’s political ideals, but suffice it to say that they are not realistic. If Plato expected to establish a tyrannical regime to secure everybody’s happiness, I am happy to see that almost no one is willing to follow Plato’s designs.

It is hard enough for an individual to keep reason in control of his appetites and emotions. In some cases, people require years to learn how to live properly. The learning curve is long and arduous.

Plato’s idea of securing the predominance of reason for everybody in society seems impossible to achieve because there is no way that a group of sages, including Socrates and Plato, could come up with universal recipes that fit every individual situation.

Virtue and pleasure

Nonetheless, the discussion in Plato’s “Republic” is valuable because it conveys the two ingredients of Socrates’ prescription for happiness, namely, reason and virtue. I could even argue that reason itself is a form of virtue.

What about the role of pleasure in human happiness? Plato consecrates part of his dialogue “Gorgias” to this question. The positive and negative arguments are presented by Socrates to Callicles at the very end of “Gorgias.”

A pleasure-seeking lifestyle defended will be taken up and magnified by the Epicurean school of thought in the century that followed Aristotle’s death. I can only surmise that, instead of reading “Gorgias” carefully, the Epicureans had opted for reinventing the wheel, metaphorically speaking.

Socrates confirms the benefits of pleasure of all kinds, even the pleasure of listening to a skilful flute player, an actor in the theatre, or a public speaker. Nevertheless, he considers those most beneficial when they help “elevate our souls.”

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860) retook this insight from Socrates and recommended artistic contemplation as a sizeable contributor to individual happiness. Art, especially the type of art that incorporates moral values, can help us reduce our stress and strengthen our resilience.

However, Socrates did not endorse pleasure that would take advantage of one’s position in society, or impose burdens on other people. When his discussion with Callicles approaches the end, Socrates argues that life needs “a certain order created by the fact that things are each in their proper place.”

A certain order

Socrates then explains that it is not conducive to happiness to behave in a “foolish and undisciplined manner.” I consider this statement as a precursor of Aristotle’s theory of the golden mean, in which virtues are defined as the middle point between two vices: one vice consisting of doing too much, and another consisting of doing too little.

As a result, we can add a third element (“a certain order”) to the two previous elements (“reason and virtue”) in Socrates’ path to happiness. All ideas from Socrates regarding happiness fall under any of these three elements.

In Plato’s “Apology,” Socrates said that “I acknowledge that I know nothing and this makes me wise,” he was practising the virtue of truthfulness. By declaring Socrates the wisest man on earth, the Oracle of Delphi had confirmed that it is wiser to acknowledge one’s ignorance than to claim to know something that one doesn’t.

Also in Plato’s “Apology,” when Socrates exhorted the jury to “care of one’s soul above everything else,” he was advising them to practise virtue in general.

Similarly, in Book VII of Plato’s “Republic,” the allegory of the cave restates the pursuit of virtue through knowledge. We should acquire knowledge because, if we do so, we will make more virtuous decisions. Once again, we see the reaffirmation of virtue as part of the path to happiness.

How solid is Socrates’ prescription for happiness? Despite the immense reputation of Socrates as a moralist, I must point out that his recipe is insufficient for taking quick and accurate decisions.

Every day, we need to make dozens of decisions in all areas of life. Some decisions are major, most are not, but in any case, we need to make them. We cannot put our lives on hold while we try to figure out what Socrates meant by reason, virtue and a certain orderliness.

Compared to the sophistication of Aristotle’s “Nicomachean Ethics” and “Eudemian Ethics,” the prescriptions for happiness made by Socrates seem patently incomplete; nonetheless, if we compare them with prior philosophers, we must give Socrates the credit he deserves for having moved the discussion one step forward.

If you are interested in applying rational ideas in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “Consistency: The key to permanent stress relief.”