In real life, I’ve never heard anyone quote Socrates’ words: “the unexamined life is not worth living.” That’s a quote from Plato’s “Apology,” section 38a, which conveys the essence of Socrates’ strategy during the criminal trial against him.
Life without asking questions is not worth living. Nor life without debating, philosophising and speculating about virtue. That conviction drove Socrates, according to his own words, to hold debates in the Athenian market place on all subjects under the sun.
In modern parlance, Socrates’ questioning style has been re-baptised “critical thinking.” Although Socrates never employed those words, they sound clever, visionary and rebellious. They reflect the spirit of our era, where style often matters more than substance.
Many people who hear Socrates’ quote “the unexamined life is not worth living” for the first time, will stand still, perplexed and dazzled, wondering what on earth “the unexamined life” is and why would anyone wish to elevate it to a pre-requisite for living.
My heart goes out to them because their intellectual struggle mirrors my past intellectual struggles. Still in our days, I am as suspicious of critical thinking as of any other philosophy that claims to pursue the public good at no cost, just for the sake of seeking truth.
The examined life
Socrates viewed “the unexamined life” as synonymous with “a thoughtless life” or “a life conducted automatically.” That’s why he filled his days with philosophical conversations, public debates, and walking around barefoot; and that’s why he filled his nights with wine-drinking parties.
Despite Socrates’ assertions that his debates, that is, his critical thinking, were held for the sake of seeking truth, I have not found much truth-finding in Plato’s dialogues. The fact that most Socratic debates ended up without a conclusion belies the claim that it all revolved around “seeking the truth,:
If I claim to go to the supermarket to purchase eggs, I don’t walk there, go inside, spend hours looking around, and then go back home without the eggs. Any unbiased observer would say that I did want to go to the supermarket, but not to purchase eggs.
The same scepticism should be applied to Socrates’ quotes about critical thinking, debating or questioning. Any unbiased reader would say that Socrates loved debating, but not for the sake of finding the truth.
Socrates’ best-known quote is “I am wise because I do not pretend to know what I don’t know.” This quote is drawn from section 21d of Plato’s “Apology,” and gives us a crucial hint about Socrates’ motivation for debating and asking questions.
The whole questioning exercise aimed at demonstrating that other people were pretending to know what they did not know. It wasn’t so much about seeking the truth as about proving that other people were wrong, that is, that they were pretending to know what they didn’t.
Socrates’ motivation
Why did Socrates engage so passionately and devotedly in such an exercise? Why did he practise his variance of “critical thinking” at the risk of alienating his debating partners? I posit that he did it primarily for fun, and later rationalised that he did it for seeking the truth and “taking care of his soul.”
In my example of the supermarket visit to purchase milk, I wouldn’t give credence to anyone claiming to go twenty times to the supermarket to purchase milk, only to return home empty-handed every time. How come he didn’t purchase any milk in the course of his twenty visits?
Socrates possessed a remarkably high intelligence, a knack for philosophical discussions, and was more interested in lively debates than in cultivating his land, fishing, or raising sheep.
I witness the same phenomenon in any gifted person for art, physical sports, chess or stock market investments. Talent calls for an outlet, not just to make money, but for the sake of using one’s natural abilities.
People who love playing music will do so even if they don’t get paid. People who love cooking might spend an inordinate amount of time preparing dinner just because it will taste great and look great. I think that my point is incontestable.
Three crucial quotes
Socrates did not wake up every morning with an itch to do “critical thinking” and “truth seeking.” I regard those aspects as side effects of Socrates’ passion for debating, philosophising, and playing with abstractions.
There is no need to guess about this matter because Plato’s dialogues provide us sufficient evidence: we know for sure that Socrates held his debates for free. He could have charged a fee, just as Gorgias the rhetorician was charging a fee, but Socrates did it for free. Why? Because it was exhilarating fun.
That’s why we should take Socrates’ quotations about truth-seeking and critical thinking with a grain of salt. To prove my interpretation, let me give three Socrates’ quotes on this matter.
First, a quote that characterises critical thinking as fearless. In sections 29d-e of Plato’s “Apology,” Socrates addresses the jury and asks them “Are you not ashamed of caring more for money and reputation than for wisdom and truth?”
Nobody except Socrates would have made such a remark to the jury during a criminal trial. Socrates was arguing that the pursuit of truth and wisdom gave him the right to ask annoying questions and hold public debates, even though many people in Athens found them offensive.
Socrates’ claim is that critical thinkers must be fearless and do whatever is necessary to pursue the truth, irrespective of the context. In his own case, Socrates was engaging in debates just for the sake of proving people wrong, even if he almost never arrived at a practical insight that would justify the effort.
By addressing the jury in a reproachful tone, Socrates didn’t act wisely. Asking “are you not ashamed of” was not a polite manner to present his case. Instead, he could have made some abstract argument, used examples, or recounted a story.
My second Socrates’ quote about critical thinking is drawn from section 47b of Plato’s “Crito.” Socrates tells his friends that “we should give less weight to public opinion than to the opinion of expert individuals.”
I couldn’t agree more when it comes to making decisions in our own life. For instance, when it comes to romantic choices, it often happens that the concerned persons know much more about their beloved than the rest of the world do. They are the best experts to make their own romantic choices.
The same principle applies in stock market investments: the opinion of experienced experts will often prove more valuable than the public sentiment. While the latter changes by the hour, the former is based on a factual assessment.
Critical thinking requires sufficient moral strength to stand by minority opinions. When the public sentiment is extremely negative, there may be great opportunities in the stock market, but how many individuals possess Socrates’ fearlessness?
My third Socrates’ quotation about critical thinking is drawn from section 29d of Plato’s “Apology.” At that point, Socrates knows that there is a high risk of being sentenced to death, but instead of trying to assuage the jury, he makes a statement that endorses critical thinking at any price.
Socrates said: “A good man will continue to do what’s good without fear of death.” In other words, Socrates was absolutely determined to continue his public debates. He didn’t recognise anyone’s right to curtail his activities, which he alleged, aimed at seeking the truth.
Talented and fearless
The three Socrates’ quotations that I’ve brought to the table prove that he was fearless, that he considered critical thinking his natural right, and that he regarded negatively anyone who would hold a different opinion on this matter.
I attribute Socrates’ determination, first and foremost, to his remarkable intelligence and debating talent. He deeply enjoyed his debating and was willing to risk anything to keep it going.
He refused to pay any attention to the accusations raised by Anytus and Mellitus. He did not grant them any legitimacy. In his view, nobody had the right to prevent him from practising his natural talent for “seeking the truth.”
I regard Socrates’ passion for debating as the psychological need of any gifted person to practise his skills. As a result, the choice of defence strategy made by Socrates in the trial proved fairly weak. He simply could not grasp the difference between average people, like the jury members, and himself, a highly gifted person.
I posit that Socrates’ passion for philosophising prevented him, to his detriment, from grasping the dangers present in the Athenian environment. He ended up jeopardising his life for the sake of debating or critical thinking, trying to convince a biased jury to abandon their prejudices.
The search for truth is essential, but it is foolish to pursue it in an environment which, by its very nature, is hostile to truth. That was the case of the trial in which Anytus and Mellitus did nothing but raise exaggerated charges against Socrates.
Unfortunately, Socrates failed to see this contradiction in his arguments. He should have realised that, generally speaking, it is pointless to attempt to convince people to let go of their prejudices. It would have been better for Socrates to flee Athens and look for a place that would appreciate his talent.
Did Aristotle (384-322 BC) appreciate critical thinking less than Socrates had done? No, I do not think so, but he was more realistic than Socrates; when he faced in Athens a situation that risked turning as bad as Socrates’ trial, Aristotle went away.
I can only reaffirm the importance of seeking truth, wisdom, and practising critical thinking, but without losing sight of the context. It does not help anyone to make oversized sacrifices in the name of truth-seeking. I wish that Socrates had recognised that his flight from Athens was more than justified.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas in all kinds of situations, I recommend my book “Against all odds: How to achieve great victories in desperate times.”