The writings of Plato, Xenophon and Aristophanes portray Socrates (469-399 BC) as a real historical figure, not a literary invention. However, most of what’s said about Socrates doesn’t come from the original sources, but from later elaborations.
If we trust history and philosophy professors, Socrates is to be credited for the key ideas underlying Western civilization and for leading an exemplary life. During his lifetime, he was a well-known figure in Athens, and after his death, he attained an almost mythical stature.
I profess admiration for Socrates’ achievements, but I see no reason to overlook his mistakes, philosophical and existential. One can admire the beauty of a Renaissance painting without having to proclaim it perfect, exemplary and inspirational.
Indeed, a sober look at Socrates’ life and philosophy entails separating the wheat from the chuff. It requires evaluating the veracity of his ideas, not only their cultural appeal. It also calls for assessing his personal choices in terms of effectiveness, not only in terms of virtue signalling.
Discrepancies
My reservations rest on an incontestable fact: the different characterisations of Socrates in the original sources. On the one hand, if we trust Plato (427-347 BC), Socrates came up with groundbreaking innovations in the fields of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, political and art theory.
On the other hand, it’s reasonable to question the accuracy of Plato’s portrayal of Socrates if we compare it to the other two original sources: Xenophon and Aristophanes.
Xenophon (430-354 BC) also praised Socrates’ wisdom, but when I read his recollections, I miss the innovations that Plato had attributed to Socrates.
Similarly, the portrayal of Socrates by Aristophanes is the opposite of Plato’s. For Aristophanes (446-386 BC), Socrates was just a fool, not a great philosopher; and considering the success of Aristophanes as a playwright, I can only assume that his portrayal of Socrates must have somewhat resembled the reality.
I know that history and philosophy professors have long ago decided that Plato’s portrayal of Socrates was the most accurate and that, for all practical purposes, we should ignore the works of Xenophon and Aristophanes in this respect.
Nevertheless, I am more interested in stating the truth than in paying allegiance to Plato. His words are mellifluous, bright and well-modulated, but do they depict the real Socrates?
I must also point to the conflict of interest affecting a large number of Socrates’ hagiographers. Their career prospects and their income were dependent on supporting the doctrines of the Christian Church, and those rested on a certain interpretation of Plato’s works.
Those Christian scholars, especially in the Middle Ages, did not want to commit professional suicide by questioning Plato’s works or the principal character therein, namely, Socrates.
For hundreds of years, there was a strong professional and monetary incentive to stick to the mainstream narrative. Thus, it’s no surprise that nobody dared to question it in public.
Even in the late Middle Ages, there was no forgiveness for anyone who dared to besmirch the dominant ideological nest. I can affirm, metaphorically, that there was no other nest to turn to, and that no other bird species was allowed.
The unexamined life
Under those uniform conditions, Plato and Socrates became household names, and their ideas were decaffeinated, sanitised, and homogenised. Of course, history didn’t stop in the Middle Ages, but the inherited intellectual corpus is hard to clean up.
The doubts that I’m raising carry substantial weight towards understanding Socrates’ life and ideas. If we regard the ancient interpretations as unimpeachable, we will be building on rusted copper that cannot withstand any shaking; but if we dare point to the discrepancies, we might rekindle long extinguished fires.
The impact of my disquisitions becomes apparent as soon as we start studying Socrates’ teachings. Plato’s work “Apology” contains the most famous words uttered by Socrates, namely, that “the unexamined life is not worth living.”
Nowadays, nobody employs the adjective “unexamined” in normal conversations, but philosophy books prefer the archaic translation. In today’s parlance, Socrates’ statement should read “an unphilosophical life is not worth living,” “a thoughtless life is not worth living” or “an untruthful life is not worth living.”
The love for truth permeated every aspect of Socrates’ life and teachings, namely, his habit of conducting philosophical discussions in the Athenian agora, his sharp analysis of ethical questions, and his refusal to accept contradictory arguments.
Socrates loved truth in abstractions and in specifics. Most of Plato’s works portray Socrates discussing philosophical matters with friends or antagonists. He discussed subjects such as the relation between moral values and religion, the nature of love and friendship, and the ideal political system.
Did Socrates teach anything that we can still apply today? I mean something we can use to improve our lives? Yes, I regard Socrates’ observation about life’s priorities one of the sharpest ever made by a philosopher.
Socrates’ observation about life’s priorities was relayed by Plato in the “Apology,” which consists of a recollection of the trial held in Athens against Socrates in 400 BC, which ended in a death sentence.
During the trial, in which Socrates was charged for impiety and for corrupting the youth with his ideas, he affirmed that it’s more important to care about one’s soul than to pursue wealth or popularity.
When Socrates said “to care about one soul,” he meant “to care about the truth” or “to lead a truthful and meaningful life.” His message has reverberated across the centuries, and luckily, many people are still taking it seriously today.
If you are interested in applying rational ideas in all sorts of situations, I recommend my book “The 10 Principles of Rational Living.”