Update
16th December 2016
For
reasons which remain inexplicable to me, I left out an essential paragraph in
the original composition. I have remedied this amnesic error and have consequently
bolstered my piece with the illuminating additional paragraph. This
paragraph adds context further supporting the general thrust of my thesis.
May the literary gods forgive me, for I shall not forgive myself for this grievous
omission.
If
you care, it is the paragraph just above the ugly fella. Arse
Socrates, together with Plato and Aristotle,
represent the Magnificent Triumvirate and epitome of Ancient Greek Philosophy.
Socrates left no scribblings of his own and what we know about his life,
philosophy and discourse, is mainly through two of his students, Plato and Xenophon. Plato requires
no introduction. Xenophon was a Greek general who successfully led 10,000 Greek
troops through the length of the Persian Empire
c400BC. No mean feat? Or a stroll through a degenerate, effete empire? You
decide.
The Main Sources
The Socrates, as related by both men, is an
inconsistent entity on important philosophical issues. Although Xenophon can be
relied on with reference to the factual aspects of Socrates' life, his take on
Socratic philosophy and political reaction to his teachings should not be taken
too seriously. Xenophon may have been a successful general but he was no
intellectual. With Plato's account we have a different problem. Plato was well
versed with Socrates' philosophical outlook and debating methodology however,
in his dialogues where Socrates takes central stage, we are not entirely sure
whether we are listening to the original Socrates or Plato's doctrine emanating
from a Socratic mouthpiece. Not many men could have invented this ‘Socrates’,
but I believe Plato could have.
A life in Brief
Socrates was born c 470 BC in Athens . When young he served in the Athenian
citizen army and acquitted himself bravely on three campaigns during the
Peloponnesian war with Sparta .
In later life he became an avid debater and applied the dreaded dialectic to
his discourse. In the main he was not interested in matters pertaining to the
material, physical world. He concerned himself with ethical and moral
questions. Thus Socrates enmeshed himself with human concerns: what makes men
good? What is truth, justice and happiness? He questioned all existing beliefs
and institutions including politics and the prevailing theology. His method was
to question his subject by a line of prompts and verbal spurs in order to
elicit 'new knowledge'. In this regard he considered himself a midwife- merely
drawing forth and giving birth to ideas already latent and innate within the
'vessel'. This of course is not the case. By a series of well designed leading
questions Socrates either imposed his point of view or encouraged the 'victim'
to engage the topic from a novel direction. It is to be noted that he rarely
brings together firm conclusions on the topics he chooses to debate. This is
due to the subject matter in hand and shows wisdom. The ultimate questions
concerning human nature do not have ultimate fixed answers, unless
asked/answered by a prissy pedant with a closed mind. The debate forever
remains open. In this regard he has fared better than his contemporary, Plato
and near contemporary, Aristotle, in the opinion of modern folk. The
speculations of Plato and Aristotle roamed and delved not only into human
nature but in matters physical, cosmological and biological- in these subjects
they have been subsequently shown to be entirely wrong. However, due to their
authority and the uncritical reverence given by those who followed, they
indirectly stifled original thought for nearly 1,500 years. What men; what a
legacy! But not their fault.
Socrates, due to his philosophical methodology,
garnered great respect and great hatred in equal measure amongst the Athenian
citizenry. The questioning young, and old, adored him while established
politicians, men of substance and respect often felt humiliated by his probing
irreverent treatment of their long held cherished notions and beliefs. We have
no extant written evidence attributed to the Athenian ferret community. I
suspect, on the whole, it would have been positive. But if we are to be
intellectually honest, we will really never know. Let us draw an opaque veil
over this knotty conundrum and digress, no more.
As to Socrates appearance: he was not moulded in
the Greek Classical concept of beauty; short, squat, stocky and with an
agreeable paunch. Even his friends and admirers considered him very ugly.
Socrates seemed to care little about his physical appearance and made little
effort to defy nature with artificial adornments.
The Athens of the late 390s BC was a politically
unstable city. Athens
was still reeling from its defeat in the Peloponnesian war. Those who reigned
had little time and affection for the likes of Socrates. He was seen as an
unsettling influence on the citizenry and especially the young and as a
consequence it was considered expedient to have him indicted for impiety
(399B). Socrates managed a spirited defence but was condemned nonetheless.
Instead of paying a hefty fine and going into exile, Socrates remained
unrepentantly defiant and was eventually condemned to death by poison. An
account of his last hours, spent with friends, is given in Plato’s Phaedo. During his
last hours, Socrates remains serene and continues with his philosophic
speculations. Understandably, given the circumstances, Socrates ponders on what
becomes of the ‘human essence’ after death. He leans to the view that an
afterlife exists in which he will continue his speculations with fellow
philosophers. The arguments on which he relies are not convincing to a modern
mind and have a naive quality about them. To his credit, Socrates considers the
alternative- gentle oblivion. A dreamless sleep which cannot be anything but
good.
Socrates,
appears as a high minded aesthetic. A man seemingly divorced, as much as anyone
can be, from the mundane physical world. A man of honest and towering
principles. Although, in public, he confesses to know nothing, the impression
we get is that: ‘he protests too much’. I suspect in private ‘he knows it all’.
Perhaps I’m being a tad unfair to the 'gadfly', although he does come across as
more than a little smug. Indifference in the face of death is laudable. A death
he could have easily escaped. However, we would have been more impressed if he
had believed oblivion the more likely scenario. In this respect he is
reminiscent of the Christian undergoing martyrdom at the hand of the Roman
Emperors. Surety of an afterlife inures us from tragedy, in this life, and
makes us brave to face the next.....
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI see you've been raiding my family album again for your photos Flaxen...
ReplyDeleteEvery family has someone who looks like that. In my family it is uncle Enoch.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMy my...it's too bad there are no descriptions of old Soccy's willy, because if he had one approximately the size and shape of a small rodent, then I could be led to believe that he and Mr. Saxon were long-lost identical twins - the poor brothers separated at birth through an unfortunate accident involving a time machine, half a pound of spam, and a ferret. Which explains almost everything about Mr. Saxon's current...fixations.
ReplyDeleteYou forgot to mention jelly wresting, Arthur Askey and Japanese snipers. Matt you must pay attention, I will not be around to instruct you forever. Unless of course I become immortal- I'm working on it. All I need is virgin's blood. Can you provide?
DeleteUnfortunately, I am a man well-versed in the ways of women. Will your own blood not suffice?
Delete