|
ENGLISH 101. ACADEMIC WRITING |
||
|
Taylor, Quentin P. "The Last Days of Socrates: An Invitation to
Philosophy." Midwest Quarterly 42.1 (2000): 20. Taylor argues that
by teaching The Last Days of Socrates teachers of Philosophy 101 have the
opportunity to get students to think more philosophically, if not actually to
become philosophers.
Dr G has added boldface labels in brackets to
reveal the essay structure. Yellow
highlighting is added to show the "identification of the
problem." |
||
|
The Last Days of
Socrates: An Invitation to Philosophy [BACKGROUND, Statement of the problem] Of the disciplines that make up the social sciences and humanities, philosophy undoubtedly has the fewest practitioners and adherents outside academia. If we exclude the fine arts--which are widely practiced, patronized, and discussed in the broader society--philosophy is still distinguished from its sister subjects by its shadow-like existence beyond the campus walls. The history buff, the amateur archaeologist, and the literary layman are familiar enough. But the disciple of philosophy who is not a professor of the same is rare bird indeed. Even the casual reader of philosophic texts is a decided anomaly. [BACKGROUND, Statement of the problem] The reasons for this discrepancy are perhaps apparent to all who, with some seriousness, study philosophy. The very manner in which philosophy typically proceeds, conceptually and in general terms, accounts in part for its lack of accessibility. When this intrinsic feature is accompanied by excessive abstraction, abstruseness, or verbosity, philosophy takes on an enigmatic aura that commonly leaves the general reader in utter despair. Beyond difficulties of comprehension, there is the problem of content. In our utilitarian and fact-centered society, many find the questions and concerns raised by philosophy remote, irrelevant, even trivial. Moreover, the notorious absence of consensus among philosophers, and the "non-cumulative" nature of the discipline are notable sources of perplexity and frustration, and not infrequently lead to the conclusion that the history of philosophy is little more than a series of gratuitous "opinions," none of which can be "proved" or "disproved." [BACKGROUND, Statement of the problem] In conjunction these difficulties render philosophy prohibitive to most of the reading public, and tend to dampen its appeal even among those trained in related fields like history, law, literature, psychology, and political science. All too often philosophy is either shunned as something inscrutable and remote, or dismissed as frivolous and hardly worth the effort. [BACKGROUND, Statement of the problem] Despite such formidable obstacles, I suspect that many of those who teach philosophy remain committed to "infecting" their students with the philosophical "bug," not primarily because they want them to become philosophers or even philosophy majors: the former are normally born, the latter may find it difficult to support themselves. The principal concern, rather, is simply that they become more philosophical, that is, more thoughtful, more reflective--in a word, better thinkers. For whatever may be said against philosophy, the philosophical sense remains a precious commodity and is among liberal education's highest goals. [BACKGROUND, Statement of the problem] This belief assumes that more than a negligible few are capable of developing the philosophic sense given the proper introduction to philosophy. There is, unfortunately, little chance of this happening beyond the groves of academia. And even within the academy, a general course in philosophy is rarely required. Yet every semester an untold number of students will find themselves in such a course, and it is probable that their experience will firmly shape their attitude towards philosophy, perhaps for the remainder of their lives. In this light, the introductory course takes on a greater significance than might commonly be presumed. Indeed, it is precisely here that the instructor can have the largest impact; for here the opportunity to awaken the philosophic spirit is greatest. [INTRODUCTION] The question then becomes, what is the most effective means of rousing this spirit? As all competent teachers know, the question defies a simple answer and involves a number of intangibles. Yet insofar as content is concerned, some texts are arguably better suited than others to capture the attention of students and awaken the philosophic sense. [THESIS STATEMENT] Keeping in mind the importance of first impressions, I believe a strong case can be made for beginning this course with the Platonic dialogues collectively known as "The Last Days of Socrates"--the Euthyphro, the Apology, the Crito, and the Phaedo, particular the first (57a-61d) and the last (114d-118a) parts. [INTRODUCTION] This recommendation will undoubtedly strike many as anticlimactic. Moreover, if we assume that the focus is Western philosophy, it will also appear commonplace. Indeed, unless one insists on beginning with the Presocratics, or prefers a topical approach, what could possibly be novel about commencing an introductory philosophy course with Plato's Socrates? In what follows I hope to show that, beyond the ancestral primacy of Greek philosophy, there are compelling reasons of an intrinsic kind for doing so. To this end, I will note some of the outstanding characteristics shared by the four dialogues, and then identify some notable aspects of each. These general and specific features, I believe, provide a strong rationale for employing The Last Days of Socrates in the first days of the introductory course. Accessibility and Platonic Socrates [BODY] Perhaps the most attractive general feature of the Platonic dialogues is their accessibility. Vital to this are the genre and style in which Plato writes. In addition to their brevity, the dialogues in question are free of technical language and philosophic jargon. The advantages of this are obvious and hardly require comment. Suffice it to say that the discovery that one can readily comprehend the father of Western philosophy without the aid of a specialized vocabulary is likely to come as a welcome relief to the beginning student. Second, the dialogue form is well suited to engage the attention of the reader. Combining elements of personality and drama, humor and irony, the Platonic dialogue has an immediacy, a direct appeal that is largely absent from more conventional forms of philosophical discourse. That Plato often reads like literature, and polished literature at that, is not the least of his appeal for the purposes considered here. [BODY] No less compelling is the central figure of the dialogues, Plato's beloved mentor Socrates. Every college student has at least heard the name "Socrates," most will know that he was an ancient philosopher, and even those whose knowledge extends no further may well be curious to learn more about this remarkable man. This can best be initiated, I suggest, via the dialogues at hand. Here we find the moral philosopher and ironist engaged in his characteristic activity (Euthyphro); then defending himself (and the philosophic life) against his accusers in the Athenian law courts (Apology); then discoursing in his jail cell (Crito); and finally, raising the poisoned goblet to his lips, all the while maintaining an undaunted philosophical calm (Phaedo). [BODY] Given the important philosophical issues and intense drama of the "last days," few students--whatever their impressions regarding the life and death of Socrates--are likely to remain unmoved or indifferent. After all, the reader is confronted, not with a hypothetical or fictional matter, but with an actual event involving one of history's most famous and fascinating figures. That Socrates happened to exhibit "unusual" characteristics and espouse "provocative" views almost guarantees an engaged response, sympathetic or otherwise. In this capacity alone the dialogues in question are invaluable for stimulating an interest in philosophy. The Euthyphro [BODY] The features described above certainly make The Last Days of Socrates an eminently accessible work, but its principal pedagogical value resides in its philosophic content. Proceeding chronologically, we first encounter Socrates on the day before his trial (having been accused of impiety towards the gods and corrupting the Athenian youth), loitering outside the court of the King Archon, awaiting his preliminary hearing. Socrates is spotted by Euthyphro, a self proclaimed authority on religious matters, who has traveled to Athens to prosecute his father for the wrongful death of a servant. In the ensuing exchange, we learn of the charges brought against Socrates. The core of the dialogue, however, is devoted to a discussion of "piety" (hosios), a discussion instructive in a number of ways. Here we are introduced to the "Socratic method," a mode of discourse that typically aims to "discover" the essence of a general quality or "thing" as expressed in a definition. Euthyphro's attempt to define piety draws attention to some important philosophical issues. At the broadest level it raises the age-old metaphysical question of particulars and universals, the Many and the One. For example, we call a number of actions pious or just, but what, Socrates asks, is piety or justice in itself ? Or to use another example, we speak of a beautiful painting, a beautiful horse, a beautiful garden, but what is it about each of these that merits the adjective "beautiful"? Such questions continue to perplex philosophers, but they are invaluable at eliciting that metaphysical wonder which is at the heart of the philosophic sense. [BODY] Another vital issue raised in the Euthyphro concerns the foundations of ethics. In response to Socrates' questioning, Euthyphro defines piety (or right) as "what is agreeable to the gods." This definition reflects the traditional (religious) basis of Greek ethics. For the typical Hellene, what was pleasing to the deities was more a matter of formal observances ("the science of requests and donations to the gods") than of personal conduct. Of course, even in ancient Greece ethics was not exhausted by reference to the gods, but was also a matter of custom and law. The important issue here, however, concerns moral foundations, and the ensuing discussion sounds a few silent notes. First, Socrates adroitly maneuvers Euthyphro into agreeing that what is pious is approved by the gods because it is pious, not because they approve of it. This important distinction not only undermines Euthyphro's identification of piety with the predilections of the gods, but speaks directly to the status of the ethical per se; its sources and sanctions. Moreover, Socrates notes that even with the help of this distinction, the essence (eidos) of piety remains undiscovered. [BODY] Like many of the early dialogues, the Euthyphro ends without a positive answer to its principal question. Nor does Socrates elaborate on the matter of ethical foundations. Yet as noted, the dialogue raises seminal philosophical questions in a manner readily grasped by the beginning student. The Apology [BODY] Socrates' spirited defense before an Athenian jury in 399 B.C. is a key source of information about his life and character. Here we learn of Socrates' divinely-inspired mission to seek truth; of an inner voice (daimonion) that dissuaded him from acting unjustly; of the cause of his popularity with some and the animus of others; of his manner of living and his commitment to the examined life; and of his tireless effort to persuade his fellow Athenians "not to think more of practical advantages than of [their] mental and moral well-being." These and other biographical details, as well as the dramatic setting of the Apology, are well-suited to capturing the attention of the novice. [BODY] In addition to these interesting revelations, Socrates' defense raises some notable philosophical issues as well. One of these is the odd-sounding notion that the "law of God" does not permit "a better man to be harmed by a worse." On closer inspection, we learn that Socrates is not denying that one may, for example, suffer physical abuse at the hands of another, but rather that the "soul" (psyche) of the better man (i.e., his rational and ethical essence) cannot be damaged by a moral inferior. While this doctrine is hardly immune from objections, its counter-intuitive nature is likely to stir some probing ethical considerations. [BODY] Also likely to stir reflection are Socrates' remarks on death. "Death," the condemned philosopher says, is one of two things. Either it is annihilation, and the dead have no consciousness of anything; or . . . it is really a change; a migration of the soul from this place to another. In either case, death is deemed a benefit-a "dreamless sleep" in the former case; a chance to share the "company and conversation" of interesting and famous people in the latter. To fear death, then, is irrational, particularly for the "good man" whose "fortunes are not a matter of indifference to the gods." [BODY] The qualifying clause suggests that Socrates personally believed in the survival of the soul, and in an afterlife in which "the gods" judge of one's earthly conduct. Indeed, in the Phaedo we discover that he was prepared to hazard this belief. What is particularly worth noting, however, is the absence of dogmatism in Socrates' treatment of the subject. He concedes that death may well be annihilation, and admits that belief in immortality and judgment remains a "belief," albeit to his mind, "a belief worth risking." This distinctly philosophical view is a useful corrective, I think, to the dogmatism (theistic or atheistic) that frequently pervades this "question of questions." [BODY] The Apology is notable for highlighting the concept of justice (dike), the crown jewel of Platonic philosophy. Socrates insists that to live justly is the highest good, even when (indeed, especially when) it is "inexpedient" or in conflict with our perceived advantage. Justice, moreover, requires true knowledge (phronesis), which is a product of inquiry. Socrates illustrates this point when he informs the court that an accused man should not appeal to the emotions of his judges, but ought to inform them of the facts and convince them by argument. The jury does not sit to dispense justice as a favor, but to decide where justice lies. [BODY] For Socrates there is only one way to attain knowledge and thereby live wise and justly: "to make your first and chief concern not for your bodies or for your possessions, but for the highest welfare of your souls." By this Socrates means the philosophic life, a life dedicated to the ideal of intellectual and moral excellence (arete). Again, there are obvious difficulties with the Socratic-cum-Platonic equation: knowledge = goodness = happiness; yet these very problems make for instructive discussion. Finally, the passionate and eloquent defense of philosophy in the Apology may well move some students to agree with Socrates that the "unexamined life is not worth living." [BODY] Beyond these considerations there is also the question of Socrates' guilt or innocence. Did Socrates adequately address and successfully acquit himself of the charges? Did he deliberately antagonize the jury in the hope of a guilty verdict and a sentence of death? Did the Athenians have sufficient reason to rid themselves of this bothersome "gadfly"? These questions, some twenty-four centuries later, remain compelling. For beyond the fate of the historical Socrates, the Apology (if only inadvertently) raises the perennial issue of civil liberties--freedom of speech, association, and religion. It is but a short step to a consideration of that master concept of political philosophy, the proper relation between the individual and the state. The Crito [BODY] The dialogue begins with an imprisoned Socrates receiving a visit from his friend and admirer, Crito. Informing the philosopher that his execution is imminent, Crito attempts to persuade Socrates to escape from jail and flee Athens before it is too late. In all, Crito offers some half dozen reasons for doing so, none of which are sufficient to convince Socrates of the wisdom of his friend's advice. A consideration of the relative merits of the two men's arguments constitutes the principle philosophical value of the dialogue. [BODY] One of Crito's concerns is that he and Socrates' other friends will be accused of cowardice for deserting their imperiled comrade. The condemned philosopher replies that the opinion of the many should not merit serious attention, but only the opinion of "sensible people," who will perceive the truth of the matter. Building on this theme, Socrates suggests that in all matters where knowledge guides practice, only the opinions of the knowledgeable should be consulted and obeyed. Just as we must follow the expert advice of the physician and trainer in matters of the body, so too must we be guided by the "expert in justice" in affairs of the soul. [BODY] The notion of such an "expert," and the analogy it's based on, will no doubt strike many readers as odd and suspect: as such, their instructional value is considerable. The former speaks to the relationship between knowledge and virtue (a recurrent Platonic theme), while the latter raises the issue of the nature and validity of analogical reasoning (a recurrent Platonic device). Moreover, Socrates' notion that the soul, no less than the body, is damaged or improved by our mental habits and immoral behavior, is a seminal ethical doctrine, and well worth sustained inquiry. Students should also be encouraged to consider the related notion that "the really important thing is not to live, but to live well;" that is, "to live honorably and justly." [BODY] An equally provocative idea is Socrates' claim that it is never right to "inflict an injury in retaliation" for a harm inflicted upon us. Even if we are the innocent victim, it remains an injustice to "defend one's self against injury by retaliation." Is not Socrates, one may ask, confusing self defense with injury, and injury in such cases with injustice? In reality only the wording is misleading, for Socrates neither denies the right of self defense nor rejects the concept of punishment. What is rejected as unjust is deliberate injury for the sake of injury. Conversely, Socrates maintains elsewhere (viz., in the Republic) that punishment properly administered constitutes neither injury nor retaliation, but is ultimately intended for the malefactor's "benefit." These novel views are likely to elicit a lively exchange on the nature of injury and punishment. [BODY] Finally, there are the vital ethical and political considerations raised by the "Laws of Athens." In taking the voice of the "Laws," Socrates provides a number of reasons (principled and practical) for accepting the verdict of the jury and rejecting Crito's plea to escape. This part of the dialogue is well-suited to a discussion of the basis of political obligation, the status of law, and the logic of civil disobedience. The Phaedo [BODY] The dialogues which relate the trial and imprisonment of Socrates are readily available in a number of single-volume editions. Some of these include the pre-trial Euthyphro as well as the Phaedo. The latter contains a portrait of the Athenian philosopher's last hours, and is significant for its awe-inspiring account of Socrates' dispassionate attitude toward his impending death. Here we see that most sublime instance of philosophy in action: self-assured calm in the face of imminent physical destruction. Socrates' steadfast concern for his soul, his anticipation of a blessed afterlife, and his scorn for delaying the inevitable, provide the stirring prologue to what is surely the most moving scene in all philosophical literature. [BODY] Near the end of the dialogue, Socrates calls for the hemlock-laced chalice, says a final prayer, and, undisturbed, drains the cup with a single quaff. No longer able to restrain themselves, Socrates' grief stricken friends spontaneously break out in tears and sobs. A philosopher to the end, Socrates chides them into silence, and, wide this last breath, asks Crito to sacrifice a cock to Asclepius, the god of healing. The meaning of these final words, and the significance of Socrates' life and teaching, supply a fitting coda for what promises to be a compelling "invitation to philosophy." Conclusion [CONCLUSION DOESN'T FOLLOW FROM BODY BUT ADDS NEW MATERIAL AND NEW IDEAS] While the emphasis here has been on the philosophical content of The Last Days of Socrates, the dialogues also lend themselves to historical and literary analysis. In fact, further inquiry into the historical Socrates and an appreciation of the literary features of Plato's writing may assist in better understanding the philosophical issues therein. For example, while Plato provides us with the most extensive treatment of his beloved mentor, there are two other contemporary accounts of Socrates, both of which supply additional perspective and in some cases different facts--on the life, teaching, and death of the Athenian philosopher. These are Xenophon's Conversations of Socrates, which includes a brief account of the trial, and Aristophanes' The Clouds, a comical parody of the early Socrates. And while the Platonic Socrates will remain uppermost in the minds of most readers, these works provide a fuller picture of the man as viewed by his contemporaries. [MORE FALSE CONCLUSION] It may also be useful to explore the relevant historical background, particularly when considering the validity of the charges against Socrates and the merit of the jury's verdict and sentence. Plato would have us believe that the charges were groundless and the decision unjust. However, Plato (who was certainly an interested party) does not tell the entire story, the "Athenian side of the story." For example, he fails to inform us of Socrates' unfriendly attitude toward Athenian democracy or of his admiration of rival Sparta, which defeated Athens in the Peloponnesian War five years before Socrates' death. Nor are we informed of the perfidy and murder committed by some of Socrates' young associates; viz.., Alcibiades, Charmides, and Critias. Such details led the late I.F. Stone to conclude that the prosecution and conviction of Socrates was less a travesty of justice, than a reasonable (if ultimately indefensible) response to a truly dangerous man. The popular success of Stone's book, The Trial of Socrates (1989), as well as its controversial reception, testify to Socrates' continued relevance for those who continue to debate the issues of crime and punishment, the relation between knowledge and virtue, the basis of political obligation, and the nature of the good, the true, and beautiful. [MORE FALSE CONCLUSION] As for the salient literary features of the dialogues, we have already noted the presence of drama, humor, and irony. The last two deserve special mention insofar as they dispel the notion that philosophy is an inherently staid and humorless enterprise. Indeed, each of the four dialogues under consideration contain comical passages, ironic or otherwise. The entire setting of the Euthyphro, for example, is humorous, as Euthyphro's hubris is deflated by the Socratic method. In the Apology, Socrates' descriptions of himself as a "gadfly" and "god's gift" to the Athenians are ludicrous (if perhaps truthful), just as his suggested "punishment" of maintenance for life in the Prytaneum (a dining hall reserved for Olympic victors) is outrageous in light of the charged atmosphere of the trial--but this is vintage Socrates. While the philosophical value of such risible scenes may be negligible, they undoubtedly make for more enjoyable reading--a crucial consideration for beginning students. In conjunction with his other notable qualities, Socrates' humor contributes to an image of the "philosopher" which is largely at variance with the common perception. "Here is not abstract thinking machine," the just reader will conclude, "no cloistered, peevish `intellectual,' but rather a living, breathing man, vigorous in mind and body . . . and funny too!" Such a response may not give rise to a life-long pursuit of truth, wisdom, and virtue, but it may encourage some among the otherwise indifferent to take a genuine interest in the "great ideas" and the life of the mind. Accordingly, it would appear that "The Last Days of Socrates" is not only ideally suited to the introductory philosophy course, but is also appropriate for courses in literature, history, and politics. If nothing else, students will have been introduced to one of history's most remarkable and fascinating men--a man who (due to Plato) has come to occupy a singular place among the secular saints of Western civilization. Bibliography Allen, R, E., Socrates and
Legal Obligation. Minneapolis: Aristophanes. Clouds.
Ed. Kenneth Dover. New York: Oxford Benson, Hugh H., ed. Essays
on the Philosophy of Socrates. Oxford, Brickhouse, Thomas C., and
Nicholas D. Smith. Socrates on Trial. "What Makes Socrates a
Good Man?" Journal of the History of Gulley, Norman. The
Philosophy of Socrates. New York: Macmillan, Kraut, Richard. Socrates
and the State. Princeton: Princeton Nietzsche, Friedrich.
"The Problem of Socrates." Twilight of the Plato. The Last Days of
Socrates. Ed. Hugh Tredennick and Harold Rudebusch, George. Socrates, Pleasure, and Value. Oxford, 1999. Taylor, A. E. Socrates: The Man and His Thought. New York, 1953. Taylor, Christopher. Socrates.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, Vlastos, Gregory, ed. The
Philosophy of Socrates. Garden City, New ________. "Socrates on
Obedience and Disobedience." Yale Review, ________. Socrates, Ironist
and Moralist. Cambridge: Cambridge Xenophon. Conversations of
Socrates. Ed. Hugh Tredennick and Robin What's
Wrong with This Article? G's Note Things printed in scholarly sources aren't
necessarily right or good or even logical. Taylor's article is a case in
point. This text is full of bloated pomposities like "the
philosophical sense remains a precious commodity and is among liberal
education's highest goals." (What is the "philosophical
sense"? Who values it? And who is "Liberal education"?) Taylor observes that there are huge
problems with the discipline of philosophy, but he proposes that
"the spirit of philosophy" can be awakened by teaching The
Last Days of Socrates in Philosophy 101. He then admits that these
dialogues already are taught in such courses. Ergo, Mr. Taylor, your
answer is no answer. The problem already has been addressed, as you
propose to address it, and yet the problem hasn't gone away. There are big problems with the organization of this article, as the writer rambles on about each of the four dialogues with a combination of plot summary and comment on points of possible (non-philosophical) student interest raging from history and drama and law to irony and humor. In the end, Taylor's conclusion doesn't square with his introduction, as he claims that The Last Days is ideally suited not only to Philosophy 101 but to courses in literature, history and politics. These other subjects were not identified as parts of the problem. Finally, note the citation or lack thereof. The article uses Chicago style of documentation (see Hacker section 38) rather than MLA style, so the author is free to load up a bibliography full of texts that he doesn't actually use in his article. Clear thinking this is not.
|
||
|
gutchess@englishare.net Academic writing home page Gary Gutchess © 2003 |
||