StrivingLife presents ...

Although none of Socrates actual writings exist, what we can get from Plato about Socrates shows the importance that Socrates played in not only the past, but also the influence that he has today. In this paper, I will be discussing the main reasons that Socrates had such an influence on philosophy.

Early philosophers often discussed the world around them and its qualities. Thales was an early philosopher who is first attributed to have questioned “What is the basic ‘stuff’ of the universe?” (Baird, 6) Other early philosophers also asked themselves that same basic question, and came up with a variety of answers.

Instead of following those that came before him, Socrates decided to do something different. Instead of trying to find out more about the world around him in order to find out more about the world around him, Socrates asked questions of those around him in order to learn more about himself. Socrates was not interested in truths about what the world was composed of, rather he was interested in all of the things dealt directly with individuals and their interaction between other people. A few things that he talked about were; justice, injustice, and piety.

In the Apology, Socrates explains why he began his quest for wisdom about these things. Earlier in his life, a friend of his had asked the priestess of Apollo at Delphi if there was anyone who was smarter then Socrates. The Priestess replied back that no one was wiser then he. Socrates reluctantly decided to test the validity of this reply. Socrates examined the first person that he came upon, someone who was widely thought to be wise.

After questioning this man, Socrates found that although this person thought that they knew a lot, it turned out that in fact they knew very little. Socrates realized that “in all probability neither of us knows anything worth knowing; but he thinks he knows when he doesn’t, whereas I, given that I don’t in fact know, am at least aware I don’t know” (Baird, 85). After questioning other ‘wise’ people, not only did he make a large amount of enemies, but he also found that for the most part they did not really know a lot, but pretended to. Socrates later questioned people at the other end of the scale.

From this questioning, Socrates also learned that “those with the highest reputations seemed to me to be pretty nearly the most useless, if I was trying to find out the meaning of what the god had said, whereas others, who appeared of less account, were a much better bet when it came to thinking sensibly” (Baird, 85). This finding, and the statement being said in front of the prominent men of Athens during his trial, could only increase the amount of people that looked at him with distaste.

Another reason that Socrates was so important has to do with his questioning of others for the truth. In Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro begin discussing piety. At the beginning of Euthyphro, Euthyphro has a good understand of what piety means, and believes that something that he had done was a pious act. Socrates claims ignorance of what piety is and asks Euthyphro what it is. After questioning, Euthyphro revises his definition of piety. This questioning takes place a few more times until Euthyphro can no longer say that he knows what piety is. Socrates did not want to know about things or actions that had the traits of what he was looking for, he wanted a definition of what it was exactly. If he was interested in justice, he did not want examples of just actions, but a definition of justice that once used, could find the truth of what exactly a just act was.

Eventually, Socrates was summoned before 500 of Athens prominent males to be tried for two things. The first charge was that “he enquires into things under the earth and in the heavens, and makes the weaker argument the stronger, and he teaches these same things to other people” (Baird, 84). His second charge was “of being a bad influence on the young, and of not recognizing the gods whom the state recognizes, but practicing a new religion of the supernatural” (Baird, 87).

Socrates dismisses the first charge brought against him by stating that people who are angry at him for pointing out that they don’t truly know anything, “come out with the standard accusations made against all philosophers, the stuff about ‘things in heaven and things under the earth,’ and ‘not recognizing the gods’ and ‘making the weaker argument stronger’” (Baird, 86-87).

For the second charge, Socrates says that he was only doing that which he thought the gods wanted him to do, so that he could find out why they said what they did about him. He then tells the jury what he believes the gods meant when they said that he was the wisest: that “human wisdom is of little or no value” (Baird, 86). The only way for him to find this out, was to question others about what they knew. He also states, “I have never been anyone’s teacher. Equally, I never said no to anyone, young or old, who wanted to listen to me talking and pursuing my quest” (Baird, 93).

Socrates was found to be guilty of the above charges, and is asked for a suitable penalty. Being a poor man because he was able to do nothing but question others, he proposed that he receive “free meals at the public expense” (Baird, 96). Needless to say, Socrates was not allowed to be ‘punished in this way’, and was instead given hemlock.

Socrates famous quote, “The unexamined life is not worth living” (Baird, 97) best sums up his life. Socrates was willing to die for his beliefs, which made his point much stronger. After reading Plato’s writings about Socrates, and therefore learning more about Socrates, you learn just how important Socrates was in changing philosophy and its focus.

Bibliography:

Philosophical Classics Volume I: Ancient Philosophy. Forrest E. Baird and Walter Kaufmann. Prentice Hall, 2000.

Although none of Socrates actual writings exist, what we can get from Plato on Socrates shows the importance that Socrates played not only in the past, but also the influence that he has today. From Plato, we are able to learn some of the reasons that Socrates is important. In this paper, I’ll be discussing the main reasons that Socrates was persecuted, in the hopes that this will shed some light on why he was so important.

Socrates believed that “the unexamined life isn’t worth living” (Baird, 97). Earlier in his life, a friend of his had asked the priestess of Apollo at Delphi if there was anyone who was smarter then Socrates. When the priestess replied back that there was no one, Socrates, who didn’t believe himself to be all that knowledgeable, went out on a quest to find proof that he was indeed the wisest. The first person that Socrates came upon, who was believed to be wise by many, was examined to see how wise he was. After questioning the man, he found that the man believed he knew much, but in fact knew very little. Socrates realized that “in all probability neither of us knows anything worth knowing; but he thinks he knows when he doesn’t, whereas I, given that I don’t in fact know, am at least aware I don’t know” (Baird, 85). What made Socrates wiser then that individual was the fact that Socrates realized his weaknesses, and didn’t pretend to know more then he actually did.

This realization determined the path that Socrates would walk down for the rest of his life. By showing others that what they thought they knew, they in fact did not, he made a large amount of enemies. Due to this, Socrates search for ‘his wisdom’ lead him to be persecuted on two charges by the men of Athens. The first charge was that “he enquires into things under the earth and in the heavens, and makes the weaker argument the stronger, and he teaches these same things to other people” (Baird, 84). His second charge was “of being a bad influence on the young, and of not recognizing the gods whom the state recognizes, but practicing a new religion of the supernatural” (Baird, 87).

Socrates contests the first charge brought against him by saying that due to the influence of the priestess of Apollo at Delphi, as mentioned above, he began questioning people. He found, not only that people pretended to know what they did not, but that “those with the highest reputations seemed to me to be pretty nearly the most useless, if I was trying to find out the meaning of what the god had said, whereas others, who appeared of less account, were a much better bet when it came to thinking sensibly” (Baird, 85). In a society where those with the highest reputation had a lot of the power, this was not something to confess that you believe. Eventually, after questioning people who practiced crafts that he had no knowledge in, he soon realized what he believed the god meant, that “human wisdom is of little or no value” (Baird, 86).

Socrates next states that since the people that he questions get angry, not at themselves for the lack of knowledge, but rather at Socrates for pointing out their lack of knowledge, “they come out with the standard accusations made against all philosophers, the stuff about ‘things in heaven and things under the earth,’ and ‘not recognizing the gods’ and ‘making the weaker argument stronger’” (Baird, 86-87). This is Socrates main defense against the first charge, that since the people that he asked are angry, and “don’t want to lose face” (Baird, 86) they are bringing charges against him.

Socrates next attempts to find faults in the second accusation. He asks if he alone is a bad influence on people and the rest of Athens is a good influence. If this is so, which they say is, then Socrates asks why they didn’t take him to the side, and tell him that what he is doing is wrong, instead of taking him to court. He also states that “I have never been anyone’s teacher. Equally, I never said no to anyone, young or old, who wanted to listen to me talking and pursuing my quest” (Baird, 93). This statement implies that it isn’t really his fault that people followed him, since he let them do as they saw fit.

Socrates is then able to change the next part of the second accusation to read “Socrates is guilty of not recognizing the gods, but recognizing the gods instead” (Baird, 89), after further questioning on the exact meaning of the accusation. He also states that the main reason that he is asking all of these questions in the first place is because the gods told him that he was the wisest, and wished to find out why. To not find out what the gods meant, would be to ignore them, or not recognize them.

Socrates was found guilty of the charges, by a somewhat close margin. He was able to choose a penalty for his acts. Socrates, rather smugly, states that “if I must propose a penalty based on justice, on what I deserve, then that’s what I propose – free meals at the public expense” (Baird, 96). His justification for this statement is that “the Olympic winner makes you seem to be happy; I make you really happy. He doesn’t need the food; I do need it” (Baird, 96).

Even towards the end, Socrates doesn’t believe that what he has done is wrong. He will not accept exile or being committed to silence for the rest of his life. He believes that the reason that he has been found guilty is because his accusers will not look past the fact that Socrates has pointed out their faults.

Two statements with great importance even today, that Socrates makes against his accusers along this point are that “if you think that by putting men to death you can stop people criticizing you for not living your lives in the right way, you are miscalculating badly” (Baird, 98) and that “the best and simplest way lies not in weeding out other people, but in making one as good a person as possible” (Baird, 98).

At the end, Socrates was willing to die for his beliefs. I believe that this is an admirable trait, the power to stand up for what you believe in, no matter what the cost. Socrates himself says that he knows that he can get out of this alive, but to do so would go against his beliefs.

All in all, Socrates quest for knowledge, no matter the cost, and his view of looking inwards, for knowledge about oneself, all have an impact on people today. For these reasons, I believe that Socrates had great importance on the origins of philosophy.

Bibliography:

Philosophical Classics Volume I: Ancient Philosophy. Forrest E. Baird and Walter Kaufmann. Prentice Hall, 2000.

This paper will explore Erasmus’ understanding of authority.  First of all, Erasmus’ view on the Bible and Scripture will be discussed.  Secondly, what he has to say about the Spirit will be discussed.  Lastly, Erasmus’ view on church will be discussed.  Since Erasmus’ primary focus in his paper was on the Bible, that too will be the focus of this paper.

Based on the fact that Erasmus not only translated, but also read the Bible in the original languages, Erasmus can be thought of having quite an extensive knowledge dealing with the Bible and Scripture.  In his Prefatory Observations, Erasmus says “Among the difficulties, of which not a few crop up in Holy Scripture, there is hardly a more tangled labyrinth than that of ‘free choice’ …” (Rupp and Watson, 35).  It can be assumed that since Erasmus has gone over the Bible so frequently, that when he says this, we can trust him.  This statement therefore makes a good point that will be restated in different words later on in his work; namely that the Bible and Scripture can be looked at different ways.  Due to the obscurity of the Scripture “into which God has not wished us to penetrate more deeply” (Rupp and Watson, 38) there is much that is left for the readers to not know.

Erasmus seems to believe that the authority that controls man is God.  Man does have some say however.  Erasmus begins by pointing out, and explaining the passages in Scripture that point out that free choice exists.  “God made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his own counsel.  He added his commandments and precepts.  If thou wilt observe the commandments, and keep acceptable fidelity forever, they shall preserve thee.  He hath set water and fire before thee; stretch forth thine hand for which thou wilt.  Before man is life and death, good and evil; that which he shall choose shall be given to him.” (Rupp and Watson, 47)  Therefore, as long as the commandments are kept in mind, man can do as it wishes.  Man must remember that God is the final authority however, as he has the say in the end.

The commandments are from God, handed down to man, to help man lead a good life.  Since man is unable to communicate directly with God, man must use the commandments, and Scripture to lead him to the right path.  In fact, man should accept God’s authority without question.  “The whole man should depend on the divine will, place all his hope and confidence in God’s promises, recognize how miserable he is of himself, and love God’s immense mercy, which he freely bestows on us, and submit himself wholly to God’s will, whether he wills to save or destroy” (Rupp and Watson, 86).

Erasmus’ view that man has some say in his destiny is one way in which his view conflicts with Luther.  Erasmus does believe that man has some authority in his own life, although God is the one whose authority is major.

Erasmus also took a look at the Spirit and the church as authorities.  “But let us grant, as indeed we must, that it is possible that the Spirit might reveal to a single humble and unlearned man what he has not revealed to the wise and prudent” (Rupp and Watson, 44).  This quote best describes Erasmus’ view that the Spirit helps in the understanding of the Scripture.  According to Erasmus, the idea that the Spirit is the only thing that you need to help decipher Scripture is ridiculous.  The major objection he has, is if this is true, why are there so many questions about the Scripture?

According to Erasmus, the church is able to help understand the word of God, the Bible.  Without the church, it would be next to impossible to get the truth from the Bible.  The church has an intimate knowledge of the Bible, and is able to pass that information on to its members.  Not only that, but the church also deciphers some of the obscurities Scripture so that it is more easily understood.  “I know how frequently it happens that the greater part overcomes the better: I know those are not always the best things that are approved by the majority” (Rupp and Watson, 43).  In other words, what the common man thinks that he knows is not in this case bound to be correct.

Erasmus best sums it up when he points out that “since different men have assumed different opinions from the same Scripture, each must have looked at it from his own point of view, and in the light of the end he is pursuing” (Rupp and Watson, 86).  In other words, without the church to help guide us towards the correct meaning, there would be a different view of God’s word from each person.  This is one of Erasmus’ main attacks against those who claim that the church is not necessary.  If man relied solely on the Spirit to show the way, there would be far too many ways.

“If it [the Scripture] is so clear, why have so many outstanding men in so many centuries been blind, and in a matter of such importance, as these would appear?” (Rupp and Watson, 44)  This sentence best sums up Erasmus’ ideas and the paper that we wrote.  It ties in the fact that he viewed the Scripture so highly in the quest for authority, his view that since the Scripture is not clear, some kind of help from the outside must help, and that it is not primarily the Spirit.

Erasmus believes that Scripture, the Spirit, and the church have a great deal to do with authority.  As pointed out, Erasmus explores the Bible/Scripture primarily for passages dealing with authority, and shows that man is not a complete slave to God’s will, although God has the first, and final say in matters.  He finds it hard to believe that the Spirit shows common men the correct way to live their lives, rather that the church is necessary to help guide us.

Bibliography:

Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation.  E. Gordon Rupp and Philip S. Watson.  Westminster John Knox Press, 1995.