The Apology is Socrates’ classic defense against his accusers, who are of the opinion that he is inimical to the legal and cultural codes of his homeland. He is brought to court to attempt to justify his philosophical views. In doing so, Socrates employs efficient argument, and strives to be honest. He tries to distinguish his oral defense from sophistry. Socrates wants his hearers in the courthouse to see him not simply as one with the gift of garb, but also as a truthful man. Recall in this regard that it was the ancient philosopher, Quintilian, who said that good speaking is a good person speaking well (Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria 12.1.1 online).
This brief review examines the quote: “Socrates commits injustice and is a busybody, in that he investigates the things beneath the earth and in the heavens; makes the weaker argument the stronger, and teaches these things to others” (Plato, Apology 19b-c). To begin with, to “investigate the things beneath the earth and in the heavens” would be to philosophize about ideas that Athenians do not collectively see as part of intellectual culture, such as cosmology and demonism. As an allegory, recall the case of St Thomas More who was tried for being singularly opposed to King Henry’s Title as Supreme Head of the Church in England, even when all the universities and the ecclesiastical authorities of the realm had acceded thereto. (The allegory is taken from the 1966 movie entitled A Man for all Seasons, produced and directed by Fred Zinnemann and written by Robert Bolt.)
In the first few paragraphs of the Apology, Socrates seems to call his accusers envious. They are envious of Socrates because he has been declared by the Oracle of Delphi as being the wisest man in the country. He has also ticked his fellow countrymen off by going to ask them philosophical questions and finding them wanting in knowledge. He has done this with the intention of finding truth because, as a lover of wisdom, he has a natural inclination to seek understanding. However, his interlocutors have been embarrassed at being found less smart than they had thought themselves to be and have consequently hated Socrates for being the occasion of such unflattering self-discovery.
The ideas Socrates communicates appear lofty, transcendent of the theoretical disciplines of Athens, especially of knowledge concerning the local gods. Socrates in any case perceives his responsibility as being to teach the Athenians ethical and metaphysical principles that would ultimately make them better people. He is convinced that this vocation is borne out of his realization that the elite of his country, those who should ordinarily be wise, are actually not quite as wise as they would appear.
Furthermore, to “make the weaker argument the stronger” is to try to usurp the general, standard thinking of the majority of Athenians, founded on their collectively held mores and principles, and supposedly enshrine a new way of thinking a la Socrates. In other words, if one saw the laws and customs of Athens as right and collectively held, and saw the ideas of Socrates as foreign to these previously-held laws and customs, then the ideas of Socrates would be wrong, and consequently dangerous to be taught especially to the youth, for these alien and wrong ideas would corrupt their hearers, lead them astray from the correct ideals of society and undermine the established authority of the realm.
Yet if Socrates “teaches these things to others,” ideas which should ordinarily be the “weaker argument,” for ‘truth’ should be stronger than ‘falsehood,’ and the ‘correct’ ideals of the generality should be mightier than the supposedly erroneous thoughts of one man, he would then be ipso facto trying to “make the weaker argument (his ‘delusions’) the stronger,” effectively as it were substituting an established system of principles with an entirely alien set of codes inferior in quality to the established mores, as his detractors aver. In view of this, Socrates is dangerous, presumptuous and in a sense seditious.
Philosophers like Gorgias, Protagoras and other sophists are in any case the ones who should be accused of “making the weaker argument the stronger.” These philosophers argue based on philosophical relativity, averring that the human mind cannot know truth, but only subjectivity. In some cases, sophists go as far as stating that there is even no truth. A first textual reference is provided subsequently. Protagoras testifies in discussion with Socrates, “This then is my point: It is reasonable to admit everyone as an adviser on this virtue on the grounds that everyone has some share of it. Next I will attempt to show that people do not regard this virtue as natural or self-generated, but as something taught and carefully developed in those in whom it is developed” (Plato, Protagoras 323c).
Another textual reference is from the Apology itself: “There is Gorgias of Leontium, and Prodicus of Ceos, and Hippias of Elis, who go the round of the cities, and are able to persuade the young men to leave their own citizens by whom they might be taught for nothing, and come to them whom they not only pay, but are thankful if they may be allowed to pay them” (Plato, Apology 19e). In the former textual reference, Protagoras is arguing that individuals determine their own truth, and there is no objective reality separate from the individual. In the latter reference, Socrates is trying to show that he is not like the sophists who philosophize for material gain. Rather, his philosophizing is solely aimed at discovering truth.
The rest of this paper will investigate the manner in which Socrates’ philosophizing is similar and different from the philosophical career of the sophists, drawing from relevant passages in the Apology. To begin with, Socrates sees himself as a man of virtue, whose motive in conducting philosophy is a “duty” entrusted to him by the gods, for the benefit of his fellow citizens. He does not teach for money like some sophists do, but only wants his fellow citizens to know better, so that they can act better and ultimately become better people. Consider the following textual reference: “From that time on I interviewed one person after another. I realized with distress and alarm that I was making myself unpopular, but I felt compelled to put my religious duty first” (Plato, Apology 21e).
Another difference between Socrates’ philosophizing and that of the sophists is that Socrates actually believes in the existence of truth, epistemological realism, as opposed to the sophists who are relativistic and admit to no actual existence of truth. In the Apology, Socrates takes pains to explain that he does believe in metaphysical realities, including the existence of gods (Plato, Apology, 26b-28b). This is as opposed to the sophists who do not assert that there are gods. Socrates is not interested in substituting for the truth, but only expanding on it.
More so, Socrates is as fluent as the sophists are. This is a similarity. Both Socrates and the sophists are concerned with ethics and political philosophy. However, Socrates is not simply an orator or rhetorician. He speaks eloquently only because he speaks the truth. Even before he presents his defense to the court, he urges them to see his eloquence not as a means to impress or detract from the truth, but as a vehicle by which he would expound on the truth, according to his virtuous nature (Apology 17a-18b).
In conclusion, Socrates is making a case for his life in Plato’s Apology, but more importantly for truth and for his freedom to philosophize, both of which he considers greater than his life (Plato, Apology 28e-29b). He tries to show that even if he is to die, he would love to keep searching for truth and improving the lives of his fellow citizens through dutiful philosophizing. He is not engaging in cursory investigation or sophistry as others have, and he is not, in my opinion, guilty of the atrocities that his detractors have brought against him. Rather, he is genuinely conducting a career in philosophy that he hopes will have practical merit in uplifting the lives of his fellow countrymen.
No comments:
Post a Comment