Spoiler
…You must have known Chaerephon; he was early a friend of mine, and also a friend of yours, for he shared in the recent exile of the people, and returned with you. Well, Chaerephon, as you know, was very impetuous in all his doings, and he went to Delphi and boldly asked the oracle to tell him whether -- as I was saying, I must beg you not to interrupt -- he asked the oracle to tell him whether anyone was wiser than I was, and the Pythian prophetess answered, that there was no man wiser. Chaerephon is dead himself; but his brother, who is in this court, will confirm the truth of what I am saying.
Why do I mention this? Because I am going to explain to you why I have such an evil name. When I heard the answer, I said to myself, What can the god mean? for I know that I have no wisdom, small or great. What then can he mean when he says that I am the wisest of men? And yet he is a god, and cannot lie; that would be against his nature. After long consideration, I thought of a method of trying the question. I reflected that if I could only find a man wiser than myself, then I might go to the god with a refutation in my hand. I should say to him, 'Here is a man who is wiser than I am; but you said that I was the wisest.'
Accordingly I went to one who had the reputation of wisdom, and observed him -- his name I need not mention; he was a politician whim I selected for examination -- and the result was as follows: When I began to talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he was thought wise by many, and still wiser by himself; and thereupon I tried to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise; and the consequence was that he hated me, and this enmity was shared by several who were present and heard me. So I left him, saying to myself, as I went away: Well, although I do not suppose that either of us knows anything really beautiful and good, I am better off than he is, -- for he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows; I neither know nor think that I know. In this latter particular, then, I seem to have slightly the advantage of him. Then I went to another who had still higher pretensions to wisdom, and my conclusion was exactly the same. Whereupon I made another enemy of him, and many others besides him.
Then I went to one man after another, being not unconscious of the enmity which I provoked, and I lamented and feared this: but necessity was laid upon me, -- the word of God, I thought, ought to be considered first. And I said to myself, Go I must to all who appear to know, and fin out the meaning of the oracle. And I swear to you, Athenians by the dog I swear! -- for I must tell you the truth -- the result of my mission was just this: I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish; and that others less esteemed were really wiser and better. I will tell you the tale of my wanderings and of the 'Herculean' labors, as I may call them, which I endured only to find at last the oracle irrefutable. After the politicians, I went to the poets; tragic, dithyrambic, and all sorts. And there, I said to myself, you will find out that you are more ignorant than they are. Accordingly, I took them some of the most elaborate passages in their own writings, and asked what was the meaning of them -- thinking that the would teach me something. Will you believe me ? I am almost ashamed to confess the truth, but I must say that there is hardly a person present who would not have talked better about their poetry than they did themselves. Then I knew that not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration; they are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them. The poets appeared to me to be much in the same case; and I further observed that upon the strength of their poetry they believed themselves to be the wisest of men in other things in which they were not wise. So I departed, conceiving myself to be superior to them for the same reason that I was superior to the politicians.
At last I went to the artisans. I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things; and here I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was. But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets; -- because they were good workmen they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed they wisdom; and therefore I asked myself on behalf of the oracle, whether I would like to be as I was, neither having their knowledge nor their ignorance, or like them both; and I made answer to myself and to the oracle that I was better off as I was.
Why do I mention this? Because I am going to explain to you why I have such an evil name. When I heard the answer, I said to myself, What can the god mean? for I know that I have no wisdom, small or great. What then can he mean when he says that I am the wisest of men? And yet he is a god, and cannot lie; that would be against his nature. After long consideration, I thought of a method of trying the question. I reflected that if I could only find a man wiser than myself, then I might go to the god with a refutation in my hand. I should say to him, 'Here is a man who is wiser than I am; but you said that I was the wisest.'
Accordingly I went to one who had the reputation of wisdom, and observed him -- his name I need not mention; he was a politician whim I selected for examination -- and the result was as follows: When I began to talk with him, I could not help thinking that he was not really wise, although he was thought wise by many, and still wiser by himself; and thereupon I tried to explain to him that he thought himself wise, but was not really wise; and the consequence was that he hated me, and this enmity was shared by several who were present and heard me. So I left him, saying to myself, as I went away: Well, although I do not suppose that either of us knows anything really beautiful and good, I am better off than he is, -- for he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows; I neither know nor think that I know. In this latter particular, then, I seem to have slightly the advantage of him. Then I went to another who had still higher pretensions to wisdom, and my conclusion was exactly the same. Whereupon I made another enemy of him, and many others besides him.
Then I went to one man after another, being not unconscious of the enmity which I provoked, and I lamented and feared this: but necessity was laid upon me, -- the word of God, I thought, ought to be considered first. And I said to myself, Go I must to all who appear to know, and fin out the meaning of the oracle. And I swear to you, Athenians by the dog I swear! -- for I must tell you the truth -- the result of my mission was just this: I found that the men most in repute were all but the most foolish; and that others less esteemed were really wiser and better. I will tell you the tale of my wanderings and of the 'Herculean' labors, as I may call them, which I endured only to find at last the oracle irrefutable. After the politicians, I went to the poets; tragic, dithyrambic, and all sorts. And there, I said to myself, you will find out that you are more ignorant than they are. Accordingly, I took them some of the most elaborate passages in their own writings, and asked what was the meaning of them -- thinking that the would teach me something. Will you believe me ? I am almost ashamed to confess the truth, but I must say that there is hardly a person present who would not have talked better about their poetry than they did themselves. Then I knew that not by wisdom do poets write poetry, but by a sort of genius and inspiration; they are like diviners or soothsayers who also say many fine things, but do not understand the meaning of them. The poets appeared to me to be much in the same case; and I further observed that upon the strength of their poetry they believed themselves to be the wisest of men in other things in which they were not wise. So I departed, conceiving myself to be superior to them for the same reason that I was superior to the politicians.
At last I went to the artisans. I was conscious that I knew nothing at all, as I may say, and I was sure that they knew many fine things; and here I was not mistaken, for they did know many things of which I was ignorant, and in this they certainly were wiser than I was. But I observed that even the good artisans fell into the same error as the poets; -- because they were good workmen they thought that they also knew all sorts of high matters, and this defect in them overshadowed they wisdom; and therefore I asked myself on behalf of the oracle, whether I would like to be as I was, neither having their knowledge nor their ignorance, or like them both; and I made answer to myself and to the oracle that I was better off as I was.
Socrates readily admits that he knows nothing at all. But he finds that, surprisingly, most people don't know anything that he doesn't, and yet aren't capable of admitting their ignorance. He concludes that he rather be ignorant and know that he is, than be ignorant and believe himself wise.
DWill, I think Plato's view of perfect Ideals excludes the possibility of a relativistic view of the world. Socrate's pretension of ignorance presupposes the existence of Truth, which neither he nor anyone can claim to fully comprehend.DWill wrote:It's very possible that in Plato there are separate currents of thought: non-dualism, which would tend toward a relativistic view, and dualism, which would go toward absolutism.
That's interesting.DWill wrote:The author believes that Socrates tended to develop only provisional beliefs through his method of dialogue rather than to establish certainties dogmatically.
Well, Socrates is notoriously unsystematic throughout Plato's dialogues.. he tends to contradict himself. I also think he must have been something of an ass to try and talk to if you thought you knew anything, so I wouldn't put it above him to play devil's advocate for the joy of proving you wrong.
There are several explanations for why Socrates is so contradictory though. One stance is that Plato begins writing about Socrates after he is unjustly condemned to die. Initially his dialogues represent real conversations and expound Socrate's own beliefs, however in later dialogues Plato uses Socrates as a mouthpiece for his own philosophy.
Another possible, not necessarily exclusive, explanation in the contradiction between dialogues is that not all the writings attributed to Plato were actually written by Plato. Many might have been written by his students in his name, or might have been modified by them. Others may be forgeries, or simply misattributed works.
Then there's the whole relationship between Plato and Socrates, which gets really interesting. There are literally volumes written on what Plato's relation to Socrates actually was; because astonishingly there is no evidence to support the claim that Plato was Socrates' disciple. Plato barely mentions himself in his own dialogues, and many of the conversations take place before Plato was even born. It's generally accepted that Plato's two brothers (bet you didn't know he had two brothers did ya
) formed a part of Socrates' circle of followers, but whether Plato himself was a part of this group, or whether he simply recollected some of Socrates' conversations is unclear. It's even been suggested that Plato himself was nonexistent, a sort of blanket name used by various authors. I'll read that paper you linked, an eastern perspective on Socrates seems really interesting.
..I realize I'm making a lot of claims, and if anyone is honestly interested in reading about this stuff, I'll happily provide you with sources, but please don't make me go look for my old books in vain xD.
Fact is, I haven't a doubt in my mind that Plato sought, not to establish truth, but to discover it.DWill wrote:that the purpose of the dialogues is more spiritual and more about the journey than about the establishment of metaphysical truths that became so important in Western tradition.
Chris: I'm totally in.
