THE EXAMINED LIFE EXAMINED AN INVESTIGATION OF SOCRATES AS CHARACTERIZED IN THE “FORGOTTEN” DIALOGUES AND APOLOGY A THESIS Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Political Science Colorado College Professor Timothy Fuller, Advisor ________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Arts By Samantha Albert May 2015 2 Acknowledgements I would like to sincerely thank Professor Timothy Fuller for so generously supporting me through my thesis project. I am grateful for his sage advice, judicious observations and most importantly, for encouraging me to live the examined life. I would also like to thank my family for their unwavering love and encouragement during my four years at CC. 3 Colorado College Honor Code On my honor I have neither given nor received unauthorized aid on this thesis project. Samantha Albert 4 Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 5 Socrates as Stingray, Midwife, and Gadfly ...................................................................... 6 Examination of Hipparchus ................................................................................................. 8 Examination of Minos .......................................................................................................... 15 Examination of Lovers ......................................................................................................... 22 Examination of Cleitophon ................................................................................................. 26 Examination of Alcibiades I ............................................................................................... 28 Examination of Apology ...................................................................................................... 45 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 55 5 Introduction Many of us may think that we know Socrates. At one point in our lives we may have been given a glimpse of this man through his portrayal in well-known Platonic dialogues like the Republic, Gorgias, or Apology. While these are all important works that shed light on Socrates as philosopher and teacher, they do not represent the man in his entirety. My goal in this paper is to produce a more “multi- dimensional” characterization of Socrates by examining several “forgotten” Platonic dialogues. The intention of this paper is to produce a more comprehensive characterization of Socrates so as to examine whether Athens was justified in ultimately trying Socrates and putting him to death. I seek to assess how these “forgotten” dialogues shed light upon the conflict between Socrates and Athens and fundamentally how they elucidate the conflict between philosophy and politics. Understanding these conflicts should help contribute to a better understanding of Socrates, his method of enquiry, and his ability to teach others. While Socrates can be characterized in many different ways, some of the best characterization techniques are the use of three analogies, the stingray, the midwife, and the gadfly. In light of his trial in Apology, these analogies are a catalyst for the various ways that Socrates can be best understood throughout all Platonic dialogues. Because these analogies are a good representation of Socrates’s character, they will be used throughout this paper. A brief explanation of each analogy is necessary before I begin my expositions of the various “forgotten” dialogues. 6 Socrates as Stingray, Midwife, and Gadfly The stingray analogy originates from Plato’s dialogue Meno, in which the individual that Socrates is engaged in conversation with recognizes the perplexity that Socrates seems to create in others. The comrade engaged with Socrates exclaims that he is “like the broad torpedo fish [stingray], for it makes anyone who comes close and touches it feel numb, and you seem to have had that kind of effect on me, for both my mind and tongue are numb, and I have no answer to give you” (80b). In other words, Socrates seems to instill a sort of paralysis in others by engaging them in dialogue. Socrates responds by stating that “if the torpedo fish [stingray] is itself numb and so makes others numb, then I resemble it, but not otherwise, for I myself do not have the answer when I perplex others, but I am more perplexed than anyone when I cause perplexity in others” (80c). This analogy helps to characterize Socrates as a man who has the power to paralyze thought, both in others and in himself. This is important because it shows that he is not afraid to ask perplexing questions—to make others truly think and to experience discomfort in dialoguing. Socrates points out, however, that it is not simply numbing paralysis that he may instill in others, but also within himself. This shows that there are no evident answers in the pursuit of wisdom, as Socrates also struggles with the difficult questions that he raises in each dialogue. The midwife analogy comes from Plato’s dialogue Theaetetus. In discussing midwifery with a comrade, Socrates states that in his version of midwifery, “I attend men and not women; and look after their souls when they are in labour, and not after their bodies: and the triumph of my art is in thoroughly examining whether the 7 thought which the mind of the young man brings forth is a false idol or a noble and true birth” (150 b-c). This analogy best explains Socrates as a man who allows others to realize their own thoughts on their quest for wisdom. Socrates does not engage in dialogue to offer answers to others, but to allow others to discover their own answers. Socrates as midwife helps to birth one’s thoughts and recollections. His role as midwife prompts others to recall the things that they may have known before they entered the bodily world. The gadfly analogy originates from Apology. In responding to his accusations during his trial, Socrates states that he was “attached to this city by the god—though it seems a ridiculous thing to say—as upon a great and noble horse which was somewhat sluggish because of its size and needed to be stirred up by a kind of gadfly…. I never cease to rouse each and every one of you, to persuade and reproach you all day long and everywhere I find myself in your company” (30e). Socrates likens himself to a gadfly in the same sense that a gadfly has the ability to jolt a horse. Through Socrates’s method of dialogue, he is able to engage with others and allow them to contemplate questions that they may otherwise have failed to acknowledge. Throughout this process Socrates, as gadfly, has the opportunity to insight a sort of awakening in others, by hopefully allowing them to realize new and thought provoking ideas. Sometimes this works out well, and individuals leave Socrates with a renewed sense of understanding and realization. More often than not however, Socrates increases other’s confusion and puzzlement, by failing to “answer” the questions that they ask. The feeling that Socrates has somehow “failed” them in answering their questions has contributed to a negative perception of 8 Socrates, one that is a theme throughout the following “forgotten” dialogues, and one that contributes to the ultimate trial of Socrates as seen in Apology. Examination of Hipparchus Plato’s Hipparchus begins with the questions, “what is the love of gain?” and “who are the lovers of gain?” (225a) Characteristically some Socratic dialogues begin with the “what is…?” question. This is an important recognition because, as seen in Hipparchus, Socrates makes it clear that he is not simply seeking an example of gain, or justice, etc., but wants to know what the core meaning of gain is—evident in the “what is” question. Ultimately the question is, what is gain in and of itself? Key to this argument is the fundamental difference between what appears to be gain and what real gain actually is. One of the points that Socrates will make is that, while everyone is a lover of gain, moreover there are different types of gain that can be pursued. In response to Socrates’s gain question, the Comrade responds by stating that he believes the lovers of gain to be those who think it meaningful to make gains from things that are worthless (225a). While the Comrade attempts to define gain here, at this point he does not actually answer the “what is the love of gain?” question. Instead, the Comrade makes it seem as if those that like worthwhile things do not love gain. Furthermore, no one is going to pursue something that they know is not worth pursuing. Thus what is required is a genuine knowledge of what something is, not of what it appears to be. While all human beings have a drive to gain something, there is a hierarchy of gain that can be pursued. A lack of knowledge 9 about this hierarchy of gain can sometimes lead to a mistaken view of what should be gained, therefore leading to a misunderstanding of what gain actually is. A common theme throughout the Platonic dialogues is a character’s inability or lack of desire to answer Socrates’s initial question. The Comrade’s lack of appropriate response to the “what is” question leads Socrates to respond by asking whether those who think it is meaningful to make gains from worthless things actually know that the things being pursued are worthless. The Comrade responds by claiming that those pursuing gain do in fact know that they are