Socrates and the Socratic Schools

Article i. Socrates and the Socratic Schools

a) Socrates; b) The Socratic Schools.

a) Socr ates (469-399 b. c.)

Life: Socrates—son of Sophroniscus, a sculptor, and 64 Phaenarete, a midwife—was born in Athens. In youth he learned his father’s art, but abandoned it for the opportunity of studying astronomy, geometry, and philosophy, which was offered him by Criton, a rich Athenian. He had a brief military career, in which he bore himself with credit. Moved by what he conceived to be a divine call to improve the intellectual and moral conditions of his time, he became a teacher. He discarded the arts and airs of the Sophists, and met his pupils in familiar converse, showing himself as ready to learn as to teach. His honest and energetic stand upon political questions brought him into disfavor with the powers of civic control. The politicians accused him of impiety, i. e., of corrupting the youth of Athens by teaching them things not in accord with the popular mythology. Condemned to die, he drank the deadly hemlock in the year 399 b. c.

Works: Socrates taught orally and wrote nothing. His pupils, Xenophon and Plato, wrote an account of Socrates and his teaching. Xenophon tells us much of the man, but very little of his philosophy. Plato gives us much philosophy, sometimes interweaving doctrines of his own with those of his master. The combined accounts of Xenophon and Plato give us a fairly reliable and complete knowledge of the Socratic philosophy.

Doctrine: To the doubts of the Sophists Socrates opposed an unshaken faith in reason. Man, he asserts, can know things with truth and certainty. The human mind is a storehouse of truth waiting to be developed, or, more accurately, the mind is pregnant with conceived truth, and its concepts need only to be brought to birth (i. e., recognized and realized) and man will have true and certain knowledge fitted to all his needs. Let a man but know what is in his mind, let him know himself, and he will be wise. “Know thyself!” was the great Socratic precept. Socrates’ method is called the heuristic or finding method because it is designed to find the truths latent in the mind.

This method involves two processes, called, respectively, the ironic and the maieutic process.

1— The first, or ironic, process serves to make the seeker after knowledge “clear his mental decks for action” ; it rids the mind of prejudice and misinformation which block the realization of truth; it leads to a humble and sincere confession of utter ignorance. Such a confession is prerequisite to the realization of knowledge. Applying the ironic process, Socrates would assume a very humble air when a subject of discussion was raised, and would put to the speaker many respectful questions, as though he were struck with admiration at the wisdom of the speaker and had perfect confidence in his ability to impart information. But the questions were always shrewd and wily, and the speaker would presently find himself involved in a maze of self-contradictions. Socrates would then gently point out the state of affairs and force the speaker to admit that he had been talking nonsense, that, in fact, he knew nothing of the matter he had been glibly discussing. Thus the ironical questioning of Socrates would lead to the necessary confession of ignorance.

2— Having cleared the ground by the ironic process, Socrates would employ the second, or maieutic, process to draw truth out of the mind of the pupil. The subject would be freely discussed in dialogue or conversation. Dialogue, according to Socrates, is the only proper means of working truth clearly and recognizably out of the mind. Suppose, for instance, that the pupil wished to know the nature of virtue. Socrates would use the ironic process to clear the mind of the inquirer of all hazy, inadequate, and mistaken notions already formed on the subject. Then, applying the maieutic, he would engage with the pupil in dialogue, directing the discussion in such a manner that various examples of what is called “virtue” would be considered, examined, compared, studied in their points of resemblance and difference. During this discussion the mind would delve beneath mere appearances, and seeming resemblances in the examples studied would be cast aside as of no consequence, while essential resemblances would be retained for further study. Gradually there would emerge a clear and precise notion of “virtue.” This manner of working out an idea by the study of various exemplifications of it is called induction. An idea once so worked out can be accurately defined. Knowledge made up of things clearly known and accurately defined is unchangeably true, and constitutes science. Here at once we ask : Where did the mind get the concepts which the maieutic process brings to birth? Were these concepts stored in the mind by the Creator and born in man? Probably that is what Socrates believed, although he never declared in so many words that concepts are inborn in man (innatism). Socrates taught the existence of one God, supreme and allperfect, the efficient (producing) cause and the final cause of the universe. In religious practice, however, he seems to have conformed to the ritual of the current mythology. It is probable that Socrates believed that God made the world out of matter which existed without beginning (eternal matter). Still, he does not identify God with the world (pantheism). He teaches that God is everywhere present in the world, and that He directs and governs it (Providence). He also teaches that the world is the best possible world (optimism). Man is made of body and soul. The soul is distinct from the body, and is like to God in memory, understanding, indivisibility, and immortality. Man’s highest good is happiness, and this is to be achieved by the practice of virtue. Now, knowledge and virtue are one and the same. Sin is always the product of ignorance; if a man knows what is right and true (knowledge) he cannot help but choose it and act in consistent accordance with it (virtue). Thus all study, all striving after knowledge, is also striving after virtue ; all study is ethical study. “Know thyself !” is not only the fundamental intellectual principle; it is also the basic moral precept.

Remarks: Socrates makes self-knowledge the foundation of all true and certain knowledge (science). For, he says, self-knowledge means knowledge of the concepts latent in the mind, and in these there is changeless truth. Here, at least byimplication, Socrates teaches the mistaken doctrine of innat-ism. Knowledge is not inborn in man, nor is it the product of the mind’s spontaneous activity, but it is formed in the mind by the power of intellect elaborating the findings of the senses. Socrates mistakenly identifies knowledge and virtue, for the will, and not the understanding, is supreme in the choice of moral right and wrong. Nevertheless, Socrates deserves great credit for his attempt to build up a system of ethics (moral science) and to give it a rational foundation. The service of Socrates to philosophy was very great. He sanely discussed the critical question raised by the Sophists, and tried to determine the manner in which the mind can have truth and certainty—in a word, he tried to fix the conditions of knowledge. He introduced the valuable philosophic process called induction, and showed the value and the necessity of clear definition. He taught that science is the sum-total of human knowledge which is changelessly true. He tried to establish a rational basis for ethics. He was the first Greek philosopher to offer a rational refutation of pantheism, materialism, and skepticism; as he was the first in Greece to assert the existence of one supreme God, distinct from the world, and ruling it by His Providence. He rightly taught the immortality of the soul, determined the last end of man, and the rule of conduct. For all its errors, the Socratic philosophy was an enormous step forward in the development of the philosophic method (speculation), and we may say that Socrates laid the foundations of true philosophy.

b) The Socr atic School s. The followers of Socrates are grouped into several Schools. The Major Socratic School was the Academy of Plato, which will be discussed in the second article of this Chapter. The Minor Socratic Schools commingled the doctrines of Socrates with those of earlier philosophers. Such Schools were the following :

1— The Megar ian School , founded by Euclid of Megara, combined the Socratic doctrine of concepts with Parmenides’ theory of changeless being, and so made the essences of things represented in concepts the only reality, and the world of sense an illusion. This School used dialectic to excess; its members were wont to spin out long chains of subtle and specious arguments (eristic method) in proof of their theory. For this reason the School is sometimes called the Eristic School. Exponents of this School were : Eubulides, Stilpo, Diodorus Cronus.

2— The School of Cynics combined the ethical doctrine of Socrates with the theory of Gorgias the Sophist. It held that virtue alone is good, and it made virtue consist in absolute indifference to things external. The Cynics scoffed at noble birth, honor, riches, marriage, government, and even common decency. The name “Cynic” is derived by historians from the Greek kyon, a dog,—for the Cynics were a snarling set,—and also from Cynosarges, the city in which the School was established. The chief exponent of the Cynic philosophy was Antisthenes, disciple of Gorgias and then of Socrates. Other names associated with this School are: Diogenes of Sinope, Crates, Menippus.

3— The El ean School was much at one with the Megarian School. It taught a sophistical doctrine in which there was latent pantheism. The School was founded at Elis—a fact which explains its name—but was removed in the 3 century B. c. to Eretria, and thereafter it was known as the Eretrian School. The founder of the School was Phædo, a pupil of Socrates. Menedemus was a notable exponent of the doctrines of the School.

4— The Cyr enaic School , named from the city of Cyrene where it was founded, took the dictum of Socrates that “happi ness is man’s highest good” and interpreted it to mean that man must seek his last end in the refinements of sensual pleasure. Pleasures of mind are, indeed, to be cultivated and enjoyed by those who have the capacity for such enjoyment, but the obvious pleasure which lies within reach of all is that of the senses. Virtue is to be practised ; but “virtue” means no more than moderation in the enjoyment of pleasures. Without moderation, pleasures of sense soon cloy, and become the cause of pain and not of happiness. Virtue requires a man to overcome in himself all fears, hatred, superstition, as things which impede enjoyment. This School is known also as the Hedonist School from its doctrine of pleasure (hedonism). Its chief representative was Aristippus, a pupil of Socrates. Other names associated with the School are: Theodorus Athens, Hegesias of Alexandria, Anniceris.

Remarks: The Minor Socratic Schools do not deserve the name “Socratic” at all. Although these Schools incorporated some Socratic doctrines into their teaching, they commingled these with other and sometimes opposed tenets, and not infrequently they professed theories which Socrates had expressly condemned. They contributed little to the development of philosophy beyond the influence they may have exerted upon the studies of subsequent philosophers. Plato visited the Megarian School, and we find in his doctrine traces of the teachings of Euclid of Megara.