Sophocles, Plato, and Aristotle: philosophical and dramatic legacies

Education and Proper Behavior for the Ancient Greeks

Sophocles, Aristotle and Plato all made enormous contributions both to their contemporaries' decisions on how to lead their lives, and also to our modern day understanding of how the Greeks lived. Of course, this is in addition to their contributions to western philosophy and political understanding.

Sophocles' Antigone is a perfect example of a work that defines the Greek theory of education, grounded in rules for behavior. In Antigone, contempt of death allows a weak woman to conquer a powerful ruler. Therein lies the crux: Death, for Sophocles, should not be a motivating factor or fear-inducing behavior modifier. Rather, humans should move forward with their goals and ideals in the face of death.

On the flip side of the coin, the powerful ruler is far too proud of his wisdom and ventures into hubris to pit it against the divine concept of law and human sentiment, and learns too late, via the destruction of his house, that Fate will eventually bring punishment upon outrage.

These are the most powerful behavior concepts in Sohpocles. First, divine law is supreme. Any laws that man constructs may be well-thought, fair and just, but divine law trumps them at every turn. Any attempts to subvert or hijack divine law.

Also, hubris is the least desired element in human behavior. Pride in one's own wisdom, strength or prowess is the surest route to downfall. Sophocles desires humans to behave in such a manner that hubris is literally checked at the door. Here, the powerful ruler is defeated not only by his contradiction of divine law, but by his hubris and the woman's strength without hubris.

Finally, Fate reigns supreme. To use the catch phrase, from Fate, "one can run, but one can't hide." Regardless of what the ruler might have done, once he flew in the face of hubris and human sentiment and divine law, Fate would eventually catch up to him and punish him. That, for Sophocles, is the single greatest motivator - and indeed predictor - of human behavior. We must comport ourselves in a matter consistent with an understanding that our conflicting behaviors with the divine laws will result in punishment by Fate.

Plato took a similar, but slightly different, stance on human behavior. In penning the Republic, Plato saw a Greek society filled with corruption and untruth, and decided to commit his life to helping design a society moved forward by truth and justice. For instance, the work is a rectification of Socrates as a just man killed by unjust men and beliefs.

Again, Plato defends Socrates on his support for divine law. In fact, Plato writes that his early hopes for statesmanship had been defined by the ill behavior that resulted in Socrates' death.

The main points Plato fought in Socrates' death were the fact that the restored Athenian "democracy" felt that Socrates introduced new Gods to the city, engaged in unusual religious practices and was, on the whole, undemocratic. Plato pinned this ill-beliefs down to their purest form: unjust behavior.

For Plato, logic ruled all in political thought, as is evidenced by his work, Laws. He believed, a bit more than Sophocles, that through behavior, humans can actually change fate. Fate does control, yes, but only punishes those who fly in the face of all that is just and divine. For instance, Plato would agree with Sophocles that Fate would have a hand in punishing those who rule via hubris, or supreme confidence in their wisdom and strengths. However, Plato believed that through acting justly and with proper political and logical behavior, humans can actually reroute fate and escape its wrath.

Aristotle was, arguably, the most different in his beliefs on how humans should behave, and the construction of their education, in this group of Plato, Sophocles and Aristotle.

By setting up objective criteria for human behavior, Aristotle prepares the foundation for his aristocratic political views. Perhaps the part of Aristotle's Politics most offensive to the general concept of Greek democracy is his defense of slavery. Aristotle, in that view, was a true aristocrat (yes, hence the term) as far as patterns of human behavior go.

Aristotle suggests the existence of natural slaves, "those who are as different [from other men] as the soul from the body or man from the beast,... who [participate] in reason only to the extent of perceiving it, but [do] not have it." This justification of slavery, however, does not follow from Aristotle's logic but rests on an outside claim that such slaves by nature actually exist.

Aristotle's narrative of the most ideal regime and the perfect human behavior and education further demonstrates the aristocratic leanings of his theory on justness. In this regime, the aristocracy of gentlemen, only a small class of elites are citizens and share in the responsibilities of guiding behavior, while the majority of the people are slaves, doing manual work to maintain the city and produce the necessary sustainable living. This process sounds a lot like Sparta's ideal.