Socrates as Navia Puts It, "There Are

Socrates As Navia puts it, "there are not many things that are known about Socrates with certainty," (15). Historians do know the philosophers years of birth and death (469 BCE and 399 BCE, respectively), and the fact that he was poisoned by an Athenian jury much as Plato described the matter in his Apology. As with Jesus, Socrates life is pieced together by the writings of other people, many of whom did not actually know the philosopher or even live during the same era.

Beck claims that the lack of reliable historiography related to the life of Socrates is known as the "Socratic Problem." Navia states that the Socratic Problem also entails the fact that anything that is known about Socrates from one source is readily contradicted by another. The Socratic Problem can never be solved, because there are no definitive sources. Socrates did not leave behind an autobiography, and even if he did, it might be considered problematic as well.

Furthermore, Socrates often features as a fictionalized character in works such as Aristophanes' The Clouds. Therefore, Socrates is as much a legend as he is a real person. One thing that can be known for sure is that Socrates was a "man of great complexity," (Beck 1). Socrates was a teacher and a philosopher, possibly an eccentric, and certainly a controversial figure.

It has been suggested that any overlap between the major sources of information about Socrates constitutes absolute truth, but Nails notes that this approach is flawed because there is actually "too little overlap" (1). The four major sources of information about Socrates include Plato, Xenophon, Aristophanes, and Aristotle. Adams provides a helpful table delineating some of the core similarities and differences between three of the four primary sources on the life of Socrates. All three agree that Socrates was a teacher of some sort; a mentor, intellectual, and philosopher.

However, the subjects of Socrates' teachings are up for debate, as Aristophanes claims that Socrates taught the natural sciences; whereas Xenophon and Plato did not discuss Socrates as teaching the natural sciences. Aristophanes claims that Socrates took money for his services, arguably an issue that might have discredited the teachings. Yet Plato and Xenophon deny that Socrates took money for his services.

Xenophon and Plato believe that Socrates did have some belief in the gods, but Aristophanes accused Socrates of being a complete atheist and iconoclast in order to discredit him entirely. Finally, Adams points out that the manner of Socrates' death was framed as martyrdom by Plato; but not by Xenophon or Aristophanes. Xenophon saw Socrates' death as being a simple, willful suicide. Aristophanes believed that Socrates was a "fraud," (Adams 1).

Navia claims that many historians find the Aristophanes version of Socrates the most believable; but therein lies the problem of accuracy as no one source contains definitive or irrefutable evidence. Any historian preferring Platonic writings would invariably favor Plato's account; Xenophon's writings have attracted the most negative attention (Nails). According to Beck, Socrates "claimed no doctrine of his own," and was more concerned with how information, knowledge, or answers are found than the actual facts (1). Thus, the Socratic method of perpetual doubting and questioning took precedence over scientific evidence.

This is why Aristophanes' criticism of Socrates often seems vacuous: the philosopher did not claim absolutes and therefore presented no direct threat to established knowledge.