Plato's Socrates

¶ … western philosophy, everything that can be known about Socrates' techniques and beliefs is necessarily seen through the conscious lens of Plato. It can be inferred by the fact that Socrates left behind no philosophical writings that his focus was far more personal in manner, and required more direct interaction between individual minds, than any great thinker that followed him. For this reason, modern readers of Plato's works should be skeptical of his presentation of philosophical notions through the argumentative style he attributes to Socrates. Just as Plato's disciple, Aristotle, holds positions that vary wildly from his predecessor, it should be expected that the same is true of Plato and Socrates. Certainly, Plato held some reverence for the "Socratic Method," but the fact that he fundamentally separates its pattern of question and response from the audience by putting it upon a page, suggests that his more powerful allegiance is to the argument itself -- not its subjective impact. So within Plato's dialogues, the Socratic Method seems to be more of a mechanism for extracting Plato's theories, than a demonstration of Socrates' ability to educate. Consequently, Socrates does not come across as a masterful teacher, but still, a masterful philosopher.

The Socratic Method is particularly interesting in that it, unlike most philosophical discourses, seeks to debase beliefs rather than build them up. Instead of offering a linear argument as to the nature of virtue, for example, Socrates -- and subsequently Plato -- begins with commonly held notions and analyzes them in an effort to debunk them. Philosophical reflection, to Socrates, must first begin with a better understanding of our ignorance. Consequently, the reader of Plato's works is presented with a truly unique approach to philosophy that is based upon conversation and self-reflection. At the beginning of "Apology" Socrates introduces his style of argumentation when he says, "From me you will hear the whole truth, though not, by Zeus, gentlemen, expressed in embroidered and stylized phrases like theirs [his accusers], but things spoken at random and expressed in the first words that come to mind, for I put my trust in the justice of what I say, and let none of you expect anything else." (Apology, 17c). Accordingly, Plato's writings take a character on a journey through their personally held beliefs, as Socrates endeavors to help them arrive at a conclusion that he has already reached -- consequently the reader is taken on this journey as well. One of the goals of this method, clearly, is to question many of the notions that most people tend to take for granted. Generally, Plato ventures to reveal that uncritically accepted notions about philosophically important concepts can lead to logical catastrophe.

However, the chief limitation of the manner by which Socrates is expressed through Plato is that his lessons are no longer personalized with respect to the audience; they are only personal with respect to the characters Plato generates. The power of Socrates' technique is that it forces him to investigate many of his centrally held beliefs simultaneously with the person he is communicating; any questions that arise from his audience, or possible objections to his line of reasoning, must be addressed. This capacity is necessarily lacking when it is placed upon paper because any questions or objections that might be evoked in the reader inevitably go unanswered. For example, when Socrates argues, "So one may say this about everything; all other human activities depend on the soul, and those of the soul itself depend on wisdom if they are to be good. According to this argument the beneficial would be wisdom, and we say that virtue is beneficial?" Meno merely replies, "Certainly." (Meno, 89a). The issue here is that readers, viewing this line of reasoning from a differing perspective, could easily raise a number of questions that Socrates, in his discussion with Meno, is not forced to consider.

First, Socrates' reliance upon the soul to lead into the discussion of virtue could be attacked upon the assertion that insufficient evidence exists to contend that there are such things as souls. Plato believes that souls must exist because they explain the competing inclinations people can possess; Socrates' base desires may indicate to him that drinking the hemlock is undesirable, but the higher capacities of his soul direct him otherwise. Meno and Crito fail to sufficiently question this line of reasoning, but a reader might ask Socrates if there could be a more physical explanation for these internal conflicts. Second, a reader could also take a different point-of-view regarding the elevated status of wisdom and knowledge. A Christian might contend that virtue is singularly based upon faith in God, and that any further investigations into the workings of the world are fundamentally irrelevant. However, Socrates is necessarily unable to account for these ideas because he has been bound by Plato to static logic.