English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Every position of Socrates is presented by Plato and not by Socrates himself. Plato does not write, in his engaging and dramatic dialogues, about any Socratic humility between listener and speaker when looking for truth. Plato tells us there must always be a winner and a loser, a dialectic. Would it be a reinterpretation Socrates if we were to assign humility to Socrates in our study of him today?

2006-08-02 06:47:39 · 5 answers · asked by clophad 2 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

Socrates used give and take, rather than the dialectic, right? Plato describes it as dialectic.

2006-08-02 07:20:39 · update #1

5 answers

Plato wrote in dialogues, as you noted. However, readers are not meant to take the dialogues as conversations that actually occurred. Rather, it is Plato's method of simultaneously presenting Socrates' beliefs and answering objections to them. Since they are Plato's creations, and not the strict documentation of history, we are also meant to take into account every suggestion and nuance in the dialogues. So although Plato may not directly talk about Socrates' humility, he intends us to "pick up" Socrates' spirit of humility in the dialogues.

2006-08-02 07:10:06 · answer #1 · answered by mle_trogdor2000 2 · 0 0

Hello dear!
You are mostly correct! Plato was not the only one who wrote about Socrates; others also wrote about Socrates, even dialogs!
Socrates was capable for many, especially when he was trying to activate the brains of the listeners and his pupils!
As a matter of fact, Socrates, through Plato expressed that to loose at a dialog is better, since that way the looser learns more!
Also, it is not Plato who requests a "winner" during a dialog, but it is human behavior and dialog's rule!

2006-08-02 14:05:43 · answer #2 · answered by soubassakis 6 · 0 0

It depends how you define humility. After all, Socrates never claimed he knew all the answers to philosophy. He even said that the only difference between him and other people was that he knew he was ignorant, while others were oblivious to it.

But I agree to some extent that Socrates was quite content with shooting down other people's arguments, while offering very little of his own ideas in return. Something like a movie critic who can only criticize but can't write a good script himself.

2006-08-02 14:11:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think Plato did write about it. Read the Apology, Euthyphro, Crito and Phaedo, he never acted arrogant and he did submit to their authority to the death.

2006-08-02 14:10:41 · answer #4 · answered by tigranvp2001 4 · 0 0

Very good observation.

2006-08-02 13:58:08 · answer #5 · answered by the holy divine one 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers