2008-2-PHI130.Essay.1

2008-2-PHI130 Essay 1

Question

What is the aim of the Socratic dialectic? What method does it use to reach this aim? Use an example taken from the Reader (Apology of Socrates), or another text by Plato, as a case study.

You must draw on the relevant readings from the unit guide (as well as some from the further reading list) and on the material discussed in lectures (as well as your own thoughts and/or responses to the readings and lecture material) to write your essay.

Draft

Socrates was of the view that wisdom is to know that one does not truly know anything at all, and he aimed to demonstrate this through his dialectic. The Socratic dialectic confronted assertions of knowledge or wisdom by drawing out their implicit contradiction under analysis, and Socrates held this contradiction to point to the ignorance or folly of those who lay claim to various forms of wisdom. His professed aim was to show those who believed they had wisdom that they should not be so sure of themselves. Through his method Socrates did not so much endeavour to find truth, so much as he aimed to expose ignorance, falsehood, or oversimplification.

Since his own time people have objected to Socrates' dialectic as being little more than sophistic trickery, or linguistic sleight of hand. At his trial Socrates protested that he would be accused of wilful deception by skill of speech, claiming that he was in fact not at all skilful in speech (Plato, 45). His accusers may have been among the first, but they were not alone in suspecting Socrates of trickery. Vlastos catalogues numerous similar objections from a variety of further sources, so being scholars of high repute (Vlastos 1991, 132).

The Socratic Method is a form of discussion, or dialogue, wherein one who would hazard a claim to knowledge, or even opinion, would have his claim dissected through a guided process of interrogation. The method involves analysing claims and seeking confirmation or clarification of derivative assertions given in the form of questions. These questions and their answers provide a mechanism through which the complexities and subtleties of the subject matter can be illuminated for further consideration. Eventually the web of posited and accepted truths of the claimant will be shown to contain a contradiction, and thereupon Socrates will have achieved his rather unsatisfying and aporetic end.

Plato records in many of his works Socrates applying his method. For example in the Apology of Socrates where Socrates defends himself at his trial. In this record of Socrates' speech he is witnessed to begin with a somewhat lengthy monologue wherein he broadly outlines the circumstances of his case and seeks to persuade the jury that he be permitted to ply his own style of language. He laments in the beginning, too, that a great many of his accusers are not present to be subject to his examination of their prior slanderous claims.

Eventually Socrates finishes with the contextual and historical remarks concerning his position and begins to respond to the specific accusation made against him by Meletus, that "Socrates is guilty of corrupting the minds of the young, and of believing in deities of his own invention instead of the gods recognised by the State." This accusation falls under immediate analysis with Socrates drawing out the first charge, that he may proceed in questioning Meletus regarding it, so as to eventually show that corrupting the minds of the young would result in a contradiction. "Come now, Meletus, tell me this. You regard it as supremely important, do you not, that our young people should be exposed to the best possible influence?" Meletus answers the leading and pointed question with a brief "I do," and there forth Socrates is on his home turf, applying his method in full swing.

Throughout the Apology, even as Meletus interrupts or refuses to cooperate, Socrates shapes his defence in the form of question and answer. He poses questions before he provides answers to them, he quotes others who have previously asked questions, he suggests that others present might have questions such as given by his example, and he also puts questions directly to his adversary. In this way he demonstrates the Socratic method, although perhaps not so well as he might do in a forum more receptive of his style. Indeed, Socrates goes to some length to defend his manner of discourse throughout the apology, for instance:

I ask you to examine with me, gentlemen, the line of reasoning which leads me to this conclusion. You, Meletus, will oblige us by answering my questions. Will you all kindly remember, as I requested at the beginning, not to interrupt if I conduct the discussion in my customary way?

Is there anyone in the world, Meletus, who believes in human activities, and not in human beings? Make him answer, gentlemen, and don't let him keep on making these continual objections. (Plato, 58)

In looking at the Socratic method, as contrasted with a purely propositional style particularly, it seems that it has various features which make it a powerful tool of persuasion.

Firstly, it promotes participation, and holds pretensions to the consideration of feedback. This lends an impression of impartiality, as if an external objective truth were being magnanimously discovered via a joint effort, rather than by mere authority. While it may very well be the case that the questions of Socrates are essentially rhetorical -- in that answers which deviate from the expected course will be promptly denied or ridiculed -- when the questions are answered with acceptance there is a sense that consensus is being manufactured and that the argument is proceeding on robust, accepted, and undeniable grounds. When questioning Meletus, Socrates was quick to take his own point in the face of silence, "Is not that so? It is; I assume your assent, since you do not answer." When answers were not what he wanted to hear Socrates was apt to immediately dismiss them, for example, "You are not at all convincing, Meletus; not even to yourself, I suspect." And even when answers were forthright and accommodating, Socrates might chide, "How good of you to give a bare answer under compulsion by the court!" The questions are a part of the act, a part of the literary style, more so than they are genuine in their pursuit of knowledge or wisdom -- indeed, one might well be forgiven for thinking that as Socrates had, as he held, searched in earnest for wisdom for so long, yet remained ignorant, perhaps he had given up on the very possibility of wisdom, and why then would he ask after it, except to indicate a point?

Secondly, implicit in the raising of questions is Socrates' underlying philosophy: that one should question what they know, in order to find that truly they don't. Socrates' questions thus serve as an example of, create a precedent for, or seek to legitimate the practice of questioning authority. That one should not simply listen for the truth, but that one should ask after it.

Was Socrates so wise as he advertised? That's a question for another time.

References

Plato, The Last Days of Socrates. Translated and with Introduction by Hugh Tredennick. Penguin Press.

Vlastos, G (1991). Socrates: Ironist and Moral Philosopher. New York: Cornell University Press.

Notes

Aim: to demonstrate ignorance.

Method: interrogation.

Example: Socrates' questioning of Meletus at his trial.

Readings from the unit guide: Apology of Socrates. Lecture material: Socrates. Further reading: Socrates: Ironist and Moral Philosopher, Plato and the Socratic Dialogue: The Philosophical Use of a Literary Form