The Philosophy Of Socrates (History of Ancient and Medieval Philosophy)

303 Pages·1999·33.39 MB·English

by  Nicholas Smith

The Philosophy of Socrates
History of Ancient and Medieval Philosophy
ALAN D. CODE AND CALVIN G. NORMORE, SERIES EDITORS
The Philosophy of Socrates,
Thomas C. Brickhouse and Nicholas D. Smith
FORTHCOMING
Aristotle, Alan D, Code
Maimonides and Medieval Jewish Philosophy, Daniel Frank
Late Medieval Philosophy, Calvin G. Normore
The Philosophy of Late Antiquity, John Bussanich
Plato, Richard Kraut
The Beginnings of Greek Philosophy,
Allan ], Silverman and Mark Griffith
THE PHILOSOPHY
OF SOCRATES
THOMAS C. BRICKHOUSE
Lynchburg College
NICHOLAS D. SMITH
Lewis and Clark College
—•" A Member of the Perseus Books Group
History of Ancient and Medieval Philosophy
All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may
be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, includ-
ing photocopy/ recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permis-
sion in writing from the publisher.
Copyright © 2000 by Westview Press, A Member of the Perseus Books Group
Published in 2000 in the United States of America by Westview Press, 5500 Central Avenue,
Boulder, Colorado 80301-2877, and in the United Kingdom by Westview Press, 12 Hid's
Copse Road, Cumnor Hill, Oxford OX2 9JJ
Find us on the World Wide Web at www.wtjstviewpress.coni.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Brickhouse, Thomas G, 1947-
The philosophy of Socrates/Thomas C. Brickhouse, Nicholas D- Smith.
p. cm.—(History of ancient and medieval philosophy)
Includes bibliographical references and indices.
ISBN 0-8133-2084-4 (he.)—ISBN 0-8133-2085-2 (pbk.)
I.Socrates. I. Smith, Nicholas D. II. Title. III. Series.
B317.P68 1999 99-36572
183'.2—dc21 CIP
The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of the American National Stan-
dard for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials Z39.48-1984.
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Contents
Preface ix
Introduction 1
1.1 Our Purpose, 1
1.2 Interpretive Principles, 3
1.3 Identifying and Solving Scholarly Problems, 6
1.4 Translations and Citations of Passages, 10
1 A Survey of Our Evidence 11
1.1 Ancient Evidence and the Socratic Problem, 11
1.2 Relatively Uncontroversial Issues and
General Background, 16
1.3 Socrates' Trial, 27
1.4 Assessment of the Principal Sources, 33
Notes, 49
Suggested Readings, 52
2 What Socrates Does, And How He Does It 53
2.1 Socrates as a Teacher, 53
2.2 Socratic Doctrines and Positive Teachings, 72
2.3 Self-Knowledge and Psychological
Constructivism, 89
Notes, 96
Suggested Readings, 97
3 Socrates on Knowledge and Ignorance 99
3.1 Knowing and Not Knowing, 99
3.2 The Priority of Definitional Knowledge, 113
Notes, 120"
Suggested Readings, 120
v
vi Contents
4 Socratic Values 123
4.1 What Is Valuable? 123
4.2 Socratic Conceptions of Happiness, 129
4.3 Is Virtue Really a Component of Happiness? 141
4.4 Does Socrates Think that Virtue Is
Necessary for Happiness? 147
4.5 Goodness and Virtue, 149
4.6 A Preliminary Assessment of
the Plausibility of Socrates' View, 153
Notes, 153
Suggested Readings, 154
5 Socrates on Wisdom and Motivation 157
5.1 The Socratic Paradoxes, 157
5.2 The Unity of the Virtues, 158
5.3 Socrates' Denial of Akrasia, 173
Notes, 182
Suggested Readings, 182
6 Socrates' Politics and Political Philosophy 185
6.1 Historical and Textual Problems, 185
6.2 Socrates and Political Activity, 186
6.3 Socrates' Political Affiliation? 189
6.4 Socrates on Obedience to Law, 200
6.5 Socrates on Just Punishment, 216
Notes, 226
Suggested Readings, 228
7 Socrates and Religion 231
7.1 Survey of the Problems Assessing
Socrates' Religion, 231
7.2 Was Socrates Guilty? 234
7.3 Socrates' "Mission," 241
7.4 Socrates' Daimonion, 244
7.5 Socrates on Death and the Afterlife, 252
Notes, 261
Suggested Readings, 264
Contents vii
Glossary 267
References 271
Names Index 277
Subject Index 280
Index of Greek Terms 287
Index of Passages 288
This page intentionally left blank
Preface
Just as he was about to engage in the most searching criticism of another
scholar's views, the late Gregory Vlastos set the tone of his criticism with
these words: "[O]nly those who are strangers to the ethos of scholarly
controversy will see anything but high esteem in my critique" (Vlastos
[1.991], 39 n.2). In this book—and indeed in all of our scholarly work—we
share this "ethos of scholarly controversy" by engaging in disagreement,
criticism, revision, further development, and sometimes the simple en-
dorsement of our friends' and colleagues' views. Those who criticize our
work show in their efforts the "high esteem" of treating our work as
worthy of all the effort and thought it takes to consider and evaluate our
arguments. In this book, our highest esteem for many of our colleagues
should, therefore, be evident in each of our critical efforts. Less obvious,
but equally important, is our awareness that it was almost always our
own engagement with the views of others that made it even possible for
us to have a view of our own to formulate. Most scholarly work is done in
response to what other scholars say or write on a problem they have iden-
tified—or have had identified for them, by yet other scholars. We read our
colleagues' work, mull it over, worry about it, and finally something oc-
curs to us as a better way of understanding a text or solving the problem—
and then we write our own interpretation, which is then usually critiqued
by others and eventually improved upon by those with still clearer ideas
or more clever or compelling solutions. Scholars rarely find themselves
giving "the final word" on a text or a problem,, and almost always, our
colleagues will learn more from the process of exposing our errors than
they will learn from accepting our interpretations.
Accordingly, even though our "high esteem" for those from, whom, we
have learned so much will be evident in every citation we make of others'
works, we wish to begin by acknowledging even more directly the assis-
tance and education we have derived from discussions, debates, and criti-
cal exchanges with others who have taken the subject of Socrates as seri-
ously as we have. The work of Gregory Vlastos has plainly kept us busy
for many years now. The same can be said for all the time we have spent
studying and discussing the arguments and interpretations of (in alpha-
betical order) Hugh Benson, Daniel Devereux, Michael Ferejohn, Richard
Kraut, Mark McPherran, Terence Penner, George Rudebusch, and Paul
IX