What do you think?
Rate this book
The Philosophy Of Socrates
This text provides an introduction to Socrates—both the charismatic, controversial historical figure and the essential Socratic philosophy. Written at a beginning level but incorporating recent scholarship, The Philosophy of Socrates offers numerous translations of pertinent passages. As they present these passages, Nicholas Smith and Thomas Brickhouse demonstrate why these passages are problematic, survey the interpretive and philosophical options, and conclude with brief defenses of their own proposed solutions. Throughout, the authors rely on standard translations to parallel accompanying assigned primary source readers. Each chapter concludes with an annotated bibliography of suggested readings.
- GenresPhilosophy
304 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
2 people are currently reading
54 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
February 18, 2024
The book runs into seven chapters:
1 - A Survey of Our Evidence
2 - What Socrates Does, And How He Does It
3 - Socrates on Knowledge and Ignorance
4 - Socratic Values
5 - Socrates on Wisdom and Motivation
6 - Socrates' Politics and Political Philosophy
7 - Socrates and Religion
An observation based on my reading of the book:
Socrates was deeply influenced by Zeno who was the inventor of dialectic and Socrates learnt his methods. His intellectual curiosity had a blend of scepticism which he acquired from Zeno. Curious and disputant by nature Socrates was drawn to philosophy and was for a time fascinated by the Sophists. During the first half of his life Socrates studied physical science. Archelaus, his teacher turned him to ethics. Gradually a small group of friends gathered round him by the stimulous of his conversation.
He found his greatest good in daily conversation about virtue, examination of self, 'for a life unscrutinised is unworthy of man'. Socrates and his circle soon became 'notorious' in Athens as thinkers. He would spend much of his time not in his accustomed haunts --- gymnasia of the Academy and Lyceum but in the market place, workshops of artisans, and the streets, cross-examining people and exposing their erroneous convictions.
His opponents objected that he tore down but never built, that he rejected other people's answers but never gave his own. He would protect himself from being cross- examined on the plea that he was ignorant. When the Delphic oracle declared him to be the wisest man Socrates ascribed it to his profession of ignorance.
What do we learn from this book? The following:
i. Socrates' was a philosophy which was elusive, tentative and unsystematic, but very much real and for which he lost his life. ‘Of the Gods we know nothing' he would say, and with imperfect knowledge of human affairs one should not meddle with the affairs of heaven.
ii. He applied this scepticism more rigidly to physical sciences. One should, according to him, study them only so far as to guide one's life, but not beyond that. "Know thyself' was what he wanted to impress on others.
iii. Socrates also argued that good was not good because the gods approve of it, but because it is good in itself. There was nothing, Socrates thought, more useful than knowledge, it is the highest of virtues. Right action emanates from knowledge. 'Highest good is happiness, the highest means to it is knowledge or intelligence.'
iv. He was the first champion of the supremacy of intellect and insisted that an individual must order his life by the guidance of his own intellect.
v. He was the founder of utilitarianism. Socrates was a critic of democracy since he believed aristocracy to be the best form of government.
vi. Choice of magistrates by lot is regarded by him as absurd, for no one would be willing to choose a mason, a pilot or a flute-player by lot. While the shortcomings of such men would be less harmful those of the magistrates would be dangerous. Tyranny or Plutocracy was equally disliked by him.
The book also does not fail to mention that Socrates and his circle earned the ridicule of the comic poets. Ameipsias in his ‘Comus’ and Aristophanes in his ‘Clouds’ derided Socrates and his circle. But Xenophon testified that 'nothing was of greater benefit than to associate with Socrates, and to converse with him, on any occasion, on any subject whatever'. On Plato Socrates made a lasting impression and the two minds were mingled forever in philosophical history. Crito, the rich man, looked upon Socrates with much affection. There is, however, nothing to show what was the relation of Socrates with Pericles although it is quite reasonable to think that they were acquainted mutually.
This book is seventry five percent history. And the twenty five percent philosophy that’s there does not read too good.
1 - A Survey of Our Evidence
2 - What Socrates Does, And How He Does It
3 - Socrates on Knowledge and Ignorance
4 - Socratic Values
5 - Socrates on Wisdom and Motivation
6 - Socrates' Politics and Political Philosophy
7 - Socrates and Religion
An observation based on my reading of the book:
Socrates was deeply influenced by Zeno who was the inventor of dialectic and Socrates learnt his methods. His intellectual curiosity had a blend of scepticism which he acquired from Zeno. Curious and disputant by nature Socrates was drawn to philosophy and was for a time fascinated by the Sophists. During the first half of his life Socrates studied physical science. Archelaus, his teacher turned him to ethics. Gradually a small group of friends gathered round him by the stimulous of his conversation.
He found his greatest good in daily conversation about virtue, examination of self, 'for a life unscrutinised is unworthy of man'. Socrates and his circle soon became 'notorious' in Athens as thinkers. He would spend much of his time not in his accustomed haunts --- gymnasia of the Academy and Lyceum but in the market place, workshops of artisans, and the streets, cross-examining people and exposing their erroneous convictions.
His opponents objected that he tore down but never built, that he rejected other people's answers but never gave his own. He would protect himself from being cross- examined on the plea that he was ignorant. When the Delphic oracle declared him to be the wisest man Socrates ascribed it to his profession of ignorance.
What do we learn from this book? The following:
i. Socrates' was a philosophy which was elusive, tentative and unsystematic, but very much real and for which he lost his life. ‘Of the Gods we know nothing' he would say, and with imperfect knowledge of human affairs one should not meddle with the affairs of heaven.
ii. He applied this scepticism more rigidly to physical sciences. One should, according to him, study them only so far as to guide one's life, but not beyond that. "Know thyself' was what he wanted to impress on others.
iii. Socrates also argued that good was not good because the gods approve of it, but because it is good in itself. There was nothing, Socrates thought, more useful than knowledge, it is the highest of virtues. Right action emanates from knowledge. 'Highest good is happiness, the highest means to it is knowledge or intelligence.'
iv. He was the first champion of the supremacy of intellect and insisted that an individual must order his life by the guidance of his own intellect.
v. He was the founder of utilitarianism. Socrates was a critic of democracy since he believed aristocracy to be the best form of government.
vi. Choice of magistrates by lot is regarded by him as absurd, for no one would be willing to choose a mason, a pilot or a flute-player by lot. While the shortcomings of such men would be less harmful those of the magistrates would be dangerous. Tyranny or Plutocracy was equally disliked by him.
The book also does not fail to mention that Socrates and his circle earned the ridicule of the comic poets. Ameipsias in his ‘Comus’ and Aristophanes in his ‘Clouds’ derided Socrates and his circle. But Xenophon testified that 'nothing was of greater benefit than to associate with Socrates, and to converse with him, on any occasion, on any subject whatever'. On Plato Socrates made a lasting impression and the two minds were mingled forever in philosophical history. Crito, the rich man, looked upon Socrates with much affection. There is, however, nothing to show what was the relation of Socrates with Pericles although it is quite reasonable to think that they were acquainted mutually.
This book is seventry five percent history. And the twenty five percent philosophy that’s there does not read too good.
August 9, 2016
more history than philosophy but not a bad read
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews