Socrates
Historical background: Birth around 470, trial and execution in 399. Socrates was the first of the three major Greek philosophers; the others being Socrates’ student Plato and Plato’s student Aristotle. Socrates did not write anything himself. We know of his views primarily through Plato's dialogues where Socrates is the primary character. Socrates is also known through plays of Aristophanes and the historical writings of Xenophon. In many of Plato's dialogues it is difficult to determine when Socrates' views are being represented and when the character of Socrates is used as a mouthpiece for Plato's views.
Socrates was well known in Athens. He was exocentric, poor, ugly, brave, stoic and temperate. He was a distinguished veteran who fought bravely on Athens behalf and was apparently indifferent to the discomforts of war. Socrates claimed to hear a divine inner voice he called his daimon. He was also prone to go into catatonic states of concentration.
The Sophists: The conflicting views of the Ionian and Eleatic philosophers of nature encouraged skepticism about our ability to obtain knowledge through rational inquiry. In the sophists this skepticism is manifested in epistemic and moral relativism. Epistemic relativism is the view that there is no objective standard for evaluating the truth or likely truth of our beliefs. Rather, epistemic standards of reasoning are relative to one's point of view and interests. Moral relativism is the parallel doctrine about moral standards. The moral relativist takes there to be no objective grounds for judging some ethical opinions to be correct and others not. Rather, ethical judgments can only be made relative to one or another system of moral beliefs and no system can be evaluated as objectively better than another. Since earlier attempts at rational inquiry had produced conflicting results, the Sophists held that no opinion could be said to constitute knowledge. Rather than providing grounds for thinking some beliefs are true and other false, rational argument can only be fruitfully employed as rhetoric, the art of persuasion. For the epistemic relativist, the value of reason lies not in revealing the truth but in advancing ones interests. The epistemic and moral relativism of the Sophist has a contemporary manifestation in much "post-modern" thought.
Unlike the Ionian and Eleatic philosophers, Socrates was more interested in ethical matters than metaphysical questions about the nature of reality. Socrates was not an epistemic or moral relativist. He pursued rational inquiry as a means of discovering the truth about ethical matters. But he did not advance any ethical doctrines or lay claim to any knowledge about ethical matters. Instead, his criticism of the Sophists and his contribution to philosophy and science came in the form of his method of inquiry.
Oracle of Delphi story: Chaerophon visits the Oracle of Delphi and asks if anyone in Athens is wiser than Socrates. The Oracle answered that no one is wiser than Socrates. Socrates made it his mission in life to test and understand the Oracle's pronouncement. He seeks out people who have a reputation for wisdom in various regards and tests their claims to knowledge through questioning. He discovers a good deal of vain ignorance and false clams to knowledge, but no one with genuine wisdom. Ultimately, Socrates concludes that he is wisest; but not because he possesses special knowledge not had by others. Rather he finds that he is wisest because he recognizes his own lack of knowledge while others think they know, but do not. This is not a skeptical conclusion, however. Socrates does not deny that knowledge is to be had. While he does not claim to have knowledge himself, he shows us how to obtain knowledge by demonstrating a method of testing claims to knowledge.
The knowledge sought by Socrates in Plato's dialogues is knowledge of the proper definition or analysis of abstract ethical concepts like justice, piety, love etc.
Dialectic: The dialectic is a method of testing claims to knowledge or proposed analyses of concepts. Interlocutor proposes a definition or analysis. Socrates raises objection or offers counter examples. The interlocutor reformulates his position to handle the objection. Socrates raises a more refined objection. Socrates uses the dialectic to discredit others claims to knowledge. While revealing the ignorance of his interlocutors, Socrates also shows how to make progress towards more adequate knowledge.
Soc. offers only 2 options, complete knowledge or ignorance. But perhaps we can identify a third alternative: limited or partial knowledge.
Plato accepts the rationalist standard for knowledge and thinks knowledge can be attained, but not easily. Real knowledge is knowledge of abstract, eternal unchanging “forms” (properties, or concepts: physical things are just cheap copies of ideal forms in “Plato's heaven”).
But from the Socratic point of view, the prospects for knowledge might look dim. Contrary to Plato's views, Perhaps philosophy is useful only for demonstrating the feebleness of our intellect, but holds no prospect for revealing anything about the nature of the world. This is Antisthenes response to the Socratic enterprise. The view that we cannot attain knowledge is called skepticism.
Perhaps we can never completely know the nature of justice. But the process of dialectic may serve to improve our limited understanding. Aristotle takes this view in his frequently given advice that we should seek as much clarity as our subject matter admits of and not expect more. The Socratic dialectic gives us a means of making progress and improving our limited understanding even if it is ultimately impossible for us to attain the rationalist ideal for certain and complete knowledge.
Socrates was not politically active, but he was also no fan of democracy. He thought the city-state should be ruled by "he who knows" (horse trainer analogy).
Some of Socrates’ followers were involved in reign of terror. This contributed to the prosecution and execution of Socrates (more about this when we read the Apology).
W. Russ Payne