STUDY GUIDE: The Pre-Socratics and Plato’s Apology of Socrates1

Prologue - Primary and Secondary Sources:

Before I can usefully give you guidance for this week's readings, I have to introduce some terminology
that may be new for many students: the difference between what are called “primary sources” and
“secondary sources.” As students learning a new pair of terms, no doubt you are looking forward to a
succinct definition that you can write in your notes and reproduce on a quiz or exam. Unfortunately,
while there are many useful guides that try to define these terms, they tend to be both long and
potentially misleading. Fortunately you don't need to memorize a definition – you just have to learn to
tell the difference.

Roughly speaking:
“Primary Sources” are texts, images, recording, artificats, or other sources that are either themselves
your primary object of study, or have an appropriately direct relationship to that object of study.

“Secondary Sources” are sources that analyze one or more primary sources, either by directly
commenting on them, or by using them as sources of evidence to find out more about the subject
matter of those primary sources.

For example, last week's readings from the Histories of Herodotus was a primary source, since it was
our direct object of study. But the selections from Sowerby and Morcot were secondary sources, as
were the lectures and notes provided by Dr. Parrot.

Exercise for the reader: All of the rest of our assigned readings so far this semester have been primary
sources except for one. Look back to the syllabus and see if you can determine what other secondary
source you have been assigned so far this semester.

Purely Optional: For more information, see these sources; both are useful in some respects and
misleading in others.
http://www.princeton.edu/~refdesk/primary2.html
http://providence.libguides.com/PrimarySources?p=2092971

Reading Guide, Part I: The Pre-Socratics

1Guide by W. Derek Bowman (CC BY-SA 4.0). Pagination based on Forrest Baird, Philosophic Classics, Vol. 1: Ancient
Philosophy. 6th ed. (2010) and William Lawhead, The Voyage of Discovery: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy, Vol. 1,
2nd ed. (2002).
1
 This week's assigned readings come from two of your textbooks, Philosophic Classics, Vol. 1 by
Forrest Baird and The Voyage of Discovery, Vol 1 by William Lawhead. The Lawhead text is
purely a secondary source: it provides a summary and analysis of the philosophical figures and
works it discusses. In contrast, Baird's text contains a mixture of primary and secondary sources.
His text is mainly a collection of selected primary sources, together with his own (secondary
source) introduction to each one. Make sure you know when you're reading a (translated)
classical Greek source and when you're reading Baird's summary and analysis.

A. The Beginnings of Greek Philosophy: Lawhead (p. 3-7) and Baird (p. 1-3)
Both authors provide brief synoptic introductions to the origins and development of Greek philosophy
before Socrates. Don't try to memorize every name and date – there are too many, and not all of them
will be important for our discussion. Also, avoid the temptation to attach great importance to the
objective-looking classifications each author introduces (e.g. Baird's 4 groupings and Lawhead's
“Outline of Classical Philosophy”).

Questions: What similarities and differences do you see between Lawhead's introduction and
Baird's? How similar are the different “Pre-Socratic” figures to one another? Why do Lawhead
and Baird think it is important to know about these figures? When and where did these figures
live and write, in relation to the other works, figures, and events we've studied so far? What is
philosophy, and how does it differ from religion, myth, poetry, etc? Do you agree with
Lawhead's characterization of Homer and the poets? Why or why not? Who was Thales, and
why was he important? Where have you read his name before?

B. The Sophists: Lawhead (p. 29-34) and Baird (p. 43-51) and Baird (p. 305-7)
Both authors provide a general introduction to a specific group of pre-Socratics who came to be known
as 'Sophists.' In addition, Baird provides short primary text excerpts from or about each sophist he
profiles. The primary sources are indicated by bracketed numbers. Finally, I assigned an additional
primary source selection from one of Plato's dialogues (Theaetetus) in which Socrates engages directly
with a quote from Protagoras.

Questions: What similarities and differences do you see between Lawhead's description of the
Sophists and Baird's? Do the primary source fragments match the summary given by
these two secondary sources? Why or why not? What is the first conclusion Gorgias claims
to prove in that selection? Is his argument persuasive? Why or why not? What were Critias's
views about religion and politics? What is Critias's connection to Plato and Socrates, and why
is it important? In the Theaetetus, what specific claim from Protagoras does Socrates engage
with? Does he agree or disagree with Protagoras? What arguments does he offer to support his
position? Do you agree? Why or why not?

C. Women and Greek philosophy: (Baird, p. 61-4)

Questions: Why is our knowledge of Aspasia so limited? What does her story tell us about the
status of women in ancient Athens? What does it tell us about the role of women in ancient
philosophy?
Reading Guide, Part II: Plato's Apology of Socrates

A. Background on Socrates: Lawhead (pp. 35-43)

2
This section provides an overview of Socrates's life, his philosophical methods, and his beliefs. Don't try
to memorize every detail or example that is offered – the main point is to provide some background
that will allow you to better understand the primary source we're focusing on, the Apology.

Questions: What was Socrates's central point of disagreement with the Sophists? What was
Socrates's philosophical method (don't worry about memorizing the “six stages”)? What is a
“reductio ad absurdum?” What is a “counterexample”? How does Socrates's view of the soul
differ from that of the Homeric Greeks? What does the Greek term “arete” mean, and how does
Socrates interpret it?

B. Apology (Baird pp. 82-99)

17a-18a: Introductory remarks:

Questions: How would you describe Socrates’s tone at the outset of his speech? Which does
Socrates think is more important – the content of a speech, or the way in which it is presented?
Do you agree? Why or why not?

18b-24b: The “older” accusations, the Oracle, and human wisdom

Questions: What are the “older” accusations, and why does Socrates think it’s important to
address them first? Do these “older” accusations represent official charges that have been
brought against Socrates? If not, what are they? How does Socrates distinguish himself from the
Sophists (Gorgias, Evenus, etc.)? What did the Oracle at Delphi tell Socrates’s friend, and how is
this story related to the “older” accusations? What three groups of people did Socrates
question, and what was his specific conclusion about each group? What conclusion does
Socrates reach about human wisdom, and what support does he offer for that conclusion? Do
you agree? Why or why not?

24b-28b: The “later” accusers; cross-examination of Meleteus

Questions: Who are Socrates’s “later” accusers? What are their accusations? Do these “later”
accusations represent official charges that have been brought against Socrates? Why do you
think Meletus claims that all of the judges, audience, councilors, and assemblymen are capable
of educating and improving the young? How does Socrates use an analogy with horses to
challenge this claim? How is all this talk of education and horses relevant to the charges
Socrates is facing? What other argument does Socrates use to show that he doesn’t
intentionally corrupt the youth? What “riddle” does Socrates claim Meletus is posing by
charging Socrates with being an atheist? How does Socrates use his belief in “divinities” to prove
that he is not an atheist?

28b-31c: Socrates’s defense speech continues

Questions: Why does Socrates’s defense continue even after he thinks he’s already said enough
to prove Meletus’s accusations are false? For what purpose does Socrates use the example of
3
 Achilles from the Illiad? In what way does Socrates think he is like Achilles? Do you agree? What
will Socrates do differently if he is acquitted? Why does Socrates think his accusers can’t harm
him? Why does Socrates compare himself to a “gadfly”? Is this a flattering comparison?

31c-35d: Socrates’s defense speech concludes

Questions: Why has Socrates stayed out of politics? What is his “divine guide”? What two
actions does Socrates point to in order to show that he actually lives by the words he’s been
saying? What do you think of those actions? What specific form of evidence does Socrates
request his accusers to produce in order to prove that he is a corrupting influence on the
young? Why do you think no one came forward? How does Socrates compare himself to others
who have been on trial before? Why do you think he addresses his judges that way? Why
doesn’t he bring his wife and children out to beg for his life?

35e-38c: The penalty speech

Questions: What is Socrates’s reaction to the vote? Why do you think he had that reaction?
What is Socrates’s initial “penalty” that Socrates proposes? What reasons does he give for
making this proposal? How does he respond to those who think this is just another sign of his
arrogance? Do you find his reply convincing? What other penalties does Socrates consider, and
what reason does he give for rejecting each of them? How does Socrates’s famous remark about
the “unexamined life” fit into these arguments? Do you think he’s right? In the end, what
penalty does he ultimately propose? What penalty does the jury select?

38c-42a: Closing remarks

Questions: According to Socrates, why was he convicted? Was it because his arguments weren’t
clever enough? Why does he compare himself to a soldier at war? What “prophesy” does
Socrates offer for those who condemned him? What hope does Socrates offer to those who
voted to acquit him? How does Socrates use his “prophetic guide” to argue that what happened
was a good thing? What other argument does he use to show that death must be a good thing?
How does Socrates say that his accusers can “do justice” to Socrates’s sons? How does that
affect your view of Socrates as a father?