General Philosophy

Socrates, started off and is being different compared to the philosophers of his time and

even before him for his unique method of searching for wisdom. Slowly deviating from what is

common thing among philosophers that is deeply rooted from their beliefs and established

principles. As a philosopher and adding to that is his self-imposed poverty, Socrates claimed to

be as someone who wrote nothing and also knowing nothing. Interpretations to his utterances

vary depending to the different versions of the surviving writings of the scholars who tried to

figure out the reason within the Socratic philosophy.

Great sources to be mentioned as to finding out knowledge on Socratic philosophies

were Aristophanes’ comedy “The Clouds”. This writing exhibits Socrates’ image as being a

Sophist and an atheist particularly, believing not on the gods that the Athenians believed in but

in the other higher/divine being (daimonion) – his inner voice whom he claims to prevent him

from involving himself from political activity. Along with Aristopahnes’ comedy were works of

Xenophon and Plato who portrayed Socrates as a man of goodwill and a lover of wisdom. In

addition to that were the highly influential writings of Vlastos and attempts of Leo Strauss to

identify and study interpretations as to revealing the knowledge that comes along with the

measure and evidence presented into further understanding the philosophy of Socrates.

The general principles to be looked upon in Socrates’ emerging political career is his

approach in various dialogues and conversations which resulted to the springing out of what is

called as Socratic Paradoxes. Following that doctrine that knowledge is virtue , Socrates believed

that a virtuous person will do good things because he acknowledges it as the right thing to do,
that the wrong acts are done because of ignorance or lack of knowledge therein, though these

paradoxes seem to be too intellectualist for the many.

Another general principle is Socrates’ claims of knowing nothing, supported by the

oracle at Delphi are the positive inputs of knowledge that Socrates seems to contain and display

through the elenchus (art of question and answer) we can say impliedly that results of elenchus

gives a strong proof of the knowledge that Socrates had, in either search of wisdom or the

wisdom that Socrates already has acquired through conversations and dialogues in elenchus

leads us into a dilemma of whether to believe that Socrates is wise because he knows nothing or

the other is believing that he became wiser eventually through the use of elenchus.

Lastly is Socrates’ use of analogies with the arts which he used a vital point upon

supporting his claim that virtue is knowledge. But the relevance of this claim to its extension

towards morality and politics is questioned as to if it is someone, maybe, a doctor who heals

patients even if he/she is a saint or a criminal, saying that a doctor doesn’t discriminate, can this

idea be also applicable to a person being virtuous to automatically do virtuously. The idea is that

it is unimaginable to simulate a situation wherein a political art can be unbiased as to compare

to arts involving preciseness like mathematical or science related arts.

Political Philosophy

The exercise of elenchus has brought Socrates’ into a higher level of philosophy, as he

separates himself from “the many” stating indifference in opinions in contrast with the people,

Socrates’ suffered an inevitable outcome towards facing trial for accusation of impiety and

corruption of the young .

Socrates’ and his students through elenchus has ventures into a quest of search for the

truth and wisdom. Persuading and challenging those who are claimed to have wisdom like the

politicians, poets and orators, all of those have fallen into refutation and embarrassment.

Socrates arrived into a conclusion that these people and their claims of wisdom is not sufficient,

that undergoing elenchus as a part of a life or self-examination would be required upon

achieving wisdom.

Socrates’ deemed by the old accusers as an unjust busybody, and upon facing trial has

challenged Meletus to represent “the many” and let Meletus explain how he alone (Socrates)

has corrupted the young. By using the horse-trainer methodology - this reference has enabled

Socrates to subject Meletus and his argument in to refutation, explaining that as with the horses

are made better by their trainer, so as one person or a few can make people better; leading

Meletus into adopting the Protagorean argument. This statement is a great example of a

political philosophy that Socrates has shown during his trial, concerning the relationship

between the “horse” (“the many”) and the “trainer” (one or few who knows) that is capable of

making the “many” better.

 Another political philosophy that Socrates exhibited is his personification of the “laws”

wherein Socrates visioned of leaving the welfare of his children in the grasp of “the many”. Also

providing the idea that the “laws” are the opposite of the “many” in terms of power and

authority and ultimately Socrates states that he is unjustly treated by men and not by laws.

Lastly the political philosophy that Socrates has contributed is the raising of the political

horizon upgrading it from just the actual state politics in to a form of a visionary on that see

beyond a “day-to day” and observes the essential relevance between politics and philosophy in

that time being.

Is Socrates Pro- democracy or Anti democracy

It is said in the previous texts that Socrates challenged “the many” and embarrass them

through elenchus, but even though that the art is said to always have a negative outcome, its

intention is really a positive one, aiming to not only search for the truth but to find it and live by

its doctrine, which results to the idea that Socrates is someone who do away in being associated

form the people in general. But as we examine those of the biographies and evidences alike , we

can find out that Socrates was one of the members of the 500 and also of the “Thirty” of the

past oligarchy before the Athenian democratic rule.

As to the discussion of the elenchus and its deeper understanding towards Socratic

philosophy should not be related to his approach towards democracy or his views on it whether

he is pro or anti or neutral, etc. It is true that Socrates and his students try prove wrong those

who claim of their wisdom , being easily refuted and admitting , then eventually resorting to
other standard philosophies but this certain relationship and persuasion to the people is a

strong evidence of his “pro-democratic” side .

In my opinion his association of his thoughts and reaching it out to the polis is proving of

his pro-democracy, also the moment when he did not intend to leave Athens, that he also drink

the hemlock and his acceptance to the verdict casted upon him , and finally is attitude towards

death are minimal , but points that should not be left out upon identifying his pro-democratic

will.