Minutes - July 22, 2014 Introduction and one minute of sustained silence. The noise of our minds and surroundings stops us from genuine truth-directed inquiry; we must clear the mind and set this as mental space apart from the normal run of everyday life Motivating text: Apology – Plato One of the first texts of ancient Greek philosophy and the forerunner to the Western canon. Socrates stands in his own defense in front of an Athenian court (approximately 300 landowning Athenian men) against the charges of disbelieving in the gods of the state and of corrupting the youth. A compatriot of Socrates had visited the Oracle at Delphi and asked who the wisest man was. The Oracle stated that Socrates was the wisest, and so he embarked on a lifelong mission to find an Athenian wiser than himself. He interrogated prominent citizens with reputations for wisdom, and found them not only ignorant but arrogantly overconfident in their wisdom. Ultimately, he infuriated enough people doing this that they sought to put him to death. Motivating textual inquiry: What constitutes wisdom and how do you live a good life? For Socrates, a rigorous and ongoing examination in search of the truth is the only way to distinguish between right and wrong and lead a good life. Wisdom can be viewed broadly as this ethical knowledge with practical application, knowing how to act rightly in a wide variety of situations. Various items from Socrates’ defense: He covers his interrogations of the politicians, poets, and artisans, finding that men of high status in each category assumed that their particular knowledge made them believe they were knowledgeable about more or less everything. Moreover, he finds that the experts he interrogates are ignorant of their own ignorance, and concludes that he is indeed wiser than they in the respect that he properly identifies his lack of knowledge Human wisdom is limited, our ignorance is vast, and the height of ignorance is to not acknowledge these facts. He boldly states that if acquitted he would continue to live his life in the exact same way as in the past, imploring everyone to focus on self-examination and goodness instead of on wealth or prestige. “Wealth does not bring goodness, but goodness brings wealth and every other blessing.” Socrates identifies fear of death as a dangerous form of thinking one has knowledge where one is ignorant. After all, we do not know if death is perhaps the greatest blessing. Socrates chooses instead to focus on matters of right and wrong that he can know in this life He distinguishes himself from the Sophists, individuals who would charge fees for their teachings of wisdom and rhetoric, saying that all are welcome to his interrogatory process free of charge (as a result of his lifestyle Socrates is a poor man). He is convicted and sentenced to be put to death by a narrow margin, suggesting that if he had been more repentant or pleading with the court he may indeed have been acquitted, but his refusal to do so was deliberate. In Athenian court, the guilty have an opportunity to suggest an alternate punishment as a form of plea bargain. Socrates suggests the alternate sentence of state assistance for the rest of his life so he can go on carrying on his interrogatories, since after all he is providing a civic good. Socrates concludes his response to conviction with one of the cornerstone passages of philosophy: “I tell you that to let no day pass without discussing goodness and all the other subjects about which you hear me talking and examining both myself and others is really the very best thing that a man can do, and that life without this sort of examination is not worth living.” This is usually condensed to: “The unexamined life is not worth living.” After the death penalty is confirmed, he addresses the jury member who voted to acquit him, saying “nothing can harm a good man either in life or after death.” Concluding, he asks the members of the court to plague his sons as he plagued them, to scold them if they fancy themselves for no reason and neglect the important things. His last statement to the court: “Now it is time that we are going, I to die and you to live, but which of us has the happier prospect is unknown to anyone but God.” Lines of inquiry from Apology: Since we cannot all professional philosophers, how can we all lead the examined life? Are Socrates’ definitions of wisdom and ignorance in Apology complete? Is it possible to employ the Socratic Method of inquiry without incurring the wrath of those being questioned? It seems the Athenians’ reaction to being hounded and declared ignorant when it was shown they could not answer even the simplest questions properly was altogether natural. Today, if we question someone, particularly about their most fundamental beliefs, the immediate reaction is still defensiveness. If we persist, defensiveness becomes hostility because central beliefs are crucial to our concept of ourselves. We perceive that we are under attack, rather than simply the beliefs that we hold. Therefore, we must reserve the sharpest hounding for self-examination, but in dealing with others our inquiry must be in the spirit of open collaboration without the rough edges implied by harsh, arbitrary interrogatory. Barraging the politicians with questions meant to expose their ignorance will clearly get us nothing except perhaps a disturbing the peace charge. Is this open-ended inquiry sufficient or do we need additional guidelines and focal points? As the archetype of a philosopher, why doesn’t Socrates discuss philosophy as such more directly? How do we ask questions properly? Is the Socratic Method alive today? It appears to be dormant due to postmodern views that see truth as relative, determined by each individual as opposed to objective and absolute Discussion: Mr. Pettengill brings in Allan Bloom’s commentary on Plato’s Republic, focusing on Bloom’s point that Apology is essentially an outline and that taken alone it is inadequate and superficial To get a full picture of Plato, the Socratic dialogues need to be read in reference to Plato’s Republic, in which he lays out his perspective in detail on how a virtuous state should be constructed In Apology, Socrates could indeed be seen as employing rhetoric and not engaging in truth-seeking as such. Are the tenured philosophy professors of this day and age comparable to Socrates? What is the difference between a professor of wisdom and a philosopher (in the Greek, a lover of wisdom)? Mr. Menking makes observations on the state of the Socratic Method in our so-called postmodern society. Truth-directed inquiry is seen today as a waste of time (bills to pay) and too intense (‘I don’t even want to think about that’) Some may even say, “There is no objective truth, so why bother?” Of course, the response to that inquiry is to ask, “Is the statement ‘there is no object truth’ objectively true?” If so, then there is a contradiction and objective truth does indeed exist, and if not, then the statement there is no objective truth is simply an opinion When a person gets expertise in one area of life, they feel they have knowledge over every field and often are viewed as universally authoritative. This is what we Amateurs call “The cult of expertise.” This leads to states of affairs where Stephen Hawking can declare that philosophy is dead, then make philosophical proclamations that contradict themselves, and be declared authoritative on those proclamations. Ms. Cahen points out that the natural reaction of a human is to get defensive about questioning in regards to their expertise or something they are passionate about and speaks from personal experience. Mr. Pettengill inquires as to where Socrates stands on the gods of the Athenian state, as his theological position is unclear. For instance, Socrates could have simply accepted the Delphic Oracle’s proclamation that he was the wisest, instead he spends the rest of his life trying to demonstrate that the Oracle was wrong This is not necessarily an indication of total skepticism on Socrates’ part, but rather should be seen as an archetype of truth-directed inquiry. Indeed, this can help us immensely. Instead of simply accepting all the information that we are bombarded with, we can first ask ‘is this truthful?’, ‘how could we show that this is truthful?’, and ‘how could we show that this is not truthful?’ These questions can help in identifying hidden assumptions. Mr. Menking asks ‘what is wisdom?’ Socrates’ limited definition of wisdom at his trial appears to be proper identification of the line between knowledge and ignorance. However, this is clearly incomplete. A broader definition could potentially be that wisdom consists of the ability to properly decide right from wrong, an ability that cannot exist without the prior ability to conduct trust-seeking inquiry both of oneself and the external world. Mr. Pettengill asks why Socrates does not provide a more complete definition of wisdom at his trial. He does interrogate one of his accusers directly and exposes an internal contradiction in the charges brought against him, providing a practical example of the limited definition of wisdom. Perhaps the trial was not the best space for a proper philosophical inquiry into the full definition of wisdom. All participants discuss how for humans, questions can feel like accusations and an attack on the person rather than an attempt to help clarify their beliefs. There seems to be a better way to approach these situations and ask the questions in a way that doesn’t lead to the metaphorical execution of the questioner or to oppressive judgment. Only in a genuine truth-seeking environment can we engage the examined life properly. The Amateur Society seeks to foster such an environment . Even and perhaps especially when we are alone we can engage in truth-directed inquiry and self-examination. The Amateur Society seeks to provide participants with the tools necessary to conduct such inquiry. The Socratic Method, critical thinking, and logic. Mr. Menking comments that the real unlivable aspect of the unexamined life is that you will never have a strong conception of self or personal identity. Without persistent examination aimed at the truth, we are guided by our feelings and are liable to be on autopilot through life This leads to disaster when new events or information is presented that is in stark contrast with the feelings that have defined our identity. If you don’t have a strong conception of self, failure can be catastrophic. With a strong conception of self focused on truth-seeking, failure is welcomed as a clarifying experience. Mr. Pettengill brings in Heidegger, a 20th century philosopher who sympathized deeply with those without the resources or wherewithal to engage in a continuously examined life. Perhaps the best most can do is to live a life that is present and authentic. Even without thorough examination people can form strong relationships and pursue happiness. This is a sympathetic view because of all the practical burdens that face all of us in our daily lives, however what we want to show is that living an examined life does not require such a total commitment such that all practical responsibilities would have to be abandoned if truth-seeking is the goal. The Amateur Society proposes that you don’t need to know every page of every philosopher; that is entirely impractical. However, abandoning deeper inquiry altogether is dangerous. We seek to find balance by empowering people with the tools necessary to not simply be passive receivers of information. Many distract themselves or are bombarded with modern media and tune out. Instead we must tune in, both to ourselves and the world surrounding us The primary goals of The Amateur Society are: To develop the tools necessary to distill practical lessons from the rich traditions of philosophy, literature, history, and science To foster an open, friendly environment in which we can undertake this distillation process. As humans we are all amateurs in all aspects of our lives, and we invite everyone to become proper Amateurs dedicated to truth-seeking and camaraderie with fellow truth-seekers.
Posted on: Mon, 28 Jul 2014 18:15:02 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015