The Socratic Problem

Introduction

Socrates has the main character in most of Plato’s dialogues and has a genuine historical figure. It is widely understood that in later dialogues, Plato used the character Socrates to give voice to views that were his own. Besides, Plato three other important sources exist for the study of Socrates; Aristophanes, Aristotle and Xenophon. Since no extensive writings of Socrates himself survived to the modern era, his actual views must be discerned from the sometimes contradictory reports of these four sources. The main source for the historical Socrates is the Socratic dialogues, which are reports of conversations apparently involving Socrates. Most information is found in the works of Plato and Xenophon.

The Socratic Problem 

The Socratic problem is a term used in historical scholarship concerning attempts at reconstructing a historical and philosophical image of Socrates based on the variable, and sometimes contradictory nature of the existing sources on his life. Thus, the problem of Socrates is the problem of ascertaining exactly what his philosophical teaching was. In this ragard, scholars rely on the external sources such as those of his contemporaries like Aristophanes or the disciples of Socrates like Plato and Xenophon for knowing anything about Socrates.

These sources contain contradictory details of his life, works and beliefs, when taken together. This complicates the attempts at reconstructing the beliefs and philosophical view held by Socrates. It is apparent to scholarship that this problem is now deemed a task seeming impossible to clarify, and thus, perhaps now classified as unsolvable. For instace, considering Xenophon’s writing on Socrates, he viewed him as “a man whose chief interest is to make good men and citizens, one who did not concern himself with problems of logic and metaphysics- a popular ethics teacher”.

On the other hand, taking Platonic dialogues as a whole, one would receive the impression of a metaphysician of the highest order, a man who did not concern himself with questions of daily conduct but laid the foundation of a ‘Transcendental Philosophy’ by his doctrine of a metaphysical world of forms. Thus, Aristotle gives us the understanding that while Socrates was not uninterested in theory, he did not himself teach the doctrine of subsistent forms, which is characteristic of Platonism.

However, considering the thoughts that regard Xenophon’s portrayal as being too ‘ordinary’ and ‘trivial’ because of his lack of philosophical ability and interest renders his position weak. We cannot reject the testimony of Aristotle and are forced to conclude that Plato, except in the early Socratic works, example- the Apology, puts his own doctrines in the mouth of Socrates. This view has the greater advantage that the Xenophonic and Platonic Socrates are not placed in glaring opposition and inconsistency, while the dear testimony of Aristotle is not thrown overboard. In this way, a more or less consistent picture of Socrates is evolved, and no unjustifiable violence is done to any of these sources.

Conclusion

Some of the above sources of Socrates has been challenged by many scholars to misrepresent him, especially that of Xenophon who saw Socrates as an ordinary man with no knowledge of philosophy. These sources, however, continue to pose many questions to philosophers.