My
previous blog post discussed the idea of 'double ignorance' and the
essential two qualities a philosopher needs being to 'wonder' about
things and to have the curiosity to find out things when we do not
know. This blog post develops this theme with a quick look at Plato's
book: The First Alcibiades - where the question is posed: Do we
really know 'what' the human being is? This question in
Socratic philosophy is often summarised as the need for us all to
'Know Thyself'.....
'Socrates
points out to Alcibiades that unless we are aware (or at least have
it pointed out to us) that we do not know something, we will not try
to find out about that thing and try to correct our lack of knowledge
in that area. Socrates says, as discussed in the introduction to this
book, that we will fall into the trap of being ‘doubly ignorant’.
That is; firstly not knowing something; but secondly thinking that we
do know about it so that we do not even bother to inform ourselves
and correct this lack of knowledge. Incidentally, an ancient Oracle
(places where the future was predicted and where questions about all
sorts of things were thought to be answered by the Gods) once said,
when asked who was the wisest man alive, that it was in fact
Socrates. This confused Socrates a great deal, and the only reason he
could come up with for the Oracle’s answer was that at least he
knew he knew nothing which made him a lot wiser than the people who
thought they knew about things when clearly they did not.
It
is no problem if we do not know something – providing we realise we
do not know. These days we consult lawyers and solicitors on legal
matters, and accountants about financial matters. We know we are not
experts in these areas and so we consult with people who are trained
and experienced with these specialist subjects. We talk to doctors
about medical matters, and mechanics about problems with our cars. It
is normal to do so and it is no big problem not to know something
providing you are aware of it and indeed admit it to yourself and
others when necessary. In modern day life we consult experts on a
whole range of subjects. Presidents and Prime Ministers have whole
teams of specialist advisors in different areas where they know they
have little or no specialist expertise or experience themselves.
All
simple enough so far….. Socrates has made Alcibiades admit to
himself that he lacks knowledge and experience - with politics and
affairs of State in this case. However, then Socrates goes a step
further by discussing that if we are going to teach ‘ourselves’
about things or otherwise look after ourselves wisely (i.e. make the
best Life Choices for ourselves), then we better have some
understanding at least of what ‘the self’ actually is, and this
is truly what ‘Knowing Thyself’ is all about. Socrates agrees
that you have to know where you are before starting a philosophical
path (or any other path); but he says it is also important to know
‘what you are’, and this is what it truly means to Know Thyself
in the Socratic sense. Socrates is asking:
How
can we look after something well (including ourselves) if we do not
even know what it is?
So
what does Socrates say ‘the self’ is; or in other words: what
kind of creatures are we? Well he discusses with Alcibiades that
there is obviously a difference between someone taking care of their
shoes and taking care of their feet. He says that the shoes are
merely added on to the feet and are not the actual feet them self.
Similarly, he mentions that rings are merely added on to the hands
and are not the hands or indeed the actual person themselves.
Alcibiades agrees as Socrates explains by asking him more short
questions to answer. Socrates then points out that there is a
difference between the tools a craftsman uses, such as a shoemaker
using a knife to cut the leather, and the shoemaker himself. In the
same way the musical instrument the musician uses is different to the
actual musician who again only makes use of the instrument. Such
things are only used by the 'self' and Socrates wants Alcibiades to
understand the distinction between the person them self and the
things he or she merely uses. Of course Alcibiades agrees to these
examples, and this may all seem very obvious to us and perhaps
unnecessary for Socrates to explain to Alcibiades. However, Socrates
is creating universals or universal principles and truths in his
young student’s mind. Socrates is getting Alcibiades to follow his
path of logic and the steps of his argument one step at a time,
almost like a geometric mathematical proof. (Perhaps this is another
reason why Plato wrote those strange words above the entrance to his
Academy?)
Socrates
then makes the distinction between the eyes and hands that a
shoemakers or musician makes use of compared to the shoemaker and
musician themselves. Alcibiades agrees that the shoemaker and
musician merely use their hands and eyes but that they are not
actually the shoemaker or musician. He goes on to explain that this
is the same with the arms, legs, feet, etc. that while they are used
by the musician and the shoemaker they are not the actual musician or
shoemaker themselves; they are just added on to whatever the musician
or shoemaker actually is ‘in essence’ and are merely used by
them. Let me now quote direct from Plato's dialogue what comes next
(First Alcibiades-129c/d):
SOCRATES:
But the tool is not the same as the cutter and user of the tool?
ALCIBIADES:
Of course not.
SOCRATES:
And in the same way the instrument of the harper (musician) is to be
distinguished from the harper himself?
ALCIBIADES:
It is.
SOCRATES:
Now the question which I asked was whether you conceive the user to
be always different from that which he uses
ALCIBIADES:
I do.
SOCRATES:
Then what shall we say of the shoemaker? Does he cut with his tools
only or with his hands?
ALCIBIADES:
With his hands as well.
SOCRATES:
He uses his hands too?
ALCIBIADES:
Yes.
SOCRATES:
And does he use his eyes in cutting leather?
ALCIBIADES:
He does.
SOCRATES:
And we admit that the user is not the same with the things which he
uses?
ALCIBIADES:
Yes.
SOCRATES:
Then the shoemaker and the harper are to be distinguished from the
hands and feet which they use?
ALCIBIADES:
Clearly.
SOCRATES:
And does not a man use the whole body?
ALCIBIADES:
Certainly.
SOCRATES:
And that which uses is different from that which is used?
ALCIBIADES:
True.
SOCRATES:
Then a man is not the same as his own body
ALCIBIADES:
That is the inference.
SOCRATES:
What is he, then?
ALCIBIADES:
I cannot say. [i.e. I don't know... ]
Just
notice that as soon as Alcibiades says: 'I cannot say' or 'I don't
know' he suddenly ceases to be doubly ignorant on this matter. He had
always assumed that he at least knew what he was - and so had not
thought about it much. Socrates with his questions has suddenly made
him realise that he does not really know 'what' he is, and that it is
something he needs to investigate and think about from now on.'
From
Essay 1 of James’ new book ‘Life Choice – Important Tips From
Socrates, Plato and Aristotle’ (p. 25 – 27)
See
paperback at: https://www.createspace.com/6627322
See
eBook at: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1540552624
