The following is an attempt to develop a means for us to empathesize with Socrates.
Many decades ago a professor of philosophy told me that “philosophy is about radically critical self-consciousness”. It was thirty years later that this statement began to make sense to me.
To become critically self-conscious is to tread on the path to a philosophical frame of mind. If you treat this imaginary problem that I lay out here as more than thoughtless past time you might begin to comprehend what that philosophy professor thinks philosophy is about.
Imagine that you and a thousand other people live deep in the isolated and frozen interior of Alaska. Imagine further that every one of you had been born colorblind and none had any idea what color was. Imagine further that you are an exercise nut and discovered, quite by accident, that if you performed a certain sequence of exercises you developed color perception.
What would you do?
If you tried to tell the others what would they do? Would you be able to convince any one of them to follow your example? How would you explain to them what you had accomplished?
Would they eventually kill you like the Athenians did Socrates?
Socrates was NOT killed because he happened to stumble upon some grand truth that offended people. Socrates was killed because he used his rhetorical skills to publicly humiliate people in power. And it’s not even fair to say he was killed. He commited suicide, and I say this because he must have known what would happen to him if he continued to make fun of these people. He was a smart fellow. There’s no way he didn’t see it coming. And there’s the sentencing portion of the trial when he actually taunts his jurors, daring them to sentence him to death, by asking for free meals in the Prytaneum.
He himself professed to knowing nothing, and I guess in some sense you could say it is this grand truth he discovered and was trying to teach his fellow Athenians, that you can’t know anything (about moral values, essences). Still, it remains probable that it is not because people did not like the idea that they didn’t know anything that they decided to kill the teacher. Many people before Socrates taught crazier things, and they weren’t killed. Think Parmenides or Heraclitus.
In reading the Socratic dialogues, did you ever get the feeling that Socrates was sincerely trying to teach those with whom he argued (and I’m talking about the pre-Meno dialogues)? Did he seem like he had some sincere point he was trying to get across; that he was trying to be understood? Because my impression is that he was using his skill as a dagger in the heart of men more powerful than him. He seemed to get enjoyment out of bringing them down to his pathetic level.
My point here, other than to clear up this misconception of Socrates as a philosophical martyr, is that if you have some grand truth you think you’ve discovered, then you have little to worry of it bringing you harm. It’s the manner in which you deliver your truth that you have to worry about.
You have a totally inaccurate definition for “suicide”. Murder and suicide are two different things. Also… faith ridden people probably will falsify the actions of a philosophical person… they generally dislike logic, at least from what I’ve observed personally. This is why their beliefs in a higher power aren’t centered around logic, but around “faith”, a much less reliable source, but sometimes a more emotionally fulfilling source.
Allow me to defeat this argument from Socrates… “I know that moral values and essences are not objective.” … Why did none of his student decide to say that? Perhaps that would’ve stopped the spreading of that belief that nobody knows anything?
And Socrates was justified in doing so. If those “powerful” men hadn’t been so arrogant, Socrates would’ve have been able to bring them down, and therefore would’ve failed in his endeavor. OR… maybe Socrates didn’t really enjoy bringing powerful men to his “pathetic” level… maybe he just did it by nature, without having the motive you proposed?
My point here, other than to clear up this misconception of Socrates as a philosophical martyr, is that if you have some grand truth you think you've discovered, then you have little to worry of [i]it [/i]bringing you harm. It's the manner in which you deliver your truth that you have to worry about.
No it isn’t. You don’t have to worry about anything. Generally, the “worst” reaction is to kill you, which isn’t very special, because… HOW MANY HUMANS HAVE DIED IN THE PAST!!! Billions. So, why would you have to “worry” about the reactions of your audience? What are you thinking that we assume here?
~~Jeff
EDIT:: Thought I would mention… Socrates was a well-known douche bag… yeah…
don’t worry - death will come to you before you know it. and i am sure that you will find much meaning in that thought. oops i forgot, you only find true meaning in something that is rare. billions of people have died…what is so rare and special about the fact that you will someday die.
perhaps if you were made immortal…now that you would find meaningful, wouldn’t you? but then again, you would have an eternal moment… of moments which you held to be meaningless except on very rare occasions. double edged sword, that.
Well, I’d have to be one of the 1st people to be made immortal before it would mean something, or else it would just be commonplace. Anyway, check your phone book… do you know any Vampires?
that then begs the questions…(1) would the manner in which you would, are going to die, bring more or less meaning into it, or not? (2) what about how you might handle the way in which you die? (3) question for the conscience i forgot - anyway, do you find meaning in the struggling and overcoming and the will to live of the little children with cancer - or anyone with cancer? as there are so so many these days - on a serious note…
how many before you - before the meaningless of immortality set in? and how many before the last immortal before…
yes, i do, but one cannot see their fangs. they are within but certainly do rob you of your life’s blood, if you allow it. quickly, run run run.
Since there’s already been billions of human to die in the past, it doesn’t really matter how I die. This may sound a little selfish, but I wouldn’t want to torture if that’s what you’re asking, in which case, I would dislike it, but it still wouldn’t be special. Have you ever heard of Vlad the Impaler? (speaking of vampires)
With a terminal illness, I would probably go through the 5 stages of grief in an extremely hasty fashion, appearing to be a severe bipolar lunatic to everyone watching (no joke, there). If it was sudden death, then I guess I’m just dead; there’s not much more to that.
(3) question for the conscience :oops: i forgot - anyway, do you find meaning in the struggling and overcoming and the will to live of the little children with cancer - or anyone with cancer? as there are so so many these days - on a serious note....
Little children who have cancer… their brains aren’t fully equipped to comprehend the same intensity of fear that adults can have. And, I’m pretty certain that fear has a close connection with the alleged “will to live”. So, little children cannot possibly be suffering to the same extent as adults who have a strong “will to live”. However, you want to know if I find meaning in their struggles? Not really. I feel pity for them, if that’s your question, but it isn’t important. As you may know already, people have been dying from fatal illnesses since the beginning of recorded human history.
I’d better call up Edward Cullen… for interrogation.
And I suppose that your reason for thinking that perhaps it might be “selfish” to not want to be tortured to death is because so many others have been? Plus, for the same reason, it wouldn’t be special.
I think I am in some way beginning to intuit, get a feel for what you mean by “selfish”. I have yet to ponder if I agree with it though. but i am moving closer to it - even since i typed these words and copied and pasted them over here.
Yes, I have why? i like to watch supernatural shows. buffy, angel, i love Supernatural (especially Dean )
Explain if you will/can. You have me giggling again.
I never actually thought of it this way and I can actually understand what you say here. This is certainly nature’s way of compensating for her flaws. You of course may not see it from my pov. At the same time, I don’t know. Do you not think that children can be very instinctive in seeing/realizing the suffering of the parents, the parents’ fear of loss and their pain? Might that not compensate for the “lesser” wils to live and indeed give children a greater will to live?
I am having trouble wrapping my brain around this one…you feel compassion for them (pity doesn’t cut it). can you feel pain when you see a very young child, a child suffering with cancer and what they have to endure to live with it, to overcome it? I understand multitudes of children have suffered from cancer – do you not feel pain at seeing their suffering? I can understand separating ourselves from our emotions but how do you find it so easy when dealing with the suffering of children? It is almost as if to you it is nothing simpler than the flick of a coin? Flick it’s gone.
Alright, you said you feel compassion and then I suppose that you dismiss it. I am able to see how feeling compassion for another would not directly help them - unless they could feel that compassion and/or did something more to show for it – to move from a feeling of compassion to an act of love. There is no percentage in feeling that kind of emotion toward someone unless it is helpful to them. To feel that way might perhaps only allow us to feel better about ourselves, to feel like we are good and compassionate people. In a sense, I could almost see how that would be “selfish” as the emotion would be more directed inward toward ourselves instead of outward toward the suffering person – unless like I said – we move away from feeling into an act of love. perhaps to some extent, feelings may not serve many purposes - well, there is the survival of humanity of course - but then again, feelings, selfishness has also been responsible for its downfall. perhaps the true purpose of feelings is to allow one to move over into love and awareness too.
Edward Cullen – no - let me call him. Probably more my type than yours. He’s hot. And for a vampire, he’s moral and has compassion.
1-Denial: “No! I… I don’t believe it!! I have cancer!?! That’s just ridiculous!!”
2-Anger (a.k.a. the “get the hell away from” stage): “I’m not even old enough to die!” “Shut up! It’s not you who has cancer! Stop trying to be self-righteous!” <prepares to physically hurt the person who is trying to spill out cliche nonsense about how to “cope”>
3-Bargaining: “Let the radiation fly! May as well do it! It’s not like radiation causes even more cancer growth!”
4-Depression: “Does this mean… that I’ll never kill boredom again? That I won’t be able to observe the world anymore? Is this the wrath of a vengeful god? No, what am I thinking?! Why am I being so selfish…?” <proceeds to cry hysterically without any regard to who is witnessing the scene>
5-Acceptance: “It’s not important anyway… Billions have died before me, so big deal… Give me some morphine; let me enjoy these final days.”
This, but of course, is a severely dramatized fashion. That’s me!
I think that the children will recreate their parents’ pain in a generic fashion, as in, empathizing in their own little way, but not grasping the full extent to which their parents are suffering, due to their brains’ undeveloped state.
Pity… obviously it was a rather poor choice of words. Yes, compassion seems to fit better as an appropriate adjective.
Well obviously, it’s pretty devastating {for me} to imagine the destruction of a life before having a chance to live that life. However, for the child… that’s all that he/she has ever known. Adolescence and adulthood cannot be missed. Of course, I wouldn’t feel the emotions and empathy for very long. They’d be very temporary… and quite intense… but my empathy probably wouldn’t last any longer than five minutes, due to my thinking patterns and beliefs.
Sometimes, I enjoy feeling sad, because it activates something in my mind that causes appreciation of my own life’s continuation. But, that’s touching a bit on selfishness, so I don’t really extend it any further than that.
It would be selfish to elaborate on that appreciation of your own life’s continuation. However, feeling it briefly and intensely… there’s not much wrong with that.
“Hot”? Before or after a tan? Nah, who am I kidding?! I’m the very same guy who finds pale, gothic woman to be extremely {physically} attractive. They don’t scare me; they make me do other weird things when I’m alone and picturing them in my mind… uh oh… I should’ve NEVER said such a thing! Heuihahehehehahaha!!
Okay so then where does the concept of the ‘survival of the fittest” enter in here. Is it really selfish to Not want to be tortured to death, simply because others were? Is it really selfish to want to live? Perhaps it could be an act of “selflessness” to forego our ego insofar as “thinking” that we have to die because others have.
why are you finding me perceptive – because I am beginning to agree with you? Would you call that bias (not telling, asking)? As far as the first thought above on selfishness, we have yet to determine, I think, if you would be “selfish” in wanting Not to be tortured, though others were tortured.
you put a very humorous slant to something which is not. Well, after having said that, I suppose if we were capable of being humorous about own deaths, some of the fear and the power would be taken away. And you did make me laugh. Question, does the depression set in after bargaining or before? I am not sure about that? Actually, isn’t depression anger turned inward, so might not the depression set in before the anger, and after the denial?
About no. 2, you are absolutely right about this. We sometimes have no idea how to talk with someone who we know is going to die or someone who has cancer. It seems very strange to give them a stupid bandaid instead of just offering our arms and our ears and our silent listening or whatever kind of support they may need. They have to be the ones who lead us to know this. God forbid we should take a few moments to recognize our own mortality, to feel it through their own.
No. 3, sometimes that bargaining takes the form of promising god to be good, to go back to church, to be good to people – all kinds of bargaining can be seen. Which of course is really normal and being human. Your no. 3, jeff, sounds more like “acceptance” to me. What do you think?
No 4. depression, of course we both know it goes a lot deeper than that, depending on the individual. Facing our mortality, the fact that we will “not be” anymore, can be a very scary state of affairs. I think this is why it is so important to little by little learn to “let go” of things in our lives, whether they be that which are important to us, precious to us, if we do in fact NEED TO, and of course, I would be a hypocrite to here allow you or anyone else to think that I am so capable of that. I am indeed just learning it. But each “letting go” is a form of death of self and of ego. We have so many attachments and so many of these attachments are utterly meaningless; i.e. here I am speaking of things, let’s say even things which have piled up in our homes. How ridiculous to be so attached to things albeit some of these things may remind us of our loved ones. Can “things” though be a substitute for our memories regarding the love of others? Okay, I’m derailing myself here. Learning to love in the correct way and learning to let go are the most difficult lessons we human creatures are about.
No. 5 acceptance…at what point, tell me, jeff, do we realize that we have truly moved from rationalizing that “it is okay” to knowing that we are at peace and ready and willing to let go of life?
Indeed I know this.
As I said, I hadn’t thought of it in that way. You may be right to some extent – I suppose it might depend upon the degree. At the same time, I am not so sure that that would be the case for all children. Some children are very intuitive and very intelligent and have very aware spirits, even at a tender age. Would you agree or disagree with this?
I am not so sure about this, jeff. There are any number of things that an intelligent child might be aware of that he or she is going to miss and these thoughts might fill their mind. I am not so sure that not having experienced something means that the younger child or adolescent will not miss it – will not have regrets. This just might be one of the things that is in the child’s or adolescent’s mind that can cause them pain or great anger. Let’s take for instance, the 30 year old virgin albeit he is 30 years old, if he was told he was dying tomorrow, do you think he would have any regrets (and don ‘t go and tell me he would take care of that the night before LOL). What if he was lying dying in the street do you think it is possible that might be the main thing on his mind, unless he was in a great deal of pain – “damn I am still a virgin”. He never had it so he wouldn’t miss it? Hmmm. I think it is the same with the children. Out of sight does not always mean out of mind. Sometimes out of sight can mean more in the mind. Sometimes never having had can leave such a hole in one’s heart and spirit. Just another perspective.
I actually do understand this as I think I pointed out before. It serves no purpose for the other person unless there IS something we can do to help them – it only serves a purpose for our selfish selves I think.
Perhaps it isn’t so much of an enjoyment of being sad as it is an awareness of how precious life might appear to you. That might be applying too much meaning here (for you) but gratitude is a reasonable, logical human thing, no matter how selfish we might appear to be in relation to others’ lives that seem to have no reason to be grateful. Perhaps our gratitude for our own lives can extend to those of others and draw them in, if you know what i am trying to say.
Gratitude and awareness.
…both before and after the tan. And why do you like pale, gothic women?
that means…Hahahahahahaha and we know if you actually felt that way, you would have deleted it. Ttttttttttttttttttttttttt!!! Pure selflessness you are. Haha.
oops i forgot, you only find true meaning in something that is rare. billions of people have died…what is so rare and special about the fact that you will someday die.
i forgot - anyway, do you find meaning in the struggling and overcoming and the will to live of the little children with cancer - or anyone with cancer? as there are so so many these days - on a serious note…
Would you call that bias (not telling, asking)? As far as the first thought above on selfishness, we have yet to determine, I think, if you would be “selfish” in wanting Not to be tortured, though others were tortured.
(for you) but gratitude is a reasonable, logical human thing, no matter how selfish we might appear to be in relation to others’ lives that seem to have no reason to be grateful. Perhaps our gratitude for our own lives can extend to those of others and draw them in, if you know what i am trying to say.