Socrates the father of modern thought

Home

Alexander
Everett

Edgar Cayce

Nostradamus

Socrates

Yogananda

Aristotle

Socrates – His Life and Trials

Socrates (469-399BC) has emerged as one of the most influential ‘fathers of modern thought’, and has been instrumental in shaping the way we view many established principles of modern life today. His rhetoric and debate regarding spiritual matters, the soul, individual enlightenment, spiritual matters, and his opposition to more physical social norms such as wealth creation have left their mark on modern society.

According to Socrates a simple life was a good life. His life, however, was anything other than straightforward. He was born in a time when challenging existing ideas and established orthodox religious principles was a very dangerous proposition. Never-the-less, Socrates’ life took him on a course that was to directly challenge these very tenets of Greek life.

Born in Athens, the son of Sophroniscus a sculptor and Phaenarete a midwife, Socrates initially followed the traditional pathway, and became a sculptor. He was successful at this, and executed a statue group of the three Graces which stood at the entrance to the Acropolis until the 2nd century AD. Soon after, Socrates left to fight in the Peloponnesian War with Sparta (which Sparta won) and was recognized and rewarded for his role here also.

Socrates’ early life was therefore marked by success at almost every step. Following his return to Greece he opted, after the death of his father, to forgo the traditional lifestyle and instead became a much in demand philosophical speaker.

‘When Socrates, said “learning is remembering” he didn’t mean you need to develop a good memory. Rather, he was talking about the deeper concept that you already know everything and simply have to be reminded of it. Learning is simply re-accessing everything you already know.’
Ed Strachar

As a debater and speaker he became very popular, and attracted a large following. Rather than take money for his debates and ‘work’ he refused it, adding to his base of followers. The young of Athens respected and in many cases revered him. The parents of his followers were not always as enthusiastic.

Socrates was obedient to the laws of Athens, but he generally steered clear of politics, restrained by what he believed to be divine warnings. Politically he remained on unsafe ground often through no fault of his own. Following the defeat by Sparta, a number of the ‘Tyrants of Sparta’, the bloodthirsty ruling-body were followers of Socrates. Although he tried to remain aloof from them and their ideas, he was however tainted by association. Other aspects of his life also tainted him in the eyes of many.

Socrates early in life discovered his daimonion, a guardian spirit or voice. It was reliance on and discussion of this daimonion that led him into trouble with authorities. Although we must rely on the interpretations of others in deciphering exactly what this daimonion was, Socrates seems to have recognized it as a social conscience, since he repeatedly said that “when it comes it always dissuades me from what I am proposing to do, and never urges me on”.

Regardless of what Socrates’ daimonion really was, it was often interpreted as being a ‘guardian spirit’, or ‘divine manifestation’ akin to a new god. As such, this put him on a collision path with the rulers of the post-Sparta government and his continued espousing of his daimonion was seen as a grievous sin to the government and people of Athens. It is generally accepted by non-partisan observers that their attack of his ideas was little more than a way to undermine his position and influence in society and marginalize him. The result was a trial before 500 Athenian citizens at which Socrates had to defend himself against the charges. The punishment, were he to be found guilty, was death.

Surprisingly, Socrates’ defense against his accusers was weak. Rather than respond in a substantive way he chose instead to use ridicule, allegory and irony to support his defense. He accused Athens of following a non-religious course in its continued search for more wealth, and slammed individuals for their lack of adherence to higher aims.

Not surprisingly, he was found guilty, and drank hemlock in the company of friends to take his own life. Many have since said that they saw this as his final rejection on the legitimacy of a state that valued money and power above morality, virtue and individual enlightenment.