Great Dialogues of Plato - Dialog: Apology
I bought another Plato book to replace the one I lost, this one was half the cost and way better.
Introduction
This introduction was a lot more informative than the other book. Filled with facts about Plato and others, it was worth the time it took to read.
Apology
This dialog takes place in an Athens court room at the hearing of Socrates. Its the only one I have read so far that has a reference to Plato, he is in the court room observing the proceedings. Socrates tells his story/defense, it involves speaking to the gods through an oracle, Pythian Prophetess, of Delphi. They say he is the wisest man. He didn’t think it was true, and began a quest to find a man who is wiser so that he may logically refute what was said. In the process he makes enemies with politicians, poets, and artisans. He calls out those who claim to be wise and are not. He sees this to be the reason he has ended up in court. He then proceeds to say that wisdom is knowing that your wisdom is worthless and only god is wise. I am disappointed in the words, maybe I am not reading them the way I should, but its the message I see.
His slams on the poets take me on a small trip. Poets maybe vague at times and may not be all wise in the subject but this is an impossibility. You do not need to posses great wisdom in a subject to have meaningful discussion. Socrates appears to be a man of absolutes and not all things are to be judged in such a manner.
The notion of Socrates being on a mission from god kind of cracks me up, adding continual humor throughout the book because I keep wondering what they are all wearing, I imagine he has a buddy there who likes to dress the same as him ala The Blues Brothers.
Towards the end of the dialog Socrates is talking about his potential punishments and something is said that hits a chord with me.
“… and if I say again that daily to discourse about virtue, and of those other things about which you hear me examining myself and others, is the greatest good of man, and that the unexamined life is not worth living …”
What I see in the text is that life is about self improvement, cross examination is used as a tool of improvement. I find these thoughts interesting because it is the reason I wanted to read more. There are probably a million books on self improvement but that seems like cheating. Some things are best found on your own without them being handed to you. With all these constraints it almost sounds as though I have a goal in mind. How can someone without goals be successful? How can that someone fail? Its something that pops into my head frequently. Does having a goal give you an edge? It would seem too, but by whos measure? If one has a goal and fails is he better off than the one without a goal and cannot fail? Without goals are you open to more things? It seems as though a goal could give you tunnel vision. Perhaps that is a demonstration of wisdom, being able to set goals and still be able to draw on those things outside of them to meet your end.
Sometimes I wonder about this game I play because it never seems to end. Every question leads to a thought which leads to a question, etc. “If one has a goal and fails is he better off than the one without a goal …” The answer is found within the measure of “better off” But of course its just another path to discover with an incalculable number of variables to consider. What more could you ask for? 