Customer Reviews

The Death of Socrates (Profiles in History)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I suspect there are few others in history besides Christ who have had more books written about his death and its meaning than Socrates. From Plato, his student and other contemporaries such as Xenophon, through many centuries where he was adopted by other skeptics of the prevailing social order such as Erasmus, who called him a saint, the trial and circumstances of the death sentence imposed on him, and his willingness to carry it out have resulted in many adopters of his cause.

As a libertarian myself, I have always thought that much of what Socrates was ultimately about was to force people to ask questions about "established" wisdom; one of the most threatening things that can be done in any social order. Doing this at a time when there were many gods supposedly looking after ancient Athens was really no different than those who went to their deaths in Stalin's gulags; a timeless threat to those who rule by consensus or complete control.

Wilson has obviously spent many years researching her subject and has come up with her own theories about just why Socrates was given the death sentence, and they deserve just as much deference as many others which have been equally well "established" by others who studied the man and the era.

This is a really great book about a wonderful topic and one of the few I have read on the subject that i plan to keep in my library.

I have read several books on Socrates and found this one well written; a refreshing look at an historical figure often referred to but not well understood.

This witty, erudite book forces us to look again at one of the founders of Western civilisation. Going beyond hagiography, this book is highly readable and scholarly, accessible to students but serious and original enough for specialists. I recommend it highly.

The idea motivating this book is great: discuss the significance of Socrates (particularly his death) throughout Western history. Unfortunately, if you misunderstand the way in which Plato presents the figure of Socrates then such an endeavor risks being entirely distorted. I am sorry to say, but such is the case with this book.

The author opens the book by with the admission of being "torn between enormous admiration and an equally overwhelming sense of rage." The author goes on to explain the rage is due to four things: (1) Socrates' own beliefs are never called into question; (2) Socrates' neglect of his family; (3) The fact that Socrates "died for faith, even superstition"; (4) Socrates "always had an unstated goal - to prove the other person wrong."

A powerful case can be made that the author is simply wrong on all these four accusations. A close look at, for example, Plato's Crito and Phaedo easily dismisses the first count. As for the second, I would say that the word "belief" simply doesn't apply to Socrates, for Socrates makes his reasoned opinions (not mere beliefs") clear in a number of dialogues, as for example in the Gorgias, but more importantly his emphasis is always on questioning, for Socrates lives in what Keats referred to as "Negative Capability," or the ability to live without certainty. Plato's Socrates addresses the fourth point in the Republic and especially the Gorgias where Socrates explicity rejects the love of victory in conversation to the love of following the logos of any argument to wherever it leads. Further, this accusation points to the authors misunderstanding of the so-called Socratic method, which is to say the method of dialectic. The author only sees a distorted surface of Plato's teaching and fails in understanding how to approach a Platonic dialogue, which begins first and foremost with the question of why Plato wrote dialogues rather than treatises.

As a book in which one can turn to and learn about Socrates, I cannot recommend this one. Moreover, the author's misreading of Plato casts great suspicion on what is provided as interpretation for the other thinkers mentioned in this book, particularly Xenophon as I feel he is more difficult than Plato. By far, in my opinion, a much better book for one to turn to in order to gain insight into what exactly Socrates was up to is Diskin Clay's "Platonic Questions." With what Clay provides, one can then proceed for oneself to examine Socrates' impact on Western civilization.

This book is a thorough study of the whys and wherefores of a significant historical event that has resonated over the centuries in western civilization. The author explains Socrates' philosophy and the society he lived in and describes the event. Then reviews how the event had influenced not only ancient Greece but also Rome and beyond. All the way to the Enlightment and modern times citing all kinds of philosophers, writers and artists. The book has pictures of paintings that depicted the event and has an extensive bibliography for future reading. The author even interjects with her own opinions about the subject, especially about Socrates' nagging wife. I enjoyed reading it for its insights and recommend it.

As other reviews herein have stated: MS Wilson did her homework in reviewing a multitude of documents, sources, books and others' opinions on the issues presented. Her conclusions that Socrates may have protrayed both the feminine and masculine sides of his life, that his death has been manipulated by many who followed and his impact on western civilization are masterfully done.

I deeply regret that MS Wilson used her work to proffer falsehoods about the United States and Jewish history.

It is my opinion that the following sentence was out of place and does not accurately protray reality:

"The right of prisoners to a proper hearing has been a key tenet of almost all democratric or semi-democratic governments in western history (only recently violated, in America, in the case of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners)."

Her statement is not supported by international law nor the Constitution of the United States. The prisoners in Guantanamo are not a member of the Constitutionally protected class of "We the People of the United States . . ." The Constitution applys to citizens of the United States and has not been extended to enemy combatants bent on destroying the United States and its citizens.

Next and probably unintentional misrepresentatkon is "Votaire, more unusually, dubbed Jesus 'the Socrates of Palestine'. This translation is improbable - there was no country or area of the world referred to as "Palestine" during the life of Jesus or Voltaire. The more accepted translation is "Philistines." By making this historical reference mistake the author continues to perpetuate the myth that there was a country named Palestine.

Finally the author's statement: What had begun (Christianity) as a tiny Jewish-Palestinian cult had suddenly become the world's most powerful ideology. As stated above there was no country, religion or people referred to as "Palestinians" that had any influence on the "tiny cult". What is documented and supported by most reputable historians is Jesus was a Jew and he and his followers belived that he was the Jewish Messiah. The problem created by this was there were over 200 persons making the same claim and Jews believe that the Messiah would bring peace on earth and good-will towards all men. Jesus' cult was the most effective and become Christianity - Palestinians did not exist and had nothing to do with the "tiny cult".

Notwithstanding the above complaints I did find this books well written and worth my time to read and understand. MS Wilson did so much work that one must appreciate being able to read her conclusions while relaxing and not having to read the myriad of documents she did for us.