Sokrates presents us with quite a striking paradox in the platonic corpus by characterizing himself as being ignorant and wise combined. Like so many of his other claims this one is rather provocative in its obvious contradiction which none the less hides a striking idea for us readers to note. By relevant definitions he would be the person to answer philosophical questions on moral properties. Those questions take the nature of – can a truly good man be virtuous? Is that action just? These questions according to Socrates would only be answered by someone who was truly wise and who had essential knowledge on definitions for him to be able to provide an expert answer. On the essence of piety and virtue, Sokrates insisted on a clear message
…show more content…
Continuing to read through the dialogues, we discover that Sokrates profession on lack of knowledge results from believing that he has no knowledge about moral ideals or properties like piety, justice, virtue and beauty. He specifically laments on his ignorance of fundamental definitions or natures of these properties (Allen, 1989). Further he asserts that if only we were aware of our ignorance on moral definitions and thus unable to derive desired information arising from them. That is to imply that we lack the knowledge that would make us truly knowledgeable. He sees emptiness from the arrogance that we exhibit when we declare authority on whether something ought to be pious or …show more content…
This draws his interest and he is keen in finding out how confident he was on such a claim, or was he perhaps an authority on property? Enquiring, the responder in essence replies that indeed he knew much about property since he had fundamental knowledge of its nature. This exchange is found at the start of Euthyphro where Euthyphro tells Socrates that due to his expertise on matters touching on piety, he understood that he had a religious duty to press charges against his own father (Allen, 1989). In the exchange, Sokrates asserts “By Zeus, Euthyphro! Do you think that you have such accurate knowledge of divine things and what is pious and impious that in circumstances like you describe, you can accuse your own father? Are you not, yourself, afraid that you are committing an impious act? (Allen, 25). Euthyphro responds “Why Sokrates, if I did not have accurate knowledge of all that, I would be worthless and Euthyphro would not be different from most men.” (Allen, 25).
In effect he asks, “Tell me, as an expert, what is the fundamental nature of the property you claim to understand? If I knew this, then I could be like you and derive all sorts of knowledge about the property” (Allen, 46). The interlocutor invariably agrees to this request and gives an answer. Again, the Euthyphro provides an ideal example of
Continuing to read through the dialogues, we discover that Sokrates profession on lack of knowledge results from believing that he has no knowledge about moral ideals or properties like piety, justice, virtue and beauty. He specifically laments on his ignorance of fundamental definitions or natures of these properties (Allen, 1989). Further he asserts that if only we were aware of our ignorance on moral definitions and thus unable to derive desired information arising from them. That is to imply that we lack the knowledge that would make us truly knowledgeable. He sees emptiness from the arrogance that we exhibit when we declare authority on whether something ought to be pious or …show more content…
This draws his interest and he is keen in finding out how confident he was on such a claim, or was he perhaps an authority on property? Enquiring, the responder in essence replies that indeed he knew much about property since he had fundamental knowledge of its nature. This exchange is found at the start of Euthyphro where Euthyphro tells Socrates that due to his expertise on matters touching on piety, he understood that he had a religious duty to press charges against his own father (Allen, 1989). In the exchange, Sokrates asserts “By Zeus, Euthyphro! Do you think that you have such accurate knowledge of divine things and what is pious and impious that in circumstances like you describe, you can accuse your own father? Are you not, yourself, afraid that you are committing an impious act? (Allen, 25). Euthyphro responds “Why Sokrates, if I did not have accurate knowledge of all that, I would be worthless and Euthyphro would not be different from most men.” (Allen, 25).
In effect he asks, “Tell me, as an expert, what is the fundamental nature of the property you claim to understand? If I knew this, then I could be like you and derive all sorts of knowledge about the property” (Allen, 46). The interlocutor invariably agrees to this request and gives an answer. Again, the Euthyphro provides an ideal example of