Você está na página 1de 6

1

Mishael Eusebio
R. Price
LARTS-111
11/19/2015
The concept of goodness has been such a sensitive topic among every day and scholarly
folk alike. The idea of categorizing specific actions or qualities ties in with the hope that one may
attain something greater in a new realm of existence after death: religion often offers systems for
this. Yet, irrespective of religions, what makes something good itself and how can we know it?
This is the dilemma that Socrates touches in his entire lifes work as a philosopher and especially
in The Last Days of Socrates, which only offers a glimpse of his own doctrine. Aristotle, who
was the best student of Plato who was in turn a student of Socrates, brings different ideas of
goodness to the table, countering Socrates notions in Nicomachean Ethics, particularly in what
aspects of goodness they focus on. Wherein some take the idea of living the good life for
granted, these great Greek philosophers take it more than seriously.
Piety is the central point that is fixated in Euthyphro, in that its main character Euthyphro
is unable to bring a satiable definition of it to the inquiring Socrates. The first book; in this
respect, teaches us not how to define goodness. Socrates leaves the idea that he does not want to
associate the idea of morality with the gods, because it can only bring more dilemmas. When
Socrates asks Euthyphro to define holiness, he states that his act of prosecuting someone
regardless of familial relations (p. 13, 5e) is what is pious, or good. This isnt exactly a definition
and so Euthyphro tries again: Right then: what is agreeable to the gods is holy and what is not
agreeable is unholy (p. 16, 7a). This again is irrational to Socrates, who points out that the gods
do have their disagreements, therefore one might find a particular thing agreeable and another

2
may find it disagreeable, therefore making it holy and unholy at the same time (8a). Quickly
changing his definition to what the gods collectively favor and denounce (9e), yet he goes on to
state that what is approved by the gods is approved because it is holy (10d). An issue arises due
to the contradiction in those two statements: the holy and the divinely approved cannot be the
same (pg 20, 11a). Upon digressing further, Euthyphro concludes that actions appeasing to the
gods is what is holy and the opposite is the unholy (p.27, 14b). However, this contradicts his
theory, where the initial statement was that what is approved is approved because its holy, rather
than the other way around. All of the arguments are centered on the gods, to which Socrates
points out a flaw to the reasoning each time, to say that the idea of the good cant be tied to the
gods. In Euthyphro, Socrates gives his definition of goodness by defining what its not: a godsaffiliated virtue.
In The Apology, Socrates gives his beliefs on the knowledge of the good. For the life of
the philosopher, nothing is more important than wisdom and so that is where the term
philosopher comes from, which translates to love of wisdom in ancient Greek. During his
defense, he mentions a time when an oracle at Delphi had said that no one was wiser than he was
(pg. 43, 20e), yet he vehemently denies the accusation (pg.46, 23a). In fact, he states that those
who call him wise mistake him with human wisdom, which is worthless: [R]eal wisdom is the
property of the god, and this oracle is his way of telling us that human wisdom has little or no
value (pg. 46, 23a). One could well imagine the reaction to this among many of those in the trial
and especially to the orator Meletus who claims to be one of the wise. He believes that what is
important in doing an action is whether or not one is doing it justly or unjustly (p. 54, 28b). In a
slight digression, Socrates makes a statement in the Crito that no one makes a conscious choice
to do evil or to act ignorantly (pg. 88, 49b) but in order to cease making evil or ignorant choices,

3
one must pursue knowledge. The best way to live a good life, in Socrates perspective, is to lead
an examined one with the pursuit of wisdom: [T]hat life without [discussing goodness and all
other subjects] is not worth living (pg. 36, 38a). Unfortunately, the Athenians fail to understand
Socrates and so they sentence him to death for demoralizing the young. What they fail to realize
is that Socrates point is that there is more wisdom in the acceptance of ignorance as it was in his
case and that the most desirable life is one that leads a quest for wisdom which encourages good.
In the Crito, Socrates explains the difference between just laws and laws that are binding
merely on a social agreement. In his distinctive Socratic style, he first tells Crito that there is a
weak basis of what good is if it involves widespread opinions (pg. 86, 48a). What really matters
in living is living well and justly (pg. 87, 48b). This reaches them to the conclusion that it would
be unjust to leave the prison because leaving the prison would be causing a form of injury to the
Athenians (pg.89, 50a) and therefore makes a choice to create injustice. This also breaks a social
agreement to abide by the laws even though they are unjust for the sake of social order and
cohesion: Do you image that a city can continue to exist and /not be turned upside down, if the
legal judgments which are /pronounced in it have no force but are nullified and destroyed /by
private persons? (pg. 90, 50b). At this point, his voice is starting to say that legal judgments and
the laws are not necessarily just, but rather made and followed for social cohesion. Moreover,
referencing back to the Apology, the laws are made with human wisdom, which is not the true
wisdom as true wisdom belongs to the god (pg. 46, 23a). Socrates view of the good in the laws,
there can be good in the laws, but not all laws are necessarily good.
The Phaedo is a powerful book on Socratic philosophy in its own right because it
introduces ideas such as Socratic asceticism and the Eternal forms. Through these ideas he ties in
the idea of goodness. He states that pleasure and pain are both tied together because there can be

4
no pleasure if there was no pain that brought need for it (pg. 117, 59a). Within the realms of
pleasures, he states that there is no need for it among philosophers (pg.125, 64d). He
recommends abstaining from the body: in good clothing and accessories as well as from all
pleasures, desires and griefs (pg. 152, 83c). In his belief, devoutness to the body does not bring
goodness; rather, it is the devotion to the eternal soul. The soul itself is immortal and the body is
what is ephemeral (pg. 183, 105d-e). Our knowledge comes from a previous life from the
immortal soul that lived before it lived inside our bodies (pg.144, 77b). Because of the
imperfection of the body within the soul, it clouds its inherent sense of good (pg.127, 66b). By
giving into pleasures or pains, one sticks the soul closer to the body and making one even farther
from experiencing the unseen world, where the true good is (pg.153, 83d). It is also more
important to pay attention more to the soul than to the body, as to prepare for death (pg.124,
64a). In the Phaedo, Socrates explains the importance of asceticism in order to attain good, even
though the true good cannot be attained in the physical world.
Aristotle also pens many strong ideas on good, though some are deliberate contradictions
to Socratess own beliefs. For instance, wherein Socrates believes in the good life being the
pursuit of knowledge in order to do good, Aristotle believes that the highest form of good is
happiness because there is no reason above that as to why man does good (pg.1, #2). In this
respect then Aristotle believes every action man does is because he believes he is doing it for the
pursuit of something good (pg. 1, #1). Essentially, if we were to keep asking why to someones
action, it would lead to the final answer that he is doing it for his own happiness. This does not
necessarily mean that everything man does is good just because his pursuits are for good. In fact,
Aristotle believes that knowing what is good is not enough to be good, contrary to Socrates. It is
rather in the upbringing of someone where the virtues of goodness are ingrained: Hence anyone

5
who is to listen intelligently to lectures about what is noble and just must have been brought
up in good habits (pg. 3, #4).
Aristotle also goes on to criticize the Platonic/Socratic belief in one absolute good. In his
belief, there are many forms of good and not just one, with happiness being the highest, and that
they are attainable in this life: Perhaps, however, some one might think it worthwhile to
recognize this with a view to the goods that are attainable and achievable if we know them we
shall attain them (pgs. 5-6, #6). Aristotle sees no point in believing that good is unattainable in
this current life. Wherein Socrates is more concerned for the good in the life after the soul leaves
the body, Aristotle is more focused in what good can be achieved in this current life and his first
book is essentially a summary of how to achieve them.
Aristotle believes in the idea of pleasure participating in virtue, rather than Socrates
belief in abstaining from it. Instead of Socrates idea that the virtuous are those who remain
ascetic from pleasure, Aristotle says that observing people taking pleasure in doing good acts is
evidence of having a virtuous disposition (pg. 18, #3). The Aristotelian idea of moral virtue is
finding the balance of a quality (pg. 21, #6). For example, by being modest one is being virtuous.
If one is lacking in it, one is shameless and if one has too much of it one becomes bashful, and
both are considered vices. Instead of Socratic asceticism, pleasure in doing virtuous acts and
finding the mean in it is what is evident of the good in Aristotle.
Socrates, Aristotle and Plato, who happen to be the big three of Greek philosophy, seek
out an answer to what is good. Their approaches are different, yet they indirectly reach the
consensus that what matters most is the good: whether it be asceticism in pursuit of knowledge
of an absolute good to prepare the spirit for the afterlife as in Socrates and Plato or the pursuit to
attain goods in this current life and maintaining a mean to a virtue, as in Aristotle.

Works Cited
Ross, W. D. The Nicomachean Ethics. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2009. Print.
Tredennick, Hugh. The Last Days of Socrates. London: Penguin, 2003.
Print.

Você também pode gostar