We have discussed some of the historical events leading up to Socrates' death, and touched on the quasi-oral poetic history underneath which gives us some insight into his work (and Plato's choice of literary form). One remaining piece is the conceptual, philosophical or scientific background, leading to the so-called "Socratic turn" away from speculation about the natural world, and inward, so to speak, to the investigation of oneself and one's place in a human community.
Here's a question about that "turn" on which you might perhaps all weigh in: Why do you suppose it seemed to Socrates as though he had to choose between these inquiries?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Is this "Socratic turn" a move from empiricism to rationalism?
Maybe he had to choose one over the other to put the emphasis on a method that wasn't popular at the time, as to put it out there for others to use. And/Or perhaps he thought people should start recognizing their own cognitive, rational abilities as a source of knowledge, in which one could engage in philosophical inquiry without using the sensory world, but with oneself and peers, which may be seen as a practice anyone can do at any time. This recognition may help others understand their nature as something different from their surroundings in which they may reevaluate this nature.
In response to your initial question, I think not, as much of the work of the "natural philosophers" was more speculative than observational.
Certainly the need for exaggerated emphasis is a possible diagnosis, though a somewhat uncharitable interpretation, so perhaps a fall-back theory at best.
Maybe speculation about the natural world could not be grasped fully without the investigation of oneself and one's place in a human community.
So Sacrates left the exploration of external things because the question of how, not why, is all that could be sought after. And he wanted a 'why', not just 'how'.
Post a Comment