Transcript 1,2x - UW Canvas

PHIL 340: ANCIENT
ETHICAL THEORY
BE N HOL E
WI N T ER 2 0 1 6
OF F I CE HOURS A F T ER CL A S S.
Agenda
1.
Administrative Questions?
2.
Review last lecture
3.
Apology lecture and discussion
Philosophical topics in the Apology
The examined life and
• Elenchus
• Piety
• Ignorance
• Harm and Death
Administrative
Questions?
• Add codes?
• Writing assignments?
• Participation grades?
Review
WHAT IS THE MUDDIEST POINT FROM THE FIRST LECTURE? WHAT
WOULD YOU LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT?
Ethical Theory & Virtue Ethics
Two approaches to ethics
1. What should I do? (the right)
Or, what is valuable? (the good)
Is VIRTUE ETHICS action-guiding?
Can it every tell us what to do in
a non question-begging way?
2. How should I live? (eudaimonia)
Or, what is excellent human activity? (virtue)
Is virtue ethics a different kind of project?
Eudaimonia ↔ Virtue
Ethical Theory & Virtue Ethics
The Euthyphro Dilemma. Is X pious because
the gods love it? Or do the gods love X because
it is pious?
A Euthyphro-Style Dilemma for VE. Is X right
because the virtuous person performs it? Or
does the virtuous person perform X because it
is right?
“An action is right if and only if (and because) it
is what a virtuous agent (acting in character)
would not avoid doing in the circumstances
under consideration.”
Horned Dilemma Argument
1.
If A, then B or C.
2.
B is absurd
3.
C is absurd
4.
Therefore, A is absurd
The Socratic Method
1.
Elenchos
2.
Priority of Definition
3.
Aporia
“Elenchos would ordinarily be translated as
‘refutation,’ but sometimes only means something
like ‘examination’ (see Ap. 39c7, 39d1). Certainly,
Socrates’ interlocutors appear to be defeated by the
arguments he constructs, and Socrates often
acknowledges that he is attempting to refute his
interlocutors …” (B&S, 5).
The Socratic Method
•The candidate for the elenchus, C, produces a
sincere belief, P ...
•Under questioning, C accepts Q and R (or Q, R,
S etc.).
•Q and R entail not-P.
•C's commitment to Q and R is sufficiently
strong that, faced with the contradictory
conclusion, he finds P to be problematic, not Q
or R.
•P is refuted.
"'Elenchus' in the wider sense means
examining a person with regard to a
statement he has made, by putting to him
questions calling for further statements, in
the hope that they will determine the
meaning and the truth-value of his first
statement. Most often the truth-value
expected is falsehood; and so 'elenchus' in
the narrower sense is a form of crossexamination or refutation" (R. Robinson, "Elenchus," p.
78, in Vlastos, ed., The Philosophy of Socrates).
The Dialogues
Early
Middle
Late
• Elenchus
• Elenchus
+
• (The Theory of the Forms?)
• The Theory of the Forms
Charmides, Crito, Euthydemus, Euthy
phro, Gorgias, Hippias Major, Hippia
s Minor, Ion, Laches, Lysis,
and Protagoras
Part One (17a-35d): Socrates’ Main Defense Speech
Part Two (35e-38b): Socrates’ Counter-Proposal
The Apology
Part Three (38c-42a): Socrates’ Final Speech
ἀπολογία = defense
The Apology
Is the elenchus a destructive methodology?
“If we are right, his [Socrates’] elenctic examinations generate both positive and
negative results. But on our account of the elenchos, moral philosophy for
Socrates is not merely a matter of demonstrating which propositions in the moral
sphere are true and which are false. Rather, it is a rich and complex enterprise in
which one must purge others of their pretense of wisdom, undertake to
determine what kinds of things all human beings must believe about how to live
if their lives are to be happy, test and refine definitions of the virtues, deliberate
about right action, and when the nature of right and wrong action is clear
enough, exhort others to pursue what is right and shun what is wrong. It is the
testimony of Socrates’ genius as a moral philosopher that he turns the elenctic
process into a vehicle by which his entire moral mission, in all its complexity, may
be pursued.” (Brickhouse & Smith, 29)
The Informal Charges
Informal charges are charges against his
reputation:
1. Scientism: Being a student of all things in the
sky and below the earth.
2. Sophistry: making the worst argument the
stronger.
3. Teaching these things to others.
Charges are brought through rumors.
Aristophanes, The Clouds
Defense Against Informal Charges
Socrates explains the origin of his
reputation:
◦ Oracle at Delphi said no one was
wiser than Socrates.
◦ Socrates tries to find a wiser man
by asking people questions.
What is piety? Is Socrates pious?
“It is also clear that Socrates is not a pious man –that is, he lacks the
virtue of piety– for no one can be pious without being wise. But it is
equally plain, from his defense in the Apology, that he regards himself as
innocent of the charge of impiety on the ground that the very actions for
which he has been brought to trial were performed in obedience to the
god (Ap. 28e4-6, 29d3-4, 37e6), or to the Delphic oracle (Ap. 22a7-8,
22e1, 29a3). Socrates says the god commanded him to do what he has
done (Ap. 30a5, 33c4-7), and so his examinations of others constitute a
mission or service he performs for the god (Ap. 21e5, 22a4, 23c1, 30a6-7).
Accordingly, he describes himself as god’s “gift” to Athens (Ap. 30d7-e1,
31a8). It seems clear that Socrates thinks he has acted piously in pursuing
his mission in Athens.” (B/S, 178)
Socratic Ignorance
Ap. 21b4-5: Socrates is “wise in no way great or small”
Ap. 23b2-4: Socrates is the wisest of men
Three options:
1. Socrates is incoherent because he is not being careful
2. Socrates is disingenuous or ironic
3. “Socrates considers there to be two general sorts of knowledge, one which
makes its possessor wise and one which does not. Socrates, and others too, can
confidently and quite correctly say to have a number of instances of this latter
sort; but no human being can rightly claim to have the former sort, since no
human being has ever attained the wisdom Socrates himself disclaims having
when he professes ignorance.” (B/S, 31)
Defense Against Informal Charges

“I was attached to this city … as upon a
great and mobile horse which was
somewhat sluggish because of its size and
needed to be stirred by a gadfly.” (30e)
Discussion Questions
Socrates claims not to be a sophist. He claims that he speaks
the truth, and does not make the weaker argument the
stronger. Do you think that he has proved himself not a
sophist? Why or why not?
Is someone who knows that he doesn’t know something –or
indeed that he knows nothing worthwhile- nonetheless
wiser than someone who mistakenly thinks he knows
something?
(BonJour/Baker, 29)
Formal Charges
Accusers:
◦ Meletus (on behalf of the poets)
◦ Anytus (on behalf of the craftsmen and
politicians)
◦ Lycon (on behalf of the orators)
Charges:
◦ 1. Corrupting the youth (24c-)
◦ 2. Impiety: not believing in the Gods in
whom the polis (Athens) believes. (26a-)
Defense Against Formal Charges
Argument Against
Corrupting the Youth (24c.ff)
1. If Socrates corrupts the youth deliberately,
then he wants to be harmed.*
2. But no man wants to be harmed.
3. Therefore, Socrates does not corrupt the
youth deliberately.
* By deliberately making the
young wicked, Socrates
would be harmed by those
around him. (25e-26b)
Reconstruct Socrates’ elenctic examination of
Meletus’ claim that Socrates is impious (26a.ff)
•The candidate for the elenchus, C, produces a sincere belief,
P ...
•Under questioning, C accepts Q and R (or Q, R, S etc.).
•Q and R entail not-P.
•C's commitment to Q and R is sufficiently strong that, faced
with the contradictory conclusion, he finds P to be
problematic, not Q or R.
•P is refuted.
What is piety? Is Socrates pious?
“It is also clear that Socrates is not a pious man –that is, he lacks
the virtue of piety– for no one can be pious without being wise. But
it is equally plain, from his defense in the Apology, that he regards
himself as innocent of the charge of impiety …” (B/S, 178)
The Socratic Mission

“I was attached to this city … as upon a
great and mobile horse which was
somewhat sluggish because of its size and
needed to be stirred by a gadfly.” (30e)

Warning to the Jurors (38d.ff)
Reflections on Death (40a.ff)

Discussion Question
“What do you think about the famous Socratic saying that the
unexamined life is not worth living? Contrast that with the saying that
ignorance is bliss. What assumptions would someone have to make
about the value and importance of human life to defend each one of
these very different philosophies of life? Which one strikes you as one
you might want to life by? What is wrong with the other one?” (BonJour/Baker, 37)
Elenchus & The Examined Life
“But on our account of the elenchos, moral philosophy for Socrates is not merely
a matter of demonstrating which propositions in the moral sphere are true and
which are false. Rather, it is a rich and complex enterprise in which one must
purge others of their pretense of wisdom, undertake to determine what kinds of
things all human beings must believe about how to live if their lives are to be
happy, test and refine definitions of the virtues, deliberate about right action,
and when the nature of right and wrong action is clear enough, exhort others
to pursue what is right and shun what is wrong. It is the testimony of Socrates’
genius as a moral philosopher that he turns the elenctic process into a vehicle by
which his entire moral mission, in all its complexity, may be pursued.”
(Brickhouse & Smith, 29)
Socratic Virtue Ethics
“(PE) Principle of Eudaimonism – A thing is good only insofar as it is conducive to happiness. A
thing is evil insofar as it is conducive to wretchedness…
Virtue
◦ The virtuous condition of the soul is neither necessary or sufficient for happiness. Vice is sufficient but not
necessary for wretchedness.
◦ Only good action… will enable us to live a happy life. Such activity is both necessary and sufficient for
happiness. And the happiest life is ensured by living without impediment a life that is guided by virtue.
Happiness
◦ To be happy is the same as to live well or to do well. To be wretched is the same as to life ill or to do ill. To
live well is to engage in a good activity.
◦ Though nothing can make the good person suffer the most extreme (absolute) wretchedness, circumstances
can make his or her life no longer worth living, that is, circumstances can make him or her capable no longer
of living or doing well, or being happy.”
B&S, pg. 134-6
Socratic Virtue Ethics
Is it action-guiding? Can it every
tell us what to do in a non
question-begging way?