Notes and Comments on Phaedo -- 6

11 June 2023

Notes and Comments on Phaedo – 6

This post continues with my notes and comments on the dialogue Phaedo.  I am using the Harold North Fowler translation, published by the Loeb Classical Library:

“’So tell Evenus that Cebes, and bid him farewell, and tell him, if he is wise, to come after me as quickly as he can.  I, it seems, am going to-day; for that is the order of the Athenians.’

“And Simmias said, ‘What a message that is, Socrates, for Evenus!  I have met him often, and from what I have seen of him, I should say that he will not take your advice in the least if he can help it.’

“’Why so?’ said he, ‘Is not Evenus a philosopher?

“’I think so,’ said Simmias.’

“’Then Evenus will take my advice, and so will every man who has any worthy interest in philosophy.  Perhaps, however, he will not take his own life, for they say that is not permitted.’  And as he spoke he put his feet down on the ground and remained sitting in this way through the rest of the conversation.

“’Then Cebes asked him: ‘What do you mean by this, Socrates, that it is not permitted to take one’s life, but that the philosopher would desire to follow after the dying?’

“’How is this, Cebes?  Have you and Simmias, who are pupils of Philolaus, not heard about such things?’

“’Nothing definite, Socrates.’

“’I myself speak of them only from hearsay; but I have no objection to telling what I have heard.  And indeed it is perhaps especially fitting, as I am going to the other world, to tell stories about the life there and consider what we think about it; for what else could one do in the time between now and sunset?’

“’Why in the world do they say that it is not permitted to kill oneself, Socrates?  I heard Philolaus, when he was living in our city, say the same thing you just said, and I have heard it from others, too, that one must not do this; but I never heard anyone say anything definite about it.’

“’You must have courage,’ said he, ‘and perhaps you might hear something.  But perhaps it will seem strange to you that this alone of all laws is without exception, and it never happens to mankind, as in other matters, that only at some times and for some persons it is better to die than to live; and it will perhaps seem strange to you that these human being for whom it is better to die cannot without impiety do good to themselves, but must wait for some other benefactor.’

“And Cebes, smiling gently, said, ‘Gawd knows it doos’ speaking in his own dialect.

“’It would seem unreasonable, if put in this way,’ said Socrates, ‘but perhaps there is some reason in it.  Now the doctrine that is taught in secret about this matter, that we men are in a kind of prison and must not set ourselves free or run away, seems to me to be weighty and not easy to understand.  But this at least, Cebes, I do believe is sound, that the gods are our guardians and that we men are one of the chattels of the gods.  Do you now believe this?’

“’Yes,’ said Cebes, ‘I do.’

“’Well then,’ said he, ‘if one of your chattels should kill itself when you had not indicated that you wished it to die, would you be angry with it and punish it if you could?’

“’Certainly,’ he replied.’

“’Then perhaps from this point of view it is not unreasonable to say that a man must not kill himself until god sends some necessity upon him, such as has now come upon me.’”

(Ibid pages 213-217)

1.  The discussion is about the ethics of suicide and whether or not suicide is ever permitted.  This comes up, I think, because Socrates had an opportunity to escape his death sentence.  A group of friends, likely headed by Crito, gathered money for the purposes of bribing guards and other officials (likely members of the Eleven) so that Socrates could escape.  Socrates refuses this offer; this is the focus of the dialogue Crito.

For some it looks like Socrates is, therefore, committing suicide.  But Socrates does not see it that way.  Socrates sees it as obeying the decision of his community and, in addition, following the guidance of the gods from whom he first learned of his calling in life.

In some ways I see the attitude of Socrates as similar to someone who decides to ‘let nature take its course.’  This phrase is used by some people who are diagnosed with a terminal illness and are offered surgery as a way of overcoming the diagnosis.  However, some people respond in this situation by saying that they are ready to move on, and that they are ready ‘to let nature take its course.’  In a similar way, Socrates is ready to let the will of the Athenians have its day.  Looked at in this way Socrates is not taking his own life.

2.  The paragraph beginning “You must have courage,” is a difficult one to unravel.  But I think it makes sense as a lead in to the next point, about our lives belonging to the gods.  In this paragraph, Socrates is emphasizing that the prohibition on suicide is so strong that even those who would be better off dying (say because they are in extreme pain) must not take matters into their own hands; rather they need to wait for some benefactor – I see this as close to what people mean when they say that they will let nature take its course. 

I think that the opening remark about needing ‘courage’ to understand this teaching is made because it is natural for people to think otherwise, to try to avoid terminal discomfort, and to take matters into one’s own hands.  Socrates is suggesting that such an attitude is ‘impious’, meaning an afront to the gods and to that part of the soul that is connected to the gods. 

Socrates realizes that this will seem ‘strange’ to Cebes and Cebes says that, indeed, it does seem strange.  (I’m not sure why Plato writes here in Cebes’s local dialect.  It may be a sign of affection.  It may be an indicator that this part of the conversation should be understood as verbatim.  It may be a way of reminding the reader that Cebes is not an Athenian.  But, again, I’m not sure why this device is used at this time.);

3.  It is intriguing to me that Socrates mentions that the doctrine they are discussing is given in ‘secret’; that is to say it is an esoteric teaching.  It would be helpful to know under what circumstances Socrates received this teaching.  Was it from Diotima?, or perhaps from one of the mystery traditions such as the Orphics or the Mysteries of Eleusis?  It may be that his audience knows what mystery tradition Socrates is referring to and does not need a specific reference.

4.  The teaching that Socrates offers is that we are chattel of the gods; that is to say, we are owned by the gods.  This is a difficult teaching for us moderns.  We tend to think of ourselves as individuals who stand on our own; at least we think adults are this way. 

It is possible to think of this from the perspective of what, in some East Asian traditions, is referred to as Great Nature.  Great Nature means the energy that pours forth from the source and from which everything emerges.  It is way beyond our control.  We are completely dependent upon it.

5.  There is also a kind of fatalism in the teaching of Socrates at this point.  Modernity tends to see each individual as the ‘master of their fate.’  But Classical culture didn’t see things that way.  Instead Classical culture tended to see people as pushed and pulled by forces far beyond their ability to understand, driven this way and that by the whims of fortune and misfortune.

Classical Astrology was very much a tool to determine the fate of individuals and of larger groupings such as nations.  Classical Astrology was predictive, meaning that if negative configurations appeared in your chart, then negative things would happen to you and you should be prepared.  Classical Astrology wasn’t psychologically oriented; as I said, it was fate-based, and astrology itself was a kind of elaborate explanation of how fate works.

The Stoic philosophy partially grew because of this focus on fate.  The Stoic philosophy emphasized that almost everything is beyond our control.  But, Stoics argued, there is an ‘inner citadel’ where we are free to accept these circumstances, no matter how difficult, or free to succumb.  Much of Stoic practice was teaching how to overcome fate.

In The Consolation of Philosophy by Boethius, it opens with Boethius lamenting his misfortune and how the Goddess Fortuna rules our lives.  One moment we are riding high, and the next moment laid low.  The Goddess Philosophy leads Boethius to the transcendental that lies beyond the cycles of fateful material existence through carefully reasoned insights and inferences, thereby freeing Boethius from his fate; not in the sense that Boethius is released from prison, but in the sense that Boethius’s soul is beyond whatever circumstances manifests in the material domain.

And finally, there is the medieval poem ‘Carmina Burana’, which opens with a bitter lamentation, ‘O Fortuna’, listing the fickle nature of material existence that is under the control of the Goddess Fortuna.  This has been turned into a full chorus with symphony orchestra, written by Carl Orff in the 1930’s.  It is very popular with some versions receiving millions of ‘hits’ on youtube.  I think this indicates that the teaching of the fickleness of fate is still a truth that rings true for people even in the midst of modernity where we tend to think of ourselves as demi-deities and in some way masters of the universe.

To return to Phaedo, Socrates seems to be saying that we owe our lives to the gods.  Yes, we are owned by the gods, the forces of fate, but from another perspective our life is a gift of the gods.  And we should not simply throw this gift away as it would be an afront to the gods.  No matter what our circumstances, we should wait patiently until god sends a necessity to our lives, as in the case of Socrates or Boethius.

I think it is possible, and helpful, to look at this from the perspective of rebirth and karma.  By taking our own life we are seeking to alter our karma by our own actions, and by our own standards.  But the karmic consequences that would have manifested had we not taken our own life, are simply transferred to another life; they are inescapable.  And because of this we are tied to the wheel of birth and death by this action we have taken instead of freeing ourselves from our karmic heritage.  This sounds Dharmic, but I believe it also applies in a Platonic context.

6.  The conversation on this topic will continue in the next post.