A Private Conversation between Plato and Sophocles after the Trial
Plato: If my understanding of Socrates is correct, he has never claimed to possess nor teach any kind of knowledge to anyone. At the trial, I think Socrates also successfully drew a clear line between him and the Sophists who pretend to possess knowledge which actually is not of their own. Socrates pleaded that he has “no knowledge of the kind” and that he knows it as a fact that he has “no wisdom, small or great” (Apology, 2, 3). I have admired you Sophocles as much as I respect Socrates, because I have noticed some similarities between your work Antigone and Socrates’ thoughts. Therefore, your decision to declare Socrates guilty was a verdict which I was not expecting to hear. I thought you would also have realized from Socrates’ arguments that he was not one of the Sophists, and that he indeed has been scornful of their practices. In this respect, I cannot help but asking you the reason behind your verdict.
Sophocles: My dear Plato. I do personally respect Socrates for his unbending spirit to stand against what he believes to be problematic. It takes a lot of courage for a man to do so. Like many of my fellow citizens, I disapprove of all kinds of “great words of haughty men” through which some has tried to teach others by receiving money (Antigone, 1422). I think they are destroying the foundations of our society. I see that Socrates also understood this shallowness and foolishness in wisdom taught by the Sophists. I also realize that Socrates made it clear that “the report that he is a teacher, and take money” is a false claim by his accusers (Apology, 2).
Plato: After hearing from you, I become more confident that injustice was done at the trial. It was unjust that Socrates was found guilty at the trial. The fact that “the votes are so nearly equal” also shows that many Athenians agreed that Socrates was innocent (Apology, 11). You also seem to be one of the majority who would call Socrates innocent. Furthermore, Socrates has continuously emphasized that there should be a unity in one’s life and the divine order. Similarly, in Antigone, I saw your strong disapproval of any human attempts to separate secular realm from the divine sphere. The man Creon who claimed to have “such power… to override god’s ordinance” was struck down by god in the end (Antigone, 496). As you know, Socrates was a man who has lived his whole life for this purpose. You also heard him saying that he “shall never alter his ways” which he believes to be ordained by god, “even if he have to die many times” (Apology, 8, 14). Do you still find any proofs of evil from Socrates?
Sophocles: My friend Plato. I believe Socrates and I do share the view that wisdom is a prerogative of god which can neither be separated nor controlled by a mere human being. After all, everything which constitutes and governs our lives – laws, politics, institutions, morality, and so on – are interconnected with each other, and all of them are inseparable from the divine order. Unlike the other Sophists, Socrates does seem to be aware of the fact that “god only is wise; and the wisdom of men is little or nothing” (Apology, 4). He is also right that we should base all our actions on god’s divine will. What troubles me, however, is Socrates’ way of questioning everything, and for Socrates, everything includes the divine order. When Socrates received the oracle from Delphi, he refused to simply accept it. Instead, he tried to test the validity of the oracle using his rationality (Apology, 3). For Socrates, “the life which is unexamined is not worth living” (Apology, 12). Can we say this is not an arrogant act? I do emphasize the importance of human rationality, but I believe that individual’s scope of rationality is limited by fallible nature of mankind. Accordingly, the rational search for truth should also be limited by a pious respect for the gods. Men can achieve great things through rationality, but we should not use this gift to question god’s will.
Plato: Sophocles. You and Socrates seem to be agreeing on the point that the divine nature is the ultimate underlying foundation of everything, and thus inseparable from any kinds of human affairs. If I understood your thoughts correctly, you appear to be holding to a more passive and rather receptive attitude towards god’s ordinance, and you consider raising questions on gods as an arrogant act.
Sophocles: Yes, Plato. I believe it’s a blasphemy when a mere human being questions god’s ordinance, rather than accepting it as an absolute truth. In this sense, I think Socrates is also one of the Sophists, although he is unique in a way that he has not followed the general practices of the Sophists. We have all heard from Socrates’ own mouth how he responded to god’s oracle. The underlying purpose of his “method of trying the question” was an indecent one – “to go to the god with a refutation in his hand” (Apology, 3). You have to understand what kind of danger and confusion our society will be facing if young fellows like you begin to throw arbitrary questions to go against the divine. This is especially important considering that we are in the midst of confusion after having been defeated by Sparta, and the least thing we want today is another mess. What we need right now is a strong collective will of people who could devote themselves for the restoration of our nation and accept the absoluteness of god’s ordinance. This is the reason why I cannot but regard him as a threat to our society at the same time. After all, “a man who thinks that he alone is right, or what he says, or what he is himself, unique, such men, when opened up, are seen to be quite empty,” and to me, Socrates was no more than another type of the Sophists (Antigone, 762).