Midcoast Senior College Fall 2023
Introduction to Philosophy
Bruce Hauptli
Copyright © 2023 Bruce W. Hauptli
Course Information:
Plato’s Euthyphro, Apology, and Crito provide an excellent introduction to Plato and philosophy. These dialogues (55 pages of reading) are so accessible that they require no prior study, yet they are so rich that even the most experienced scholars have critically discussed them for more than two millennia. Our discussions will devote time to both the dialogues and some of the historical criticisms of them. In addition to providing the opportunity for interested individuals to learn about Plato and philosophy, they are intended to engage students in topics such as “Does Socrates have substantive knowledge,” “Must one always obey the laws,” “Is Socrates engaged in a religious quest?”
Brief Biography: I earned a BA in mathematics from Lawrence
University in Appleton, WI (1970); and an MA and PhD in philosophy from
Washington University in St Louis, MO (1973 & 1974).
I am an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy
at Florida International University in Miami, FL (The State University of
Florida in Miami) where I taught for thirty-nine years.
Almost every semester I enjoyed teaching a historically-themed
introductory philosophy course to undergraduates as part of the University’s
core curriculum, and I used these dialogues to get the ball rolling.
I have taught this course twice before for MSC, as well as seven others.
Having retired to Bath in 2015, I enjoy continuing to introduce
interested individuals to philosophy.
Text:
Plato: Five Dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology,
Crito, Meno, and Phaedo (Second Edition) trans. G.M.A. Grube, revised by
John M. Cooper (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 2002).
ISBN:
978-0872206335.
Available from Amazon: Kindle: $7.52, Paperback: $10.50.
Anticipated Course Schedule:
Week 1: Introduction to Philosophy, and to Plato and to his society. We will not fully cover the materials in either the "What Is Philosophy" or the "Introduction to Plato" supplements below, and what is not covered in this class will be discussed in the second week.
Assignment for next session: read Plato’s
Euthyphro (pp. 1-20 of text).
Supplementary materials and readings--these
are not assigned, but may be helpful to students and they may be read before and/or
after the class:
Week 2: Plato’s Euthyphro—discussion of what Euthyphro is doing, what Socrates is doing (and why he is doing it), and why Socrates cares about what Euthyphro is doing? Discussion of the Greeks’ views regarding religion and of Plato’s differing view. We will also finish the discussions remaining from "What Is Philosophy?" and "Introduction to Plato."
Assignment for
next session: re-read Plato’s
Euthyphro, also read his Apology (pp.
21-44 of the text).
Supplementary materials and readings:
My
“Supplement to Plato’s Euthyphro.”
Week 3: Finish discussing Plato’s Euthyphro and begin discussing his Apology—discussion of Socrates’ trial and his defense. Again, we want to ask, and try out various answers as to, what he is doing, why is he doing it, and why does Plato care about what his fellow citizens are doing?
Assignment for next session:
re-read Plato’s Apology.
Supplementary materials and readings:
My
“Supplement on Plato’s Apology.”
Week 4: Plato’s Apology. Why does he think philosophizing is important for him, for his fellow citizens and for Athens? Is Socrates on a “divine mission,” is he “completely ignorant,” and why are these important questions?
Discussion at the end of the March 30 class leads me to
recommend
Assignment for next
session: Read Plato’s Crito.
My “Supplement
to Plato’s Crito.”
Week 5: Plato’s Apology and Crito. The verdict, penalty, and general discussion. Introduction to the Crito, How do Crito and Euthyphro differ?
Assignment for next session: re-read Plato’s
Crito.
Week 6: The Apology continued and The Crito.
Assignment for next session: rea
Week 7:
Finish The Crito. Contradictions—do these dialogues fit together, or does Socrates deserve his
sentence? We will address the discussion
questions listed above.
Assignment for final session:
Discussion Questions for next several classes--these were paper topics from the Induction to Philosophy Class I taught for many years which covered the materials we have read, and we will be considering how to respond to them:
Topic A:
Suppose Meletus overheard the
discussion in the Crito and went to
Plato’s Socrates saying “In your discussion with Crito you indicated you
were able to propose and defend
substantive theses—you claimed to know whether escape would be just, that it is
never right to return a wrong for a wrong, and you claimed to know what sort of
life is worth living. In making
such claims you show you do not really believe that human wisdom amounts to
little. That is, you
lied during the trial when you
professed ignorance. It seems to me
your sentence is just!” How would
you respond to this charge?
Is Plato’s Socrates inconsistent?
Can Plato’s Socrates both claim to be ignorant and to know?
An alternative way of raising
the same question would be to address the notion of “Socratic Ignorance”—to
write a paper which answers the question “Is it really true that Plato,
Socrates, and other people are on the “same level” in terms of their knowledge?”
Here you would refer to (at least) the
Apology and the
Crito and would explain what Plato’s
Socrates does, and does not, know.
You would also clarify and explain any (apparent) contradictions between his
claims in these works.
Topic B:
In his
Apology Plato’s Socrates clearly
indicates he would continue to philosophize even if the court ordered him not
to—clearly he does not believe one must
obey the laws of the state. In his
Crito, however, he accepts a death
sentence and refuses to escape from an unjust conviction—he chooses to obey the
state’s laws. It seems there is an
inconsistency or contradiction here—either one has to obey the laws or one
doesn’t! Which is Plato’s real
view? If Plato’s Socrates is
willing to disobey a bad law which says “Don’t philosophize,” why won’t he
disobey the state when it comes to life and death?
Topic C:
In the
Apology, Plato’s Socrates says:
Topic D:
Suppose you encountered
someone who maintained:
much of what Socrates went
through at the end of his life could have been easily avoided if he had only
taken his own advice and lived a private
life (Apology, 32a).
He would not have offended the rich and powerful, he would not have been
put on trial, and he would not have had to reason with Crito about the
appropriateness of escaping.
How would you reply?
Would “being private” in this sense mean giving up anything that he holds
to be important? If so, clarify
what would have to be forsaken, and why you think he would not be willing to do
so.
In their “Socratic Method,”
Thomas Brickhouse and Nicholas Smith ask: “if the god’s own gift, Socrates
himself, a man who has lead an exemplary life of examination, continues to be
ignorant of (for example) the nature of justice, it seems most unlikely that
anyone could become wise in the way Socrates claims not to be.”
So, one wonders, what is, really, the point of his inquiry with
Euthyphro—if neither of them has full knowledge, in what sense is Socrates
better off, and what does his “examined life” offer to someone like Euthyphro
(since “knowledge” doesn’t seem to really be promised)?
Week 8: Well, What Is Philosophy? Supplement for the last class. [Newly revised as of 4:00 PM on Monday, May 3]
For those
interested in further reading:
Rebecca Goldstein, Plato At the Gooleplex: Why Philosophy Won’t Go Away (N.Y.: Pantheon, 2015).
Thomas C. Brickhouse and Nicholas D. Smith, The Trial and Execution of Socrates: Sources and Controversies (NY: Oxford U.P., 2002). Includes selections from: Aristophanes' Clouds; Xenophon's Apology of Socrates and Memorabilia; Diogenes' On The Lives and Opinions of Persons in Philosophy; and contemporary essays on "Why Was Socrates Prosecuted," "Socrates and Obedience to the Law; and "Did Plato Tell the Truth About the Death of Socrates?"
Midcoast Senior College Website
Email: hauptli@fiu.edu
Last revised: 05/04/23