This blog post summarizes the lives and philosophies of Plato and Socrates, with a focus on their major works.
Plato and Socrates
The Figure of Plato
Plato was born around 427 BCE in Athens, ancient Greece, into one of the wealthiest and most influential families. His father, Ariston, was a descendant of Codrus, the legendary king of Athens, and his mother, Perictione, was a descendant of Solon, one of the Seven Sages of Greece. His brothers were Adeimantus and Glaucon.
Plato became a student of Socrates around the age of twenty. Although he had primarily studied literature under renowned scholars during his youth, from this point on he devoted himself to philosophy. However, after Socrates was executed in 399 BCE, he was deeply disillusioned and, like other disciples, left Athens to travel through Megara, Italy, Sicily, and Cyrene, where he encountered various schools of thought and philosophies. These experiences laid the foundation for his own ideas and writings.
Returning to Athens at the age of forty, Plato founded the “Academy,” one of the oldest institutions of scholarly research in Western civilization. This school was established in a place known as the Grove of Academus, located about one kilometer from Athens, and operated until it was destroyed by Sulla in 84 BC. It was here that the famous Aristotle was educated.
In 366 and 361 BC, he traveled twice to Syracuse, a city-state on the Italian island of Sicily, in an attempt to put his political philosophy into practice, but ultimately failed. After narrowly escaping death and returning to Athens, he devoted himself to teaching students and conducting scholarly research at the Academy he had founded until his death in 347 BC.
Who Was Socrates?
Regarded as one of the founders of Western philosophy and the first moral philosopher, Socrates was born in Athens around 469 BCE to Sophroniscus, a sculptor and stonemason, and Phaenarete, a midwife. He was born in the Athenian district of Allopece and belonged to the tribe of Antiochis, one of the ten Athenian tribes. Little is known about his childhood and youth, but as a young man he took an interest in and explored natural philosophy, read the works of Anaxagoras, and participated in the Peloponnesian War on several occasions. Although he did not hold public office, in the Athenian democracy, free citizens belonging to the ten tribes took turns serving as council members; thus, he also served as a council member and as a member of the council’s executive committee. Anecdotes from his time in the war and his tenure on the council’s executive committee are recounted in the four essays included in this book.
In his later years, Socrates became embroiled in political affairs and was ultimately sentenced to death on charges of impiety and corrupting the youth through sophistry. At that time, Athens was caught in an ongoing conflict between the established democratic faction and an aristocratic oligarchic faction that sought to adopt Spartan laws. Amid this conflict, the democratic faction executed Socrates as a warning to the oligarchic faction. Although he did not participate in practical politics, his teachings appeared to criticize democracy and advocate for oligarchy, and a significant number of his disciples and friends aligned with the oligarchic faction.
The primary sources that convey his life and philosophy are the writings of his disciples, Plato and Xenophon; according to these texts, one of Socrates’ most notable characteristics was his unattractive appearance, while another was his exceptional intellect.
Their Era and Athens
Athens, where Socrates and Plato lived, was a famous city-state located in the region of Attica in ancient Greece. Following Solon’s reforms, Peisistratus (c. 600–527 BCE) became a tyrant (a dictator who seized power illegally; in Greek, “tyrannos”), and the tyranny came to an end with his son, Hippias (527–510 BCE). Cleisthenes (c. 570–508 BCE) overthrew the tyrant Hippias and, in 508 BCE, abolished the existing traditional tribal system, reorganizing Athens into a system of ten tribes and 174 districts; he also introduced ostracism, thereby laying the foundation for democracy. Shortly thereafter, Pericles (c. 495–429 BC) emerged, and Athenian democracy reached its golden age and became firmly established.
After repelling the invasions of the Persian Empire, which lasted from 492 to 479 BC, Athens united the Greek city-states to form the Delian League, becoming its leader and exercising hegemony. Then, from 431 to 404 BC, Athens and Sparta, each leading their own allied forces, waged the Peloponnesian War, a conflict for hegemony. Although the war ended in a Spartan victory, it marked the beginning of ancient Greece’s decline. Thereafter, for about 170 years—until Athens was conquered by Philip II of the Kingdom of Macedonia in 338 BCE—a highly stable democratic system persisted, with the exception of a brief period of tyranny by the Thirty Tyrants.
During this period, famous philosophers and sophists flocked to Athens. Anaxagoras (c. 500–428 BC), a natural philosopher, came to Athens at the invitation of Pericles and remained there for about 30 years, spreading his rational philosophy of nature; Socrates read his works during his youth. Protagoras (c. 485–414 BCE), the most famous of the Sophists, also visited Athens on several occasions to teach the anthropocentric, relativistic theory of knowledge characteristic of the Sophists. Another renowned Sophist, Gorgias, came to Athens in 427 BCE and captivated the people with his dazzling rhetoric.
However, Athens was extremely conservative in religious matters, and this, combined with political motives, led to the exile of Anaxagoras and Protagoras on charges of impiety; even Socrates was branded a Sophist who did not believe in the existence of the gods and was sentenced to death for impiety.
Plato’s Works and His Philosophical Thought
Plato’s Works
Most of his works are dialogues, of which a total of 25 have been preserved; they are classified into three groups based on their dates of composition and philosophical tendencies.
The first group consists of early works such as the ‘Apology’, ‘Crito’, ‘Protagoras’, and ‘Gorgias’, which establish and present Socrates’s philosophy with a focus on ethics. ‘The Apology’ depicts Socrates defending himself in court against charges of impiety and corrupting the youth through sophistry; in ‘Crito’, he explains to his friend Crito—who urges him to escape from prison—why such an escape is impossible; and in ‘Protagoras’ and ‘Gorgias’, he clarifies the nature of virtue through debates with the two most famous Sophists of the time.
The second group consists of mid-period works—such as ‘Meno’, ‘Phaedo’, ‘Phaedrus’, and ‘The Republic’—written during the time when Plato was developing his own unique philosophy after traveling to various places. In ‘Meno’, he explores the relationship between virtue and knowledge, as well as reincarnation; in ‘Phaedo’, he discusses the immortality of the soul and the “Ideas”; in ‘Phaedrus’, he examines the connection between the soul, the body, and the “Ideas”; and in ‘The Republic’, he presents a political philosophy grounded in the “Ideas.”
The third group consists of his late works from his old age, such as ‘Timaeus’, ‘Statesman’, and ‘Laws’. ‘Timaeus’ is a natural philosophical discussion that views the universe and the life of the earth from the perspective of the “Ideas,” while ‘Statesman’ and ‘Laws’ present Plato’s specific political philosophy.
Plato’s Philosophical Thought
As we have already seen, Plato’s philosophy unfolds around the idea known as the “Theory of Forms.” Since the purpose of this introduction is not to examine Plato’s philosophical thought in detail but rather to lay the groundwork for reading and understanding the four essays included in this book, we will focus on his Theory of Forms. “Forms” is also the central keyword of these essays.
The ideas of the Sophists, which were prevalent at the time, played a significant role in Plato’s advocacy of the Theory of Forms. Earlier philosophers, who had focused on natural philosophy, held an absolutist worldview, believing in the existence of absolute truth and the ultimate principles of the universe. In contrast, the Sophists—referred to as “wise men” at the time—based their views on a relativistic worldview and value system. They explored the real world and its laws, pursuing practical knowledge in various specialized fields such as astronomy and geography. They placed particular emphasis on rhetoric and the art of debate, traveling from place to place to teach these subjects. Protagoras, the first and most famous of the Sophists, preached relativism with the statement, “Man is the measure of all things”; Gorgias emphasized the power of “logos,” or language; and Thrasymachus, renowned for his rhetoric, declared, “Justice is whatever the stronger devises for his own benefit.”
The emergence of the Sophists was a response to the demands of the times.
After its victory in the Persian Wars, Greece enjoyed a period of prosperity, with Athens in particular serving as the center of that prosperity, flourishing in both material and intellectual spheres. Consequently, there was a pressing need not only for expertise in politics and law but also for specialized, practical knowledge across all fields. As the level of awareness and cultural literacy rose across all walks of life, the art of debate and rhetoric—meant to persuade others—gained immense popularity.
Socrates was the figure who presented a completely different paradigm in opposition to the practice of calling such relativistic and pragmatic “knowledge” “wisdom,” and Plato was the one who systematized, developed, and articulated Socrates’ philosophy. The concept these two men put forward to establish an absolute worldview and value system was precisely the “Ideas.” This is because the Forms are the ultimate reality that is both connected to and governs the empirical world, yet transcends it and exists in a primordial sense. They viewed everything in the empirical world as fragments of these Forms, which are necessarily imperfect, and held that only the Forms themselves are absolutely perfect.
Plato’s Theory of Ideas
In Plato’s works, the Ideas are primarily expressed by the Greek terms “Idea” or “eidos.” Both words are nouns derived from terms meaning “to see” and signify “that which is seen”—that is, “form” or “shape.” In fact, in the dialogues included in this text, these terms are used in that general sense. Therefore, when we speak of the “Idea of Beauty,” it refers to the “form of beauty”—that is, “that which is called beauty.” This implies that, apart from the existence of all manner of “beautiful things,” there is a true and ultimate reality called “Beauty” that serves as the archetype for all of them. In other words, “beautiful things” and “beauty” are separate entities that exist independently of one another. In ‘Parmenides’, he defines “Ideas” as “archetypes that exist intrinsically within the nature of things.”
Plato believed that Ideas could be perceived only through the intellect, and he presented three ways in which the soul discovers the Ideas.
The first is “recollection” (Greek: “anamnesis”). The human soul already existed in the afterlife before entering the body, and there it knew the “Ideas.” Therefore, knowledge of the Ideas exists a priori within the human soul. However, because the soul undergoes a process of forgetting at birth, humans must go through a process of learning through sensory contact with objects in order to recall that forgotten knowledge of the Ideas.
The second is “dialectic,” or logical reasoning. Through observation of the real world alone, humans can obtain only incomplete knowledge; true and complete knowledge—that is, knowledge of the Forms—can be attained only through logical reasoning using reason. Therefore, the senses of the body merely hinder the soul from reaching the true wisdom it seeks through dialectic.
The third is “Eros.” Every human being possesses an innate nature that seeks “Eros,” and this nature is precisely the desire to attain true wisdom—that is, to reach the world of the Forms. Eros refers to the desire for beauty; people begin with beautiful bodies, move on to beautiful virtues and beautiful deeds, and ultimately progress toward the Form of “Beauty” itself.
Of these three, the first and second are discussed in the ‘Phaedo’, while the third is discussed in the ‘Symposium’.
‘Apology’
In 399 BCE, Socrates was put on trial after being accused of impiety and corrupting the youth. This text consists of the speeches he delivered in court, in which he defended himself against the charges of “corrupting the youth” and “believing in new, foreign gods unknown to the Athenians rather than the gods in whom the state believes.” Through this text and three other dialogues—’Euthyphro’, ‘Crito’, and ‘Phaedo’—Plato provides a detailed account of Socrates’ final days.
Socrates states that even before he was accused by “Anitus,” who represented skilled artisans and politicians; “Licon,” who represented the interests of professional rhetoricians; and “Meleetus,” a young man nominally put forward by these two—he was already hated by many and mistaken for a sophist. He then mentions the comic playwright Aristophanes (c. 445–385 BCE), who, as early as 423 BCE, had written a play titled ‘The Clouds’, in which he caricatured Socrates as a godless sophist who taught people for large sums of money.
However, Socrates explains that the true reason he incurred so much hatred was that, in order to understand the meaning of the oracle his friend had received at the Temple of Delphi—“Socrates is the wisest”—he went around seeking out many people considered wise to engage in dialogue with them, only to discover that they were not truly wise; it was this process that led to the hatred directed at him. He adds that it was simply because young people who had been observing his dialogues began to follow and imitate him from that point on. Therefore, he explains that, starting with the oracle and continuing to heed the voice of the gods thereafter, he pursued dialogue and inquiry solely in search of truth—without accepting a single coin and without tending to his household. He states that he has dedicated his entire life to teaching that one must first seek the truth before concerning oneself with personal interests or the affairs of the state.
‘Crito’
‘Crito’ depicts a conversation in which Socrates, having received a suggestion from his friend Crito to escape from prison just as the day of his execution draws near—after it had been postponed due to an important religious festival in Athens—discusses this proposal. Socrates states that he has lived his life in accordance with reason and what has been proven to be just, and he presents the reasons why he must not escape. Therefore, this text can be seen as addressing justice, injustice, and the proper attitude toward justice.
Crito, Socrates’ childhood friend, argues in favor of escape, stating that if his friends do not save Socrates, they will be criticized for failing to save him even though they were fully capable of doing so; that if Socrates chooses death when he could live, he would be aiding his enemies’ intentions; and that he would also fail to fulfill his duties toward his children.
In response, Socrates argues that the opinions and views of the masses are not worth considering; instead, one must listen only to experts and wise people in that field—and in this matter, reason and argument play that role. And when doing so, the only thing to consider is whether escaping from prison is, in fact, just.
Here, he personifies the laws of Athens and speaks on their behalf, presenting a theory similar to the social contract theory that emerged in modern times. In other words, since he has lived in Athens for many years and agreed to obey its laws, if he were to escape, he would be branded a lawbreaker wherever he went; indeed, even in the afterlife, he would be treated as such and face a harsh judgment. Therefore, Socrates says that even if one suffers injustice, one should not repay it with injustice; rather, consistently acting justly is what is truly good, both in this life and in the afterlife.
‘Phaedo’
‘Phaedo’ describes how, on the day Socrates was scheduled to be executed, his friends and followers gathered at the prison early in the morning as usual and engaged in a conversation on the topic of “the immortality of the soul” until sunset, when he drank the poison. This topic arose because Socrates had stated that a philosopher’s death is not a calamity but a blessing; that passing from this world to the next is a journey to the land of the eternally blessed; and that, since a philosopher’s life in this world was merely a preparation for that journey, he accepted his death with joy. Thus, the question of whether the soul truly lives on eternally after a person’s death emerges as the central theme.
Socrates begins his argument by presenting the principle of the generation and destruction of all things. That is, all things are in a state of constant change, and the principle of this change—the principle of generation and destruction—is that all opposing things are generated from their opposites, perish while generating their opposites, and in turn give rise to their opposites. For example, the dead are generated from the living, and the living are generated from the dead. A person becomes alive when the soul is united with the body, and becomes dead when the soul is separated from the body. This process repeats itself countless times.
Since this raises the question of whether the soul exists prior to its union with the body, Socrates introduces the theory of learning through recollection. For example, when a person sees something beautiful and recognizes it as such, it is because some knowledge of beauty already exists within them. If so, that knowledge must have already been possessed by the soul before the person was born. Therefore, it can be concluded that the soul exists prior to its union with the body.
However, Cebes objects, arguing that it has not yet been proven whether the soul truly continues to exist after a person’s death. At this point, Socrates begins to fully develop his theory of Forms. In the real world, all beautiful things are recognized as beautiful because they contain within them the “Form” of beauty. And since the Forms are the ultimate reality that remains eternally unchanging, they cannot perish. Therefore, while beautiful things perish, the Form within them does not perish but merely withdraws from that object. Similarly, since the soul is not a composite but a single entity and is life itself, it is not destroyed or annihilated; it merely withdraws from the body of the deceased and passes from this world to the afterlife.
Socrates then goes on to explain the true nature of the earth and the nature of the afterlife. The philosopher purifies himself by training to attain true wisdom—the knowledge of the Forms—through rational dialectic and intuition in pure thought, free from being enslaved by the body and the senses in this world. This is training to live alongside the gods in the “Land of the Blessed”—the place prepared for them after death, where the gods dwell—and is therefore also a practice for dying. On the other hand, those who have not undergone this process of purification remain in this world and are reborn as creatures similar to their own nature, or descend into the underworld known as “Tartarus” before being reborn into this world, repeating the cycle of reincarnation.
Here, Socrates clarifies that philosophy is the pursuit of true wisdom, and that true wisdom consists of attaining knowledge of the Forms—knowledge that is achieved only through pure thought and dialectic, after severing all distractions from the body’s senses. This was a direct refutation of the Sophists of that time, who, within a relativistic value system, pursued practical knowledge derived from the world of empirical experience.
‘Symposium’
The ‘Symposium’ recounts the story of Socrates and his followers, who attended a banquet hosted in 416 BCE by the tragedian Agathon to celebrate his victory in the Athenian tragedy competition, as they took turns extolling ‘Eros’, the god of love. The Greek title of the ‘Symposium’, ‘symposion’, means “to gather together and drink wine.” Since “Eros” is both the name of a god and a noun referring to “romantic love,” the two concepts overlap in this text.
While “Eros” is generally translated as “love,” in this text it is defined as “the desire to possess the beauty that one lacks.” Therefore, the gods do not feel “Eros” toward true wisdom. This is because, although true wisdom is “beautiful,” it is not something the gods “lack.” However, in Korean or English, “love” does not depend on whether something is “lacking” or not. The gods “love” true wisdom for its own sake. From an emotional perspective, Eros is an intensely passionate emotion in which one fiercely desires and yearns for what one lacks, longs for it incessantly, seeks to be with it, and would not even hesitate to die to enjoy it. Therefore, I have chosen “romantic love” as the most appropriate term to express these various characteristics.
There are three Greek words that correspond to the Korean word for “love.” “Philia” refers to the love between parents and children, the friendship between friends, and the love of philosophy; thus, it corresponds to the “affection” in “dear.” Next is “agape,” which signifies a love imbued with respect; therefore, it corresponds to the “reverence” in “revered.” So, what is “eros”? “Eros” is a passionate emotion and desire that refers to “romantic love,” including sexual love. While “affection” and “reverence” do not involve a desire to possess the object of one’s affection or reverence, “romantic love” inherently contains such a desire that is stronger than death itself.
At this banquet, all those who praised Eros before Socrates regarded the god Eros as the object of their romantic love or admiration, and they continued their praise on the premise that the god Eros is perfect and wholly beautiful.
The first speaker, Phaedrus, says that Eros motivates us humans to practice the finest virtues. He further argues that when an older man harboring romantic feelings and his lover—a boy or young man—are bound together by Eros, these two, conscious of one another, come to pursue virtue in all things. Thus, in this text, Eros is primarily applied to same-sex love between an adult man who harbors the emotion of Eros and his lover—a boy or young man. In other words, the archetype of Eros was same-sex love.
The second speaker, Pausanias, states that there are not one but two gods of Eros. “Earthly Eros” is active among those who pursue sexual desire centered on carnal love, while “Heavenly Eros” is active among those who pursue beautiful virtues within true “romantic love.” Here we see that the romantic relationships of ordinary people pursuing sexual desire were called “Eros,” and that such Eros was regarded as a corrupted form of true love centered on the love of beautiful virtues. From this perspective, in their eyes, same-sex love involving a boy or young man possessing virtues such as courage and self-restraint was superior to heterosexual love, which is primarily centered on sexual desire. In other words, they were not defending or praising homosexuality centered on sexual desire.
The third speaker, Eryximachus, states that the “god Eros” is active within everyone, and that it is unjust to limit this solely to romantic love between people. In other words, Eros is at work even in the work of all skilled artisans. Since Eros is the desire and pursuit of beauty that one lacks, this demonstrates that skilled crafts are also objects of Eros.
The fourth speaker, Aristophanes, states that Eros is the desire to find one’s other half and achieve wholeness. Long, long ago, there existed among humans men, women, and hermaphrodites—beings possessing both male and female characteristics—and their abilities were so great that they attempted to rebel against the gods. In response, Zeus split them in half to weaken their power, and thus every person began to search with their very lives for their other half to achieve wholeness; this is what is called “Eros.”
Socrates notes that, up to this point, everyone has spoken of the god Eros as an object of praise, but he says he will speak objectively from Eros’s perspective. He then proceeds to develop his argument by recounting a story he heard in his youth from a foreign prophetess named “Diotima.” First, he recounts the birth and origin of Eros, explaining that Eros is not a god but a being situated between the divine and the human—that is, a “daimon” (spirit or divine entity). This demonstrates that Eros is a desire to partake of what one lacks. Furthermore, while Eros is defined as the desire to enjoy “the beauty of which one is deprived,” it is, in fact, also the desire to give birth to immortality and indestructibility through the enjoyment of beauty. In other words, unlike the immortal gods who never die, the cause and purpose of Eros is for mortal beings—who are inevitably destined to die—to attain immortality and indestructibility. Eros, which refers to this desire, is conceived within every person at birth and is brought to fruition upon encountering beauty. Thus, Eros ultimately refers to the desire for and pursuit of immortality and eternal life.
Socrates argues as follows: Eros begins with the love of a beautiful body, develops into the love of beautiful deeds and virtues, and is perfected when one ascends to the realm of contemplating and intuiting beauty itself—that is, the Ideas. Furthermore, philosophy is ultimately aimed at intuiting the Forms, and its means are reasoning and dialectic based on reason. Therefore, the practice of philosophy—that is, attaining true wisdom by gaining knowledge of the Forms, which are the true realities, through rational dialectic—is Eros in its true sense.
