Abstract
In this essay, we argue that several passages in Plato’s Apology, cannot be appropriately understood by what has come to be the most widely accepted interpretation of what is called “Socratic intellectualism.” According to this view, Socrates saw no role in the explanation of human behavior for such psychological factors as appetites or passions/emotions. We claim, on the contrary, that the passages we consider in Plato’s Apology, actually reveal that Socrates was quite ready to explain human behavior in precisely the way this interpretation claims he would not (or could not) do. We then provide an understanding of what Socrates is saying in these passages that makes much better sense of them but also continues to depict Socratic moral psychology as intellectualist, insofar as it remains true in our account that all human agents always act in ways that reflect their beliefs about what is best for them at the time of action.
We began reading the works of David Keyt early in our academic careers, and each of us feels deeply indebted to him and his work for our own engagement in the field—particularly in our thinking and teaching on the topic of Aristotle’s Politics,. Smith also had the wonderful opportunity to take an NEH Summer Seminar on Aristotle with Keyt in the summer of 1979 and has from that time onward regarded Keyt as a special mentor and friend.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Apostle, H.G., and L.P. Gerson (trans.). 1991. Aristotle: Selected works., 3rd ed. Grinnell: Peripatetic Press.
Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 1994. Plato’s Socrates,. New York: Oxford University Press.
Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 2000. The philosophy of Socrates,. Boulder: Westview Press.
Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 2002a. Incurable souls in Socratic psychology. Ancient Philosophy, 22: 1–16.
Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 2002b. The trial and execution of Socrates: Sources and controversies,. New York: Oxford University Press.
Brickhouse, Thomas C., and Nicholas D. Smith. 2003. Apology of Socratic studies. Polis, 20: 108–127.
Cooper, John M. 1999. Socrates and Plato in Plato’s Gorgias,. In Reason and emotion: Essays in ancient moral psychology and ethics theory,, ed. John M. Cooper, 29–75. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Devereux, Daniel T. 1995. Socrates’ Kantian conception of virtue. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 33: 381–408.
Irwin, Terence. 1977. Plato’s moral theory,. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Irwin, Terence. 1995. Plato’s ethics,. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kahn, Charles. 1996. Plato and the Socratic dialogue: The philosophical use of literary form,. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nehamas, Alexander. 1999. Socratic intellectualism. In Virtues of authenticity: Essays on Plato and Socrates,, ed. Alexander Nehamas, 27–58. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Penner, Terrence. 1990. Plato and Davidson: Parts of the soul and weakness of will. In Canadian philosophers: Celebrating twenty years of the Canadian Journal of Philosophy,, ed. David Copp. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 16: 35–72.
Penner, Terrence. 1991. Desire and power in Socrates: The argument of Gorgias, 466A-468E that orators and tyrants have no power in the city. Apeiron, 24: 147–202.
Penner, Terrence. 1996. Knowledge versus true belief in the Socratic psychology of action. Apeiron, 29: 199–229.
Penner, Terrence. 1997. Socrates on the strength of knowledge: Protagoras, 351B-357E. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 79: 117–149.
Penner, Terrence. 2000. Socrates. In Cambridge history of Greek and Roman political thought,, ed. C.J. Rowe and Malcolm Schofield, 164–189. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Penner, Terrence. 2001. Desire, action and self-interest in Socratic philosophy. Symposium paper given at the American Philosophical Association, Pacific Division, San Francisco.
Penner, Terrence, and Christopher Rowe. 1994. The desire for the Good: Is the Meno, inconsistent with the Gorgias,? Phronesis, 39: 1–25.
Roshotko, Naomi. 1992. The Socratic theory of motivation. Apeiron, 25: 145–170.
Sanderman, Daniel R. Forthcoming. Why does Socrates mock his interlocutors? Skepsis, 15: 431–441.
Santas, Gerasimos. 1979. Socrates: Philosophy in Plato’s early dialogues,. London/Boston: Routledge and Kegal Paul.
Woodruff, Paul B. 2000. Socrates and the irrational. In Reason and religion in Socratic philosophy,, ed. N.D. Smith and P.B. Woodruff, 130–150. New York: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brickhouse, T.C., Smith, N.D. (2013). Moral Psychology in Plato’s Apology . In: Anagnostopoulos, G., Miller Jr., F. (eds) Reason and Analysis in Ancient Greek Philosophy. Philosophical Studies Series, vol 120. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6004-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6004-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-6003-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6004-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)