According to Socrates, an unexamined life is not worth living. Call this the Socratic view. Some would disagree with the Socratic view, insisting that an unexamined life can be flourishing, fulfilling, satisfying, happy, valuable, meaningful, and hence worth living. Call this the other view. I think the other view is correct, but there is a way of understanding the Socratic view so that it is compatible with the other view.
The Socratic view should be understood against the background of the question "How should I live my life?". Call this the Socratic question. Anyone can ask the Socratic question, but not everyone does ask it. But for a person who has asked the Socratic question, the only way to answer it is to examine her life so far and see how she should move on (or whether she should move on at all). To put it another way, a person who has asked the Socratic question is already self-reflective, and her attempt to answer it consists in having further self-reflection. If she finds an answer to the question and knows how she should live her life, that must also be a life that she thinks is worth living.
The Socratic view is thus true for a person who has asked the Socratic question, for it means no more than that a person cannot answer the question "How should I live my life?" and say, earnestly and firmly, "Yes, my life is worth living!" without having examined her own life.
On this understanding, the Socratic view is thoroughly first-personal. The other view, by contrast, is third-personal. It is possible for a person's life to be considered worth living by others while he himself does not have the belief that his life is worth living because he has not asked the Socratic question.
"It is possible for a person's life to be considered worth living by others while he himself does not have the belief that his life is worth living because he has not asked the Socratic question"
ReplyDeleteCan a person's life be considered worth living if a person doesn't have the belief that her life is worth living? Your answer is yes, but only from a third-personal standpoint (other people can analyze her life and conclude that it’s meaningful). From a first-personal standpoint, that person's life cannot be considered worth living because she doesn't have the belief that her life is worth living.
I’m not sure if you have really resolved the difference between Socratic and Anti-Socratic view. One key objection to the former is that proponents of the latter don’t think that it’s permissible for a Socratic philosopher to say to a person who has never self-reflected, “Your life isn’t worth living because you haven’t examined it”. The reason is that a third person is often considered not having the authority and knowledge to tell some else whether her life is worth living.
Your approach maintains this kind of third person authority. Instead of saying, “Your life isn’t worth living because you haven’t examined it”, you’re now saying “Your life isn’t considered, from your own standpoint, worth living because you have never asked the Socratic question”. In that sense, I’m not sure if you have resolved the conflict between the Socratic and Anti-Socratic views (By the way, there is a difference between thinking, from one’s own standpoint, whether one has asked the Socratic question and asking the Socratic question itself).
Now is it true that one must have asked the Socratic question, “How should I live my life?” before one’s life could be considered worth living to oneself? This is what I think your argument is. If a person never asked the Socratic question, then the person would not have the belief that “My life is worth living” (or the belief that “My life is not worth living”). If the person doesn’t have that belief, then from this person’s own standpoint her life cannot be considered worth living (or not worth living) since this is an issue that has never even occurred to her in the first place.
However, not having the conscious belief that one’s life is worth living doesn’t mean that one doesn’t have that belief. Oftentimes we affirm our beliefs through our actions. Every time I go into a classroom I sit without first checking whether the chair is safe. I don’t have the conscious belief that the chair is safe to sit on before I sit, the safety of the chair is not an issue that has ever occurred to me. If after I sit someone asked me why didn’t I check the chair before I sat, I would reply that because I believed it was safe. In this case, it’s not right to claim that “From your standpoint, the chair isn’t considered safe because you don’t have the belief that the chair is safe. The reason is that I have shown that belief through my action even though I don’t consciously say to myself that the chair is safe. For the same reason, even if a person has never asked the Socratic question, it still doesn’t mean that the person doesn’t have the belief that her life is worth living. She could show that belief though her everyday action. This means that one’s life could still be considered worth living to oneself even one never asked the Socratic question.
WKC
WKC,
ReplyDeleteI don't think my view gives the third person any authority over the first person. For one thing, my view does not imply that the third personal judgment is usually right; for another, my view does not imply that it is appropriate for someone who holds such a view to say to another person something like "You don't have the belief that your life is worth living because you have never asked the Socratic question".
I think you have read too much into my argument. What I have argued is merely that one reading of the Socratic view is that a person cannot have the self-assurance that her life is worth living without having examined her own life. That is, a person who wants to know whether her life is worth living would not be satisfied with merely believing that her life is worth living without being able to say why; in order to be able to say why, however, she must examine her life in some detail.
I agree that there are unconscious beliefs and can even grant that the belief that one's life is worth living can be unconscious. But this is irrelevant to my reading of the Socratic view, for such an unconscious belief would not offer the kind of self-assurance in question.
>for a person who has asked the Socratic question, the only way to answer it is to examine her life so far and see how she should move on (or whether she should move on at all).
ReplyDeleteI can understand what it means to examine whether a particular action is worth doing, or whether a particular job is worth taking, and so on for all other actions that constitute elements of my life.
But for my life as a whole, what kind of action is it to examine "whether it is worth living"? What should I THINK about? What is the reason which tells me about the WORTHINESS of a life?
Second, what count as an acceptable "examination exercise"? How long should I engage in this reflection? Should I think about it three times a day? Or just once a year?
Third, what count as an ANSWER? Until I am satisfied? Rich? High? Emotionally stable? Baptised?
Do I need to ask this question? Do everyone need to ask this question?
Why don't we require people to ANSWER it too with actions! "A life without the courage to practice your value is not worth living." People who just think, think, ask, ask, may just be rationalizing their powerlessness and inner weakness. And Socrates may be encouraging this kind of powerless, self-deciving, self-assuring activity.
That is certainly not healthy.
Wong,
ReplyDeleteTo be exegetical, I don't think Socrates hold first person viewpoint nor he is answering the question "How should I live?". Socrates says the sentence in Apology (Grube Trans.):
/*
On the other hand, if I say that it
is the greatest good for a man to discuss virtue every day and those other
things about which you hear me conversing and testing myself and others,
for the unexamined life is not worth living for men, you will believe me
even less.
*/
Socrates wants having "conversing myself and others" which is hardly be understood as finding out the answer "How should I live?". He is to answer the question "How should a man (I and others) live?".
It seems you have mis-ascribed a view to Socrates and by that argue Socrates is consistent with the third person view which asserts that a life without examination is worth to live.
Yan,
ReplyDeleteSince the other comments mysteriously disappeared, let me respond to yours first.
When I related the Socratic view to the Socratic question, I did not have any specific text in mind. I am not interested in exegetical questions. For me, it does not matter whether the Socratic view as I understand it was held by Socrates; what is important is that it is an interesting and sensible view.
Wong,
ReplyDelete//For me, it does not matter whether the Socratic view as I understand it was held by Socrates//
Then should it be called SOCRATIC view? Or better be called "Wong's view" and "Wong's question"?
Meshi,
ReplyDeleteWhat I call the Socratic view is still based on Socrates's famous remark, and what I call the Socratic question is still based on a question Socrates asked in the Republic (i.e. "How should one live one's life?").
To me, the Socratic view has several unstated/implicit requirements. E.g.
ReplyDelete1. On the Result: If someone examined his own life and he ended up living in a materialistic and unreflected manner, we will not hold that he has really gone through the Socratic reflection.
2. On the Logic: Someone examined his own life and he revealed the reflection process to us. If we found that the process of reflection is full of contradictions, we may not count him as having done the Socratic reflection appropriately.
3. On the Content: Someone examined his life and in his examination, we found that he just took whatever the authoritative figure (in his religion or whatever) says to be true. We will not take him as having done the Socratic reflection appropriately.
4. On the Attitude: Someone's examination of his own life may fulfilled all the above conditions. However, he just did it in order to complete his assignment in Critical Thinking. He has no intention of living in accordance with the prescription. For us, this person has not done the Socratic Reflection appropriately either.
Willsin,
ReplyDelete//But for my life as a whole, what kind of action is it to examine "whether it is worth living"? What should I THINK about? What is the reason which tells me about the WORTHINESS of a life?//
- The Socratic view is not that you should ask yourself whether your life is worth living; asking that question would not make your life worth living! Rather, what you should do is take a critical look at your actions (those that you think are significant), your life style, your plans and projects, your interpersonal relationships, etc. and ask yourself why you have them. This is an attempt to look for justification or self-conscious endorsement, an attempt to have a life of which one can say "Yes, I am sure this is the kind of life I want".
//what count as an acceptable "examination exercise"? How long should I engage in this reflection? Should I think about it three times a day? Or just once a year?//
- What the Socratic view recommends is an attitude towards one's own life, not a method or an exercise that specifies a routine that one can follow. Cf. "If you are not self-critical of your own writing, what you write is not worth reading"; would you challenge this recommendation by asking whether you should criticize every single sentence you write, or just 70% of the sentences, how often you should do it, etc.?
Willsin,
ReplyDeleteAll 1-4 can be answered by this: Examining one's own life is only a necessary condition for having a life that is worth living.