Well we just read Oedipus The King last night in Seminar. Pretty much all we talked about was Fate, free will, and Divine Ruling.
Does Oedipus have any choice in his matters? Does it matter what he does? He tries so hard to avoid his impious fate but it doesn't work and he is condemned to kill his father and sleep with his mother.
That brought us to another question; did Jocasta know all along? Her character is vastly different from that of Oedipus, and seems to accept her fate rather than fight against it. Fate takes advantage of this by making her fulfill her fate (sleeping with her son) if she doesn't fight against it. Her passivity and Oedipus's combative nature both accomplish the same goal: fulfillment of Fate.
What a messy question, Fate is. Do our choices make any difference? Is there a personified Fate up in the heavens dictating our lives? Is there a god who plans out our lives and we fulfill that plan regardless of our choices? I don't really have answers to these questions yet. Well, that's not really a surprise. I almost never have answers to seminar questions. Questions raised in seminar are ones with which to be wrestled for the rest of our lives. I am still pondering over forms, the Republic, death, the philosophic life, and the summum bonum. I don't have any answers yet. Perhaps at some point I will gain a few.
Why do we admire Oedipus and feel nothing but pity and even contempt for Jocasta? Is it because Oedipus tries so hard to do the right thing even if he ends up fulfiling fate? That is what I think. Oedipus is a noble man. He tries desperately to avoid injustice and evil. It's not his fault that Apollo has dealt him this wretched hand. Even when he discovers the awful truth, he does not merely commit suicide alongside his dead wife/mother. He stays alive, blind, to learn lessons from his fate.
One last question: did Apollo do all this for a reason? Is there a reason behind Oedipus's torture, a reason that we may discover reading Oedipus at Colonus? I don't know, but I would really like to read that play on Thursday, not in April! Grr...
Well, it can't be helped. Onwards to Theaetetus!
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Monday, December 3, 2007
Apology. Crito. Phaedo. Socrates, Justice, and Death.
In the Apology, Socrates is convicted of crimes worthy of death. In the Crito, he explains to his friend Crito why he cannot and will not flee Athens to live life elsewhere. He argues that by remaining in Athens despite its unjust laws subjects himself to them.
How just do laws have to be before we will obey them? When are they so unjust that we not only break them, but it is our moral duty to do so? The American War of Independance comes to mind, as does the Civil War. It seems like Socrates thinks that the laws of Athens, though unjust, are just enough for him to obey them. That goes against almost everything I have ever known but it makes sense in a strange sort of way.
Another thing that is interesting is how Socrates defends himself in court. He does not appeal to pity, he does not sob for mercy; he logically defends his position and refutes his opponents with incredible brilliance. It does not succeed, nor did he even expect it to - Socrates has stung Athens with his philosophizing and they want to kill him even if it is irrational.
The conclusion of Crito is one of acceptance and contemplation. Socrates will accept the hemlock and die a philosopher, a true witness of philosophy.
The Phaedo is the dialogue in which Socrates' last hours are recorded. It is all about death, the afterlife, and what Socrates thinks is the goal of a philosopher.
I have never thought deeply about death until last year, at which point I decided I did not fear it. After all, St. Paul says, "Death, where is thy victory? O Death, where is thy sting?" I read those texts and believed them. Death was conquered a few thousand years ago by a crucified carpenter from Nazareth. But never have I seen such a detailed and convincing case for the fearlessness in which we should approach death.
Death is an unknown; we cannot empirically know what death is like and therefore we believe we cannot know. I hold empirical knowledge to be inferior to that of inductive and dialectical knowledge, but even these cannot tell us what death is like. We can do little better than speculate or accept certain principles by means of faith. But the fact that death is an unknown means that we can already not fear it. Why should we fear the unknown? Is it a rational fear or a childish, immature fear that needs "incantations sung to charm it"? I hold that is it irrational to fear death because it is an unknown. We either are not after death or we are. It is that simple. We either "experience" (we cannot really because there is no 'we' to experience anything) a dreamless sleep, or some part of us exists after death. Socrates presents convincing arguments that our soul continues after death. Therefore we have no cause for fear, especially not something as trivial as death!
In the Gorgias, Socrates presents an impressive proof that the Just Life is the most advantageous in regards to the soul of a man regardless of whether or not we are immortal. If we therefore lead a just life, serve the god, and act with morality and piety, we have nothing to fear. That, in essence, is Socrates' conclusion. And a remarkable conclusion it is.
My position on death has changed little since last year. It has been deepened, that is all. I will serve God to the best of my ability, act with justice, and live out the Great Commandment as well as I am able. I can do no more, and when my time comes to die, it will be a wonderful event. There may be pain, excruciating, terrible pain, but pain is temporary for the Christian and life is forever.
To die will be an awfully great adventure.
~Peter Pan.
To Oedipus Rex! It's good to read Sophocles again.
How just do laws have to be before we will obey them? When are they so unjust that we not only break them, but it is our moral duty to do so? The American War of Independance comes to mind, as does the Civil War. It seems like Socrates thinks that the laws of Athens, though unjust, are just enough for him to obey them. That goes against almost everything I have ever known but it makes sense in a strange sort of way.
Another thing that is interesting is how Socrates defends himself in court. He does not appeal to pity, he does not sob for mercy; he logically defends his position and refutes his opponents with incredible brilliance. It does not succeed, nor did he even expect it to - Socrates has stung Athens with his philosophizing and they want to kill him even if it is irrational.
The conclusion of Crito is one of acceptance and contemplation. Socrates will accept the hemlock and die a philosopher, a true witness of philosophy.
The Phaedo is the dialogue in which Socrates' last hours are recorded. It is all about death, the afterlife, and what Socrates thinks is the goal of a philosopher.
I have never thought deeply about death until last year, at which point I decided I did not fear it. After all, St. Paul says, "Death, where is thy victory? O Death, where is thy sting?" I read those texts and believed them. Death was conquered a few thousand years ago by a crucified carpenter from Nazareth. But never have I seen such a detailed and convincing case for the fearlessness in which we should approach death.
Death is an unknown; we cannot empirically know what death is like and therefore we believe we cannot know. I hold empirical knowledge to be inferior to that of inductive and dialectical knowledge, but even these cannot tell us what death is like. We can do little better than speculate or accept certain principles by means of faith. But the fact that death is an unknown means that we can already not fear it. Why should we fear the unknown? Is it a rational fear or a childish, immature fear that needs "incantations sung to charm it"? I hold that is it irrational to fear death because it is an unknown. We either are not after death or we are. It is that simple. We either "experience" (we cannot really because there is no 'we' to experience anything) a dreamless sleep, or some part of us exists after death. Socrates presents convincing arguments that our soul continues after death. Therefore we have no cause for fear, especially not something as trivial as death!
In the Gorgias, Socrates presents an impressive proof that the Just Life is the most advantageous in regards to the soul of a man regardless of whether or not we are immortal. If we therefore lead a just life, serve the god, and act with morality and piety, we have nothing to fear. That, in essence, is Socrates' conclusion. And a remarkable conclusion it is.
My position on death has changed little since last year. It has been deepened, that is all. I will serve God to the best of my ability, act with justice, and live out the Great Commandment as well as I am able. I can do no more, and when my time comes to die, it will be a wonderful event. There may be pain, excruciating, terrible pain, but pain is temporary for the Christian and life is forever.
To die will be an awfully great adventure.
~Peter Pan.
To Oedipus Rex! It's good to read Sophocles again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)