top of page

Socrates and The Problem With Philosophy (Also, Philosocom's Socrates Directory)

Updated: Feb 18

A man with a cup of drink


Despite having renown as the father of western philosophy, Socrates was arguably kind of idiotic due to his extreme loyalty to the law of the state. His premise was the fact, that since he does not want others to break the law, then he will not be breaking the law under any circumstance, because then he'd be the same outlaw he condemned against.

While logical, due to his lack of desire to reach hypocrisy, his philosophy was his own demise. It was told that, when his followers came to rescue him from prison before his execution, Socrates utterly refused.

His reasoning was, that he would prefer to die earlier but sincerely to his philosophy, then to live another day, and die a hypocrite. That is at least what I can recall from my years at my country's open university. I was studying for a degree in philosophy before opening this site, but I've succumbed to exhaustion and stress, so I dropped out by choice.

The problem with one's fear from hypocrisy comes from the fact that reality is ever changing, and that sometimes it's better to contradict oneself than to face the consequences of your own philosophy. Due to reality being dynamic, it could be often difficult to bear the consequences of following your own beliefs and the logic behind them, EVEN if that logic is reasonable.

Socrates, while odd, was a reasonable man. Otherwise, he wouldn't be seen as the founding father of western philosophy, right?

The problem with philosophy comes, ironically, from its own consistent reasoning, and from the constant attempt of philosophers in general, to flee from flaw. It's a problem because arguably everything and everyone is flawed, so what is even the point of escaping from something that will always be there?

It's so funny, at least to me, how some people, like Jordan Peterson, who got banned from Twitter, are so angry and overzealous of their own philosophy...

It seems that they do not remember Socrates' own destructive fate! Socrates basically destroyed his own life, by arguably fearing becoming a hypocrite, through the consumption of a poisonous drink, offered by the same law he so abided to!

Of course, not all of philosophy is based on that man alone, as there's eastern philosophy as well, that obviously was developed long before globalization. However, east or west, it does not change the fact that reality is flawed, and philosophy, a method meant to be used to understand reality, is a method that seeks to be flawless, but it fails as it over and over again.

I'm also a flawed philosopher, I wouldn't mind being called that, because as they say: "In Rome, act as a Roman". In other words, if you want to understand reality, you must accept the fact that everything -- including yourself and your beliefs -- are possibly flawed.

A certain follower of my work asked me: "Who would want to find out they are delusional?" And I instinctively answered him, "Philosophers". We must, as philosophers, be aware of our own fallacies, if we want to better understand ourselves and existence in general.

This is why a heavily flawed philosophy could be a good philosophy, and a philosopher that is heavily flawed could be a good one. We all must increase our awareness, even if it takes a heavy toll on our egos.

Will you really be taking poisonous wine just to not contradict yourselves? I wouldn't. My flawed life is more important than my philosophy (to me)!

79 views2 comments

2 則留言

Hello Tomasio,

I have just "discovered" this post and the Quara page led me here.

Philosophy would not flee from flaw. rather it would remain steady and true to it's own belief. Without a constant truth then philosophy is just opinion and not logically adhering to its own constant.. therefore becoming folly and whim. Socrates took the poison and we now continue to discuss his work. If he had fled his own philosophy and avoided death by becoming a hypocrite, we would not know who he was. His theory remains yet his life ended. I would say he proved his point about remaining true to his own belief.

Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein
Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein

Welcome, Mr. Scott.

I agree that truth plays an integral part in philosophy. After all, we seek philosophy to better understand existence, and to better do so, then we must come to terms with the truth.

The truth might hurt, the truth might make people see one a cold, unemotional being, and yet, the truth, is indeed imperative if we are to regard something as philosophical.

As far as I know, Socrates never wrote a thing of his own, and was instead recorded by his follower, Plato. What do you think? Would Plato have recorded him nonetheless if his teacher fled his imprisonment?


Tomasio A. Rubinshtein, Philosocom's Founder & Writer

I am a philosopher from Israel, author of several books in 2 languages, and Quora's Top Writer of the year 2018. I'm also a semi-hermit who has decided to dedicate his life to writing and sharing my articles across the globe. Several podcasts on me, as well as a radio interview, have been made since my career as a writer. More information about me can be found here.

צילום מסך 2023-11-02 202752.png
bottom of page