Plato's Response To The Wisdom Of Socrates

In Plato’s apology, the story is told of how Chaerephon, friend of Socrates, went to the temple at Delphi to ask the oracle a question pertaining to the wisdom of Socrates, and how it compares to the rest of the men on earth. “He asked if any man was wiser than I, and the Pythian replied that no one was wiser” (Plato). This response was very confusing to Socrates because he recognized that he was not wise at all, and it troubled him for some time. Socrates then tries to refute the oracle by bringing a supposedly wise man from town to the temple to show the Pythian that he was wrong, but when they get there, Socrates realizes that the wise man was not wise at all, and neither of them knew anything really worth knowing. He sees only one

After acquiring this knowledge, Socrates goes off and begins questioning people who are considered wise so he can examine the meaning of knowledge. It is after this, and in Plato’s Euthyphro that we see the Socratic Method first being used. Socrates goes about investigating truths using a method called the method of elenchus. This is defined by Webster as, “refutation; especially: one in syllogistic form.” Elenchus is the Socratic method of investigating truths through question and answer. Socrates starts this method of elenchus by questioning a supposedly wise person about the definition of certain virtues. For example, in Plato’s Euthyphro, Socrates asks Euthyphro what piety is. After this, the person gives their definition of that virtue. In Plato’s Euthyphro, Euthyphro’s answer is “ I say that the pious is to do what I am doing now, to prosecute the wrongdoer, be it about murder or temple robbery or anything else, whether the wrongdoer is your father or your mother or anyone else; not to prosecute is impious” (Plato). After this, Socrates proves the persons definition wrong through the use of examples, and then another definition is given, and the process

He might say that if one does not examine values in this way, then one cannot really live virtuously because they do not have a definition of virtue. He would also disagree with Nietzsche’s point that the value of life should not be examined because he would believe that if one doesn’t examine the value of their life, then their life has no value at all. He would defend against Nietzsche’s thought that all definitions in the elenchus are just opinions by saying that virtues in themselves are eternal truths, and us as humans should work to know these eternal