Answers

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Sat 4 Apr, 2009 07:34 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy wrote:
Socrates was, of course, being disingenuous, and ironic. He knew lots of things. He knew he was an Athenian, that he lived in Greece, that he was a male, and ever so much more. What he had in mind when he said he knew nothing needs interpretation.


Yeah, I get that much. The above post made use of my interpretation of Socrates' famous saying.

kennethamy wrote:
He probably meant that he knew nothing of importance, and that knowing he was a male wasn't an important piece of knowledge. He was probably talking of philosophical knowledge of some kind. He may also have meant that his knowledge was not absolutely certain knowledge. It is difficult to say. In the dialogue in which he expresses this, he is contrasting himself with others who claim to know things which he clearly thinks they do not know, and he interprets the Delphic Oracle who tells him that he is the wisest man in Greece as meaning that he is the only man in Athens who knows he knows nothing but that he knows nothing.


To know "nothing of importance", to speak of "philosophical knowledge", and to suggest that "his knowledge was not absolutely certain knowledge" are three items which are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Sun 5 Apr, 2009 07:06 am
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas wrote:
Yeah, I get that much. The above post made use of my interpretation of Socrates' famous saying.



To know "nothing of importance", to speak of "philosophical knowledge", and to suggest that "his knowledge was not absolutely certain knowledge" are three items which are not necessarily mutually exclusive.


Of course not. And not merely "necessarily" either.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 08/08/2020 at 08:41:41