ZBORNIK - Matica srpska

There may be a paradox here. On the one hand, the Platonic
Socrates of the Phaedo is regarded as “most just" from Plato,
whereas, on the other, Vlastos invokes historical evidence from Pericles
to initially support his argument that Socrates could have
been “most just", but he did not prove to be. The next stages of his
argumentation involve historical evidence, too. This means that the
void between the Platonic Socrates, a quasi-non existent person, and
the historical facts (Syracuse and Mutilene) upon which the ancient
Greek philosopher should be judged, is still existent. A conclusion
that could be drawn in this case is: a quasi-non existent person is
good for nothing! But, after Vlastos' submission that Plato does not
leave us satisfied that Socrates, regarding his obligations to his city,
is not above reproach, we would better consider the aforementioned
blank as Vlastos' strive to bridge philosophical inquiry (one-to-one
elenchus) with philosophical practice (contribution to the whole, for
the sake of the whole city-state). Hence, a blank between, a more or
less, fiction (Platonic Socrates with his “most just" attitude) and
reality (the two occasions where a historical person-Socrates would
be needed to “do politics" and i.e. participate in the Assembly) is
being transformed into a moral blank with the emphasis placed on
putting together the personal theoretical and moral wealth (elenchus)
of Socrates with his practical behaviour towards the city-state,
where his wisdom and virtues (i.e. justice) would at least be helpful
to the Athenian people.
We would more safely draw conclusions concerning this moral
blank, if we focused on the historical Socrates. In such a way, there
will be an unobstructed alignment between Vlastos' appeal to historical
events and the historical Socratic persona, who would better
serve the situation. It is not exclusively the Platonic Socrates —
with the ontological and epistemological concerns — who shows
such a moral defect. One might notice the normality a person with
ontological and epistemological worries to display defects in other
areas, such as ethics. But, this is not the case. I submit that, beyond
Plato's Socrates as seen in the Phaedo, it is the historical one, too,
who demonstrates moral imperfection, since the two occasions of
Syracuse and Mytilene are derived from the history of Athens.
Gregory Vlastos refers indirectly to this persona. A direct reference
would not be necessary, due to the fact that the Greek philosopher
of the 20 th century focused on the historical Socrates in his works.
Obviously, Socrates' moral blank covers both the philosophical personae
in the Epilogue of Socratic Studies.
Vlastos actually quoted from the historical Socrates when he
referred to the abovementioned passage of the Apology “You know
100