Nietzsche Friedrich’s “The Problem Of Socrates” Critical Thinking Samples

The Socratic Method employs logic argument as a form of approaching the right answer to a problem but does not provide a complete solution to the same. If one were to consider Plato’s records of Socrates’ dialogues, it is evident that by the end of each one, the philosopher avoids answering the questions altogether. A good illustration is in Socrates’ dialogue with Meno, where rather than give a precise definition of virtue, the Socratic Method merely concludes that morality comes from the gods. Thus said, Nietzsche Friedrich’s “The Problem of Socrates” focuses on the fact that Socrates does not provide any concrete answer to explain phenomena. The man utilizes two primary premises; Socrates doubts everything people tell him and that, the philosopher applies the ideologies of a commoner as revenge to those ranked high in the social hierarchy. Accordingly, the approach shows Socrates’ disregard for the intellectual capacities of the people and at the same time, renders actual academic achievements useless in his society.
On the first hypothesis, Nietzsche reckons that Socrates’ dialogs do not improve the thinking capacities of the Athenians but tends to mock them because he uses “a sound full of doubt” (39). In other words, while one might think Socrates to influence his companions with new knowledge and wisdom, the philosopher does the contrary by breaking down their values and presenting their thoughts as faulty. His doubt is not the problem, but his refusal to provide an alternative concrete answer proves to be so because, by feigning ignorance to the subjects he evades the question altogether. As mentioned above, the Meno dialogue is a good example because, in it, Socrates does not give the definition of virtue but is quick to disband Meno’s classification.
Nietzsche bases his next premise on claims that philosophers who fail to see the value of life “were not only decadents but not wise at all” (40). Such perceptions originate from Socrates’ refusal to escape from prison in favor of an execution, just to protect his reputation among the Athenians. In Nietzsche’s views, Socrates was too incompetent to make any form of wise decision when it was his turn because he lacked intelligence in the first place. After all, Socrates was of the lowest social class, and in a bid to prove he is an imperative person, Socrates actions showed him a commoner. Such an analysis comes from Nietzsche’s insistence that wise people will take the opportunity to escape the hangman’s noose because they understand the value of life. By extension, Socrates changed the ideologies of the Athenians and upset the social order by introducing logical arguments. As per Nietzsche’s text, the plebian populace or commoners, managed to best the nation’s intellects using Socrates’ logical argument to disprove phenomena without providing an alternative answer that will replace the former.
Conclusively, Nietzsche sees the Socratic Method as valueless because the tedium of long speeches is “a last-ditch weapon” for those lacking other means to support their arguments (42). Hence, rather than admiring the renowned philosopher’s views, Nietzsche emphasizes the need for people to show real intellectual abilities. It will be more useful than indulging in supposed logic without giving answers.

Work Cited

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Twilight of the Idols and the Anti-Christ: or How to Philosophize with a Hammer. Ed. Michael Tanner. Trans. R. J. Hollingdale. London : Penguin Classics, 1990. Print.