Socrates: Why is He Still Here

"Socrates is a piece of shit," my friend Sam always says, a sentiment I've come to understand. This feeling doesn't arise from Socrates' habit of challenging random aristocrats in the marketplace—in fact, I find that quite admirable—but from his lack of commitment to a coherent philosophical system. The aporia at the end of each dialogue leaves one feeling confused and disappointed. After 30 pages of dialogue, "I am pretty ignorant, I guess" is not a satisfying conclusion, even for the most indifferent reader.

This confusion extends to Socrates' mission: aren't philosophers supposed to provide definitions and outlooks on the world? Then what is Socrates' purpose? Is it to show the limits of human understanding? To ignite a passion for inquiry into humanity? To offer a methodology for philosophers who are dying for wisdom from Minerva’s pet owl?

All these answers seem reasonable, yet they fall apart upon closer inspection. Demonstrating the limits of human cognition is futile without defining those boundaries through metaphysics. A philosopher who poses questions and leaves dead-ends is not a philosopher but a mere heckler. Such a person offers no substance for successors to build upon. As history shows, methodologies evolve into more complex levels of inquiry, rendering ancient Socratic dialogue obsolete. In contrast, philosophers like Aristotle and Descartes left a lasting legacy through their systems, contributing significantly to logic and metaphysical speculation.

So, what is the value of Socrates in our modern world? Why should we study him at all? Why shouldn't we discard him as we have discarded alchemy and astrology?

One immediate answer is his pedagogical value, and this is indeed a valid point. Though the content of Socrates' teaching is often overshadowed, his spirit of questioning entrenched beliefs and exposing their absurdity is foundational to philosophical inquiry. This spirit has echoed through the development of the discipline: in Foucault's skepticism of societal and historical narratives, in Hume's questions regarding logical inquiries, and in Wittgenstein's investigations into the fundamentals of philosophy. Embracing this spirit provides a solid grasp of one of the essences of philosophy.

However, Socrates' influence extends further. If 20th-century philosophy can be characterized by one theme, it might be anti-modernism—the drive to rethink modern philosophies, culture, and ideology. This movement, though employing different methodologies, embodies Socrates' nature: questioning every idea, sentence, and book. Yet, in our current reality, this spirit seems to have faded. The lack of questioning and reflection on our values and claims is evident in the endless repetition by academics and the polarization in ideology and misinformation in politics.

Perhaps Socrates could be the practical solution to our problems. Maybe it is time to radically question our every belief and theory, pick what should stay and what should go. Maybe it is the time for a revolution of beliefs.