【作者】 孔祥润；

【导师】 刘杰； 余纪元；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 外国哲学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 若研究苏格拉底,许多主题可供选择：他为何年轻时学习自然哲学、后来对伦理问题感兴趣?他的伦理学关注普遍的道德概念还是具体的道德行为?他的哲学与他以前的自然哲学、与他同时代的伟大智者的哲学有何异同?他的理念论与柏拉图的理念论有何不同、能否以它为标准将苏格拉底和柏拉图二人彻底区分开?然而这些研究方式都把苏格拉底的哲学当作某种知识或理论,而本论文将苏格拉底的哲学定义为一种“生活方式”。本论文由审查苏格拉底的哲学动机即苏格拉底为何献身于哲学活动出发,试图得出下列结论：苏格拉底的一切哲学活动旨在促使人们不论生前还是死后,都要关心最重要的事物——自身灵魂的完善,灵魂的完善、道德上不受伤害即幸福。对苏格拉底哲学动机的最佳解释是他的名言——“未经审查的生活不值得过”。本文结合雅典人对苏格拉底的控告(雅典人从常识的立场看待苏格拉底)以及苏格拉底面对控告所作辩护(苏格拉底从哲学的立场为自身一切哲学活动作解释),从苏格拉底哲学活动的方法论、知识问题以及信仰问题三方面对苏格拉底的哲学活动作解释。对苏格拉底的任何研究,首先应该为自己的研究对象划定范围,即所研究的是哪个苏格拉底,是历史上的苏格拉底、柏拉图的苏格拉底、色诺芬的苏格拉底,抑或其他人著作中的苏格拉底。本文研究的苏格拉底是以柏拉图《申辩篇》为主、以《欧绪弗洛篇》《克里托篇》等其他早期对话为辅的苏格拉底,其理由在于,早期对话尤其是《申辩篇》中的苏格拉底具有最大程度的历史真实性。确定了研究的基本范围后,应考证苏格拉底哲学活动中使用的方法——诘问法,以及苏格拉底使用这种方法时的态度——真诚还是反讽。所谓“诘问法”即对话法、问答法。对话过程中,苏格拉底以“说你所相信的”作为对话的基本要求,在不断地提问中使对话者拥有的不同信念陷入自相矛盾,使对话者陷入困惑中。因此,对诘问法的争论主要集中在以下两方面：第一,从对象上看,诘问法的终极目的是审查人的信念还是审查人。其意义在于,如果诘问法是为了追求人们对事物的共同信念,那么它的最终目的在于获得关于事物的定义和知识；如果诘问法是为了审查人,那么它的最终目的在于探究人的信念(“说你所相信的”)在人的一切活动中的作用。第二,从结果上看,诘问法只具有消极作用,即消解人已有的信念,抑或也有积极作用,即能在一定程度上树立起人们对事物的新看法?本文认为,诘问法是苏格拉底不同于之前一切哲学的新的哲学范式,同时也是他的生活方式。将诘问看作苏格拉底的生活方式,这意味着苏格拉底使用诘问法时态度真诚、绝非反讽。在《申辩篇》中,研究苏格拉底的态度尤为重要,诘问是苏格拉底针对“败坏青年”的控告作辩护时使用的方法,而辩护的成功与否、能否获得审判者们的认可直接导致苏格拉底被释放还是被处死。在这种关联下,认为苏格拉底态度真诚有助于我们更好地理解苏格拉底对死亡的看法。“苏格拉底的知识和‘教’”这一章,针对“败坏青年”的控告为苏格拉底作辩护。辩护分为三个方面：第一,在知识上,苏格拉底不应该为“败坏青年”负责任。苏格拉底并不否认“知识”本身确实存在,但他否认他本人以及所有具有智慧名声的人确实有这种知识。苏格拉底与有智慧名声的人的根本区别在于：他无知并且意识到自己无知,这就是苏格拉底所具有的“人的智慧”；“人的智慧”与另一种智慧——“神的智慧”——形成鲜明对比。第二,在教育方式上,苏格拉底确实应该为“败坏青年”负责任：从后果上看,苏格拉底的“诘问”确实起到了教导青年的效果。美诺悖论表明,企图教人新知识的做法必定要失败。然而,苏格拉底的“教”不在于教青年以知识,而在于使青年人习得了诘问的生活方式；随之而来的是,使更多有智慧的人的已有信念陷入自相矛盾。这正是哲学教育的意义所在：哲学教育使人意识到自己对最重要事物的无知,进而关心最重要的事物——自身灵魂的完善。第三,对于苏格拉底是否“败坏青年”以及雅典人对“败坏青年”的人的憎恨,应该放在雅典民主政治极大发展、智者运动兴起、传统教育制度以及苏格拉底与智者的相似性这一更大背景环境下加以理解。对此我们应该注意,雅典民主制度的发展和智者专职教师的兴起相得益彰,然而智者运动的过度发展冲击了雅典的传统教育和道德；同时,由于最主要的控告者阿尼图斯即民主政体的领导人之一,因此有必要考察苏格拉底是否真正对雅典民主政体构成了威胁。“苏格拉底的虔诚、‘服从’和幸福”这一章,针对苏格拉底“不信神灵”即“不虔诚”的控告为苏格拉底作辩护。辩护分为三个方面：第一,从雅典人的立场看,苏格拉底应该为“不虔诚”的控告负责任。对此,我们至少能找出两个理由支持雅典人对苏格拉底的控告：一方面,苏格拉底改变了人与神交流的方式；由传统上祷告、献祭并重,变为单纯的祷告,这容易使人怀疑他对神灵“无所求”、不需要神灵的帮助。另一方面,苏格拉底将自己与英雄(半神)阿基里斯做对比,而且他在审判中、在一切哲学活动中的依据——戴蒙——极具私人性,这使人相信苏格拉底本人自诩为半神,因而苏格拉底不虔诚。第二,从哲学角度看,苏格拉底并没有不虔诚。一个理由在于苏格拉底的所有哲学活动都源自对德尔菲神谕的解读,他坚决“服从”作为上级的神灵所发出命令；以践行德尔菲神谕、证明“苏格拉底最聪明”为自己的终生使命。更重要的理由在于,《申辩篇》中的“服从”与死亡密切相关：若“服从”神灵、坚守使命,则会带来死亡；尽管如此,苏格拉底仍然选择坚守自己的“使命”,只要还活着,就永不止息的进行哲学活动。第三,苏格拉底之所以永不停止哲学活动,原因在于哲学活动能带给他幸福；哲学家的幸福就在于灵魂不受伤害。《申辩篇》中,苏格拉底所讲的灵魂是个整体,绝没有柏拉图中后期哲学中“灵魂三分”的观念；幸福就在于可以与古往今来一切最有智慧的灵魂对话,这为诘问法发挥作用开辟了新领域。本文主要运用了以下方法：第一,既研究一般概念又研究具体事例：对苏格拉底使用的诘问法进行抽象研究,对苏格拉底的反讽进行具体案例分析。第二,背景还原法,将苏格拉底对“败坏青年”的控告应负的责任放到当时的希腊政治、教育背景下加以理解。第三,论证苏格拉底的某些观点时,从古希腊词语的原意作解释。本文通过对《申辩篇》的考察得出以下主要结论：第一,在雅典,哲学的合法性从来未出现危机,苏格拉底之所以被控告是由于他把哲学由一种理论思维、知识体系转变为生活的态度和方式。第二,“败坏青年”这一控告具有一定程度的合理性,因为在雅典人看来苏格拉底的诘问法和智者的辩论术有着相同的修辞学功能——使对话者陷入自相矛盾从而驳倒对方。第三,“不信神灵”的控告也具有一定程度的合理性,苏格拉底改变了人与神交流的方式。但是这并不能说明苏格拉底不虔诚；要么生要么死的对比更能体现苏格拉底对神灵的虔诚。第四,苏格拉底是个幸福主义者,他不仅关心自己的幸福,同时关心他人的幸福。本文的结论力图冲击人们对苏格拉底的传统看法,即苏格拉底的被控告和被处死既冤枉又高尚、他是哲学和道德的殉葬者,以及,苏格拉底以理性论证为自身一切行为的最终依据、他是理性主义哲学传统的开端。本文力图给人们留下这种印象：苏格拉底确实应该为“败坏青年”和“不信神灵”的控告负责任；然而这并不意味着苏格拉底是智者或他不虔诚。相反,支撑这一切的是他对神灵的服从和虔诚：虔诚使得他不论生前还是死后,以诘问法追求灵魂的幸福和满足。更多还原

【Abstract】 People do research on Socrates from a variety range of topics:why does Socrates do research on natural philosophy when he is young, but interest in ethics when he grows up? Does he focus on different conceptions/definitions of virtues or particular moral activities? What is the difference between his philosophy and many great Pre-Socratic natural philosophers or sophists? What are the differences between his and Plato’s’idea theory’? Could we take ’idea theory’ as a standard to differentiate Socrates from Plato? All above researches take Socrates’ philosophy as some kind of knowledge or theory. In contrast, this dissertation defines Socrates’ philosophy as some certain kind of’life style’. We aimed to argue for the following thesis:whenever people are live or dead, all of Socrates philosophizing aimed to urge people caring for the most important things. That is perfecting your souls. It is the greatest happiness.This dissertation focus on Socrates motive to do philosophizing, that is equal to say why does Socrates devote his whole life to philosophizing? I hold that Socrates’motto, the unexamined life is not worth living, is the best explanation to the question. Under the consideration of Athens’ accusation to Socrates and Socrates’ responding, this dissertation will give explanations to Socrates’ Philosophizing on three aspects: Socrates’ method to do philosophizing, his views on knowledge, and his points on faith.Whenever you want to do some research on Socrates, first of all, you’d better make it clear what do you mean by the word ’Socrates’. Is it the historical person, or the literature figure which is described in Plato or Xenophon’s books? This dissertation takes Socrates in Plato’ early dialogues (the Apology, Euthyphro, and Crito), especially the Apology, as the researching object. For the trial of Socrates is a public affair, and the Apology is the work has a high degree of historical reliability.After determining the research object, the following step is to examine Socrates’ method to do philosophizing, which is named elenchus, and his attitude, whether he is sincere or irony. Elenchus is a dialogue or ask-answer method. In the process of dialogue, Socrates takes’say what you belief as the basic requirement to the interlocutor; and the result is that the interlocutor find his believes contrary with each other. The debate on elenchus concentrated mainly on two aspects:first, what is the ultimate purpose of elenchus? Does it take the interlocutor’s believes or the interlocutor himself as the object? If the interlocutor’s belief, it will be pursuing knowledge and definition of things as the end of elenchus. If the interlocutor himself, the elenchus’ ultimate end will be exploring what kind of role does one’s belief play in his life. Second, what is the result of elenchus? Does it purely destructive, clearing up ones’ believes, or it has also the positive effect, bringing one with new views? The dissertation holds that elenchus is the new paradigm of philosophy, which is totally differentiate with natural philosophy before Socrates. Meanwhile, it is Socrates’life style.Taking elenchus as Socrates’ life style, it means that Socrates is sincere but not irony when he talks with the interlocutors. It is especially important to research Socrates’ attitude to do philosophizing in the Apology, for Socrates takes elenchus as his method to offering defense. As long as he failed the defense, he will be sentenced to death. So taking Socrates’ attitude as sincerity, it will help us to get a better understand of Socrates’ view on death.Chapter3, Socrates’ knowledge and ’teaching’, argues for Socrates Against the accusation ’corrupting the youth’. The whole argument constitutes three parts. Firstly, Socrates has no responsibility to the charge’ corrupting the youth’ from the consideration of knowledge. Socrates has never denied that the knowledge itself does exist, but he tries his best to prove that both he and the persons with a wise fame possess no such knowledge. Socrates has some kind of ’human wisdom’ which means that when Socrates doesn’t know something, neither does he think he knows. It is the fundamentally difference between Socrates and the wise-fame persons. There is a sharp contrast between the ’human wisdom’ and ’a wisdom more than human’. Secondly, Socrates has responsibility to the charge ’corrupting the youth’ from the consideration of his teaching method. Socrates’ elenchus does have the consequence of leading the youth. From the Meno paradox, we conclude that all activities aimed at imparting knowledge to others are doomed to failure. However, what Socrates’teaching cares for is not imparting knowledge, but the life style. It makes more and more people taking elenchus as their life style. What follows is that more and more wise-fame people are exposed to be ignorance. It lies in the significance of philosophy education:it brings persons realizing that they are ignorance on the most important things, that is improve ones’soul; and further more, it leads persons to care for their souls. Thirdly, we’d better try to understand Socrates’’corrupting the youth’under the more broad background: Athens democracy has made a great development, sophist-movement springs up, and the similarity between Socrates and sophists. We should pay attention to two aspects:on the one hand, Athens-democracy flourishing and the sophist-movement rising benefited each other, however, the sophist-movement goes so far that it impacts the traditional morality and education. On the other hand, Anytus, the main accuser, is the leader of democracy Athens, it is necessary to examine whether Socrates does threaten the Athens-democracy.Chapter4, Socrates’ piety,’obedience’ and happiness, argues for Socrates Against the accusation’ don’t believe the god which is believed by the city’, or briefly, the accusation of’impiety’. The argument also constitutes three parts. Firstly, from the standpoint of the Athens, Socrates has the responsibility to the charge of’impiety’. We could find out at least two reasons to support their accusation:for one thing, Socrates changed the communication form between human beings and divinity. Traditionally, people both sacrifice and pray to divinity. However, Socrates makes a lot of prayer but never sacrifice to divinity. For the other thing, Socrates compared himself with the hemi-divinity Achilles, meanwhile, he takes his daimon——the totally private divinity——as his ultimate ground for his whole defense. This brings people imagine that Socrates takes himself as hemi-divinity. Secondly, from the standpoint of philosophy, Socrates has never committed impiety. For, from the interpretation to the Delphic oracle, he got his lifetime mission. What is most important, obeying or refusing the Delphic oracle is closely connected with death. Obeying the oracle will bring him death. But under the threat of death, Socrates was unmoved to practice his philosophizing:as long as he draws breath and is able, he shall not cease to practice philosophy. Thirdly, the reason for Socrates’never ceasing philosophizing is that philosophizing will bring him happiness. Philosophers take the undamaged soul as their great happiness. What Socrates said about soul in the Apology is totally different from the tri-parted soul in Plato’middle and late dialogues. Talking with the most intelligent souls eternally in Hades, this is the greatest happiness.This dissertation uses the following methods:firstly, both do research on general conceptions and detail cases. We give abstract analysis on Socrates’ elenchus method, then, we analyze Socrates’irony in the trial. Secondly, go back to the background. Understanding the background of Athens democracy and educational tradition of Socrates’ time, we could get a better understanding of the charge’corrupting the youth’. Thirdly, when arguing for some of Socrates views, we seek for help from the Ancient Greek words.After examining the Apology, we arrived at the following conclusions:firstly, the Athenian has never oppugned the legality of philosophy. Socrates was accused, for he shifted philosophy from theoretical thinking to a life style. Secondly, it is reasonable to accuse Socrates for ’corrupting the youth’. Both Socrates’ elenchus and sophists’ sophistry have the same rhetoric function:the trap the interlocutors into self-contradiction. Thirdly, it is also reasonable to accuse Socrates for ’don’ t believe the god’, for Socrates changed the way of communication between human beings and gods. However, it has never proved that Socrates is impiety. Socrates’ piety was best presented in the contrast——to live, or go to die. Fourthly, Socrates is a eudaimonist, he cares about both his and others happiness.Our conclusions tried to impact the traditional views on Socrates’ death:Socrates was wronged and noble when he was sentenced to death. This dissertation tries to leave readers the following impression:Socrates does have obligation to the two charges-’corrupting the youth’ and ’don’t believe gods’. However, it doesn’t mean that Socrates is impiety. Reversely, Socrates has a steady ground for all of the above arguments: whenever he is alive or after death, piety urges him to pursue happiness with the method of elenchus.更多还原