‘Death of Socrates’ Painting

Analysis
Sanjeet Saini
Follow
Aug 16, 2018 · 3 min read
A well-known painter in the neo-classical era, Jacques-Louis
David became one of the most famous artists in history with his
impactful works of art. With pieces such as the Oath of
Horatii, The Death of Marat, and Napoleon crossing the Alps to
have become cult classics of the neo-classical era, it is not a
surprise that the artist would attempt to illustrate what some may
agree as one of the many mistakes of humanity. The death of
Socrates, as depicted by Jacques-Louis David, shows the regret
and sorrow derived from within this act, just as it shows Socrates’
commitment and sacrifice to his work as a philosopher.

Socrates, otherwise known as the father of philosophy, has been

credited with providing humanity with one of its greatest gifts, the
Socratic method. Now known as the scientific method, the Socratic
method entails that we question everything that we are told, to
question until a contradiction has occurred. Socrates sought
contradiction as it proved that not one person knows the answer.
According to Socrates, “true knowledge exists in knowing that you
know nothing.” This belief that knowledge meant that you are
aware that you know nothing at all stressed to the core of the
Socratic method; to question your ideas and others in the pursuit
of knowledge, making the individual more aware. Socrates
imposed this idea upon his disciples and to others around him so
that they may discover their own truth, rather than trusting in the
belief of others to be true.
However, such teachings are what caused the death of Socrates.
Born in 470 BC, in the golden age of ancient Athens, Socrates
remained a pessimist despite living in one of the most successful
civilizations in human history. Athens was the first civilization to
provide every individual with a voice in politics, rather than
allowing the power of the state to be in the hands of a single
individual; this system is known as democracy. Democracy has
stood the test of time as it has evolved into the most prominent
political system in modern society. However, the new
experimental political system would not go without analysis from
Socrates, who saw the flaw in a total democracy. To Socrates, only
the innate thinkers should be able to vote in societal matters. This
does not mean that only the educated should be able to vote, as
Socrates voiced his opinion that you should be able to use your
intuition to vote and that a democracy should not be a popularity
contest. With this philosophy among others, he infused in others
the ability to question what they are told.

The teachings of Socrates were viewed as wrong in the eyes of the

Athenian government at the time, as Socrates was put on trial with
the charge of corrupting the youth and was found guilty. Unlike
those who are found guilty today, Socrates had two options as to
what his punishment would be, exile or drink poison hemlock. For
Socrates, exile meant the abandonment of his teachings and
philosophy. Instead of allowing himself to be exiled, he chose the
punishment of death by poison hemlock. This decision made by
Socrates acted as a final lesson not only his pupils but to the
people of Athens to pursue the truth, even in the face of death.

In the end, Socrates’ teachings inspired some of the greatest minds

of the ancient world, including Plato (one of Socrates’ students)
and Aristotle (one of Plato’s students). Many others in history have
followed suit alongside with Socrates in the pursuit of the truth for
either themselves or for others such as Martin Luther in
questioning the church, Voltaire, Friedrich Nietzsche, Immanuel
Kant, and many more.

Quote Analysis: The

unexamined life is not
worth living
You are here:

1. Home
2. English
3. Quote Analysis: The unexamined life…
Socrates believed that living a life where you live under the rules of others, in a continuous
routine without examining what you actually want out of it is not worth living. This illustration
of a lifestyle is what

Socrates would
describe an unexamined life. Hence Socrates’ renowned statement “The unexamined life is
not worth living”. Declaring that humans must scrutinize their lives in order to live a fulfilled
one isn’t agreeable to any extent.

Socrates’ statement does instigate discussion, but it doesn’t necessarily apply to everyone’s
way of life and what makes or doesn’t make their life worth living. The theory that all lives
that are unexamined don’t have a purpose and should not be lived is unreasonable and
simply not true. There is a lot more that contributes to a person’s happiness and well-being
besides “examining their lives”. Factors such as life experiences, being with family, things to
be thankful for, memories, and reaching success in life. Everything that makes one happy,
and a happy life should most definitely be lived whether its examined or not.
Epicurus’ philosophy on happiness, is composed of three things; good companionship
(friends), having freedom (being self-sufficient and free from everyday life and politics) and
an analysed life (meaning to have time and space to think things through). Epicurus and
Socrates have different approaches to the phrase “analysing life”. Epicurus would advise
not to spend money as temporary relief for a bad day but rather take time out and reflect
and contemplate. Socrates on the other hand has a different stance. Epicurus believes that
analysing your life is one third of what it takes to have a happy life whereas Socrates
believes that if you are not constantly reviewing and examining every aspect of your life just
so you can get the best out of it, it’s not worth living in general.

READ

What is Piety? Euthyphro & Socrates

De Montaigne was one of the most significant philosophers of the French Renaissance and
is best known for his skepticism. De Montaigne would’ve had an advancing degree of doubt
and disagreement on Socrates’ statement that “the unexamined life is not worth living”.
Socrates said that having a mechanical life with an unthinking routine, under the rules of
others without ever examining whether or not they truly want to live with those routines or
rules is basically not worth living anymore. However, De Montaigne had a contrary belief on
what bring our lives happiness and what makes them “not worth living”. He believed that
human have a tendency to over-think things and that’s mainly where our unhappiness
comes from. To be happy De Montaigne knew that we didn’t need intelligence and brain
facts, we required wisdom and life experience. De Montaigne urged us to live the best lives
we possibly can by simply not worry about our appearance, accept our own and everyone
else’s culture, and always endeavour to become wiser. De Montaigne had quite the
opposite approach on how to live a happy life to Socrates. Socrates believed over analysing
and examining our lives would lead to better ones, whereas De Montaigne would advise us
to spend less time over-analysing and overthinking things as it leads to insecurities that we
are all far better off without.
Socrates statement “The unexamined life is not worth living”, is an exaggeration and is
predominantly false but does have a degree of truth to it. We must occasionally question
ourselves and the world, as otherwise we will act without reason, and be unable to
distinguish between good or bad actions, and without this way of thinking Socrates might
argue we are no better off than animals. But with this statement, Socrates promotes the
idea that people who don’t examine their lives should not live. Socrates seemed to overlook
other factors that account to our happiness and give worth to our lives. In disagreement with
Socrates; We all must contemplate now and again but only to a certain extent, as it can be
disastrous to overthink and reconsider every aspect of our life.