What do you think?
Rate this book
El pensamiento de Sócrates
Sin abrumar nunca al lector con un gran aparato crítico, el profesor Taylor deslinda claramente entre la filosofía de Sócrates y la de Platón, estableciendo así la verdadera aportación de Sócrates al pensamiento occidental. Con este breviario, el profesor escocés ha logrado una obra maestra tanto en el campo de la biografía como en el de la exposición filosófica.
151 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1933
7 people are currently reading
134 people want to read
About the author
A.E. Taylor
92 books13 followersAlfred Edward Taylor was a British idealist philosopher. He was born in 1869, the son of a Wesleyan minister. Among many distinguished appointments, he held the chair of Moral Philosophy at Edinburgh from 1924 to 1941. His main interests were Platonic philosophy and the theology of Christianity, and his contributions in both these fields have been of far-reaching importance. "Does God Exist?" was his last considerable work on the philosophy of religion before his death in 1945.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
May 2, 2025
taylor, sokrates’i anlatırken platon, ksenophon ve aristophanes gibi kaynaklara başvuruyor. ancak ne platon gibi onu yüceltiyor ne de aristophanes gibi alaya alıyor. sokrates’i farklı yönleriyle ele alması kitabın en sevdiğim yanı oldu.
taylor’a göre sokrates’in insanlarla konuşma tarzı aslında onları düşünmeye yönelten bir yol. amacı, insanların neyi bilmediklerini fark etmelerini sağlamak. bu yaklaşımıyla sokrates sanki insanları hem sorgulamaya hem de daha erdemli bir yaşama çağırıyor. kitapta sokrates’in yaşadığı dönemin siyasal ortamına da yer veriliyor. ölüme giden süreci, hem atina’daki demokrasiyi hem de onun düşüncelerine ne kadar sadık kaldığını gösteriyor. taylor’a göre bu ölüm, sokrates’in inandığı değerlerden ödün vermemesinin bir sonucu.
yer yer yoğun olsa da kitabın dili oldukça anlaşılır. sokrates’in etik ve ölüm üzerine düşüncelerini merak edenler için güzel bir başlangıç olabilir.
taylor’a göre sokrates’in insanlarla konuşma tarzı aslında onları düşünmeye yönelten bir yol. amacı, insanların neyi bilmediklerini fark etmelerini sağlamak. bu yaklaşımıyla sokrates sanki insanları hem sorgulamaya hem de daha erdemli bir yaşama çağırıyor. kitapta sokrates’in yaşadığı dönemin siyasal ortamına da yer veriliyor. ölüme giden süreci, hem atina’daki demokrasiyi hem de onun düşüncelerine ne kadar sadık kaldığını gösteriyor. taylor’a göre bu ölüm, sokrates’in inandığı değerlerden ödün vermemesinin bir sonucu.
yer yer yoğun olsa da kitabın dili oldukça anlaşılır. sokrates’in etik ve ölüm üzerine düşüncelerini merak edenler için güzel bir başlangıç olabilir.
March 9, 2021
Yazar Taylor, kitabında çoğunlukla Platon'un Sokrates anlatısını takip ediyor ancak Sokrates'e yer veren diğer antik metinleri de sık sık anıyor. Kitabın ilk bölümleri, Sokrates'in Atina'da yaşayan gerçek bir kişi olup olmadığı tartışmalarına odaklanılıyor. Kitabın bu bölümlerinde karşılaştırmalı okumalar yapıldığı için, akademik dile ve okuma pratiğine sahip olmayan okurların biraz zorlanabileceğini düşünüyorum. Kitabın çevirmeni Mukadder Erkan ve kitabı yayına hazırlayan arkadaşlar çok iyi bir iş çıkarmışlar; öngördüğüm bu zorlanma tamamen metnin akademik planında kaynaklanıyor.
Kitabın ikinci yarısında ise Sokrates'in yargılanma süreci ve bugünün dünyasına katkıları tartışılıyor. Kitabın iddiası, Sokrates'in Avrupa'nın bugünkü entelektüel ve ahlaki geleneğini yarattığı. Taylor, bu iddiayı "ruh, etik ve epistemoloji"de Sokrates'in gölgelerini açıklayarak ispata girişiyor. Kitabın sonunda da bu konularda okumalarını derinleştirmek isteyen okurlar için birkaç kaynak önerisi var.
Kitabın ikinci yarısında ise Sokrates'in yargılanma süreci ve bugünün dünyasına katkıları tartışılıyor. Kitabın iddiası, Sokrates'in Avrupa'nın bugünkü entelektüel ve ahlaki geleneğini yarattığı. Taylor, bu iddiayı "ruh, etik ve epistemoloji"de Sokrates'in gölgelerini açıklayarak ispata girişiyor. Kitabın sonunda da bu konularda okumalarını derinleştirmek isteyen okurlar için birkaç kaynak önerisi var.
June 7, 2015
A. E. Taylor's biography on Socrates is a nice little gem. Not only does he offer a very good overview of what is known and knowable about the life of Socrates, but he also provides extensive footnotes which his readers can use to follow up his claims in their original sources. Perhaps best of all is Taylor's promising account, throughout the work, of the extent to which Socrates can be distinguished from the sophists, a distinction that seems both absolutely crucial to understanding Socrates, and often overlooked or underemphasized by others.
August 30, 2021
Enjoyable book that takes a fair approach to what we think is true about Socrates life and beliefs. Platos recount of Socrates death speech (the apology) at the end of this book was quite meaningful after reading the first three sections
January 25, 2021
Excellent. First published in 1933 --but not significantly dated in style (or scholarship from what I can see). Nice and short too.
November 5, 2019
a dos partes precedidas por una introducción este libro presenta una biografia de socrates empapado de los acontecimientos historicos de la grecia antes y durante la guerra del peloponeso. busca las razones verdaderas de que se halla sometido a juicio a un viejo y la importancia de este para la sociedad atenience.
la segunda parte es un estudio filologico que trata de separar que, de lo que platon escribio es de socrates y que es del ancho de espalda. No todos los puntos que plasma el autor me convencen; Taylor supone que la teoria plasmada en el Fedon es propia de socrates y que describe de manera fiel su pensamiento, lo cual tiene como consecuencia el restar protagonismo a platon como autor de la teoria de las formas.
la segunda parte es un estudio filologico que trata de separar que, de lo que platon escribio es de socrates y que es del ancho de espalda. No todos los puntos que plasma el autor me convencen; Taylor supone que la teoria plasmada en el Fedon es propia de socrates y que describe de manera fiel su pensamiento, lo cual tiene como consecuencia el restar protagonismo a platon como autor de la teoria de las formas.
March 5, 2024
Excelente libro que hace un buen recuento de todo lo que podemos saber acerca de Sócrates. Me parece que su dependencia en el Sócrates platónico debe ser tomada con precaución, aunque su justificación es sólida. Lo que más me interesó es como le dio valor al recuento de Aristófanes acerca de Sócrates en "las nubes", reconociendo que toda parodia tiene sustento en la realidad, y que el Sócrates del que Aristófanes se burlaba aún no había tenido su revelación.
May 25, 2019
Un libro que reune muy bien la vida y pensamiento de Sócrates. Defendiendo la tesis de que Platón plasma de manera fiel en los diálogos de juventud el pensamiento y vida de su maestro.
April 23, 2020
Impressive (but too erudite for me: Lockdown-reading)
January 19, 2022
Short read. It is included on audible for no additional charge with a membership.
June 7, 2022
It is hard to find a biography book that both academic and popular. This is the one of them.
September 13, 2022
An enlightening biography of Socrates, imbued throughout with a thorough and interesting account of the good deal of cross referencing needed to give an account of a figure who lived so long ago.
April 25, 2018
A very useful, not too long or dry historical introduction to Socrates as an historical person. I'd definitely recommend reading this before reading any of Plato's Socratic dialogues if you're thinking about doing so - you're likely to get quite a bit more out of them. Even after having read a different, more contemporary book on the historical context of Greek philosophy*, the also-good History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps, I still felt like I understood quite a bit better the context of Socrates's life and how his politics and philosophy fit into the social fabric of the city.
I do think Taylor relies on an overly strict assumption about the main Socratic writings - namely, that unless there's a strong reason to believe they're not accurate, we should assume that they are, for the most part. I think that's just wishful thinking on the part of the historian, sifting through the bits and pieces of history and trying to build a coherent narrative. One of his main arguments is that that Plato, Aristophanes and others wouldn't have been able to write outright fabrications about the life of Socrates, since their audiences would have known him personally. This is a dumb argument - people write and publish materially untrue things about famous people all the time, often during their own lifetimes.
And insofar as Plato was himself a well-regarded head of a philosophical school, he could easily have made the argument himself that others now make on his behalf: namely, that he was using the historical context of Socrates, a real historical person, to provide a scaffolding for discussing his own philosophical ideas. It's not like he had to get his dialogues peer-reviewed for accuracy...they just needed to persist in history in order to become authoritative. And the quality of Plato's writing (and his is an excellent writer, even if I'm not a huge fan of Greek philosophy in general) would have ensured that it remained, whether it hewed closely to truth or not.
I'm not making a positive argument here that the depictions of Socrates that have come down to us are ahistorical; I'm just saying I don't find Taylor's argument that convincing. But that being said, he does a great job of outlining the key political, social and historical contexts for Socrates's life, and his discussion of what has been written about Socrates, his life and his thoughts, is valuable whether you think it's particularly trustworthy or not. Insofar as Plato is on the Must-Read list (and, somewhat unfortunately, he is), this is a really good way to get more out of it than you're otherwise likely to do. And it's a reasonable length!
*"Why does he do this to himself," the Reader wonders? He doesn't have a good answer.
I do think Taylor relies on an overly strict assumption about the main Socratic writings - namely, that unless there's a strong reason to believe they're not accurate, we should assume that they are, for the most part. I think that's just wishful thinking on the part of the historian, sifting through the bits and pieces of history and trying to build a coherent narrative. One of his main arguments is that that Plato, Aristophanes and others wouldn't have been able to write outright fabrications about the life of Socrates, since their audiences would have known him personally. This is a dumb argument - people write and publish materially untrue things about famous people all the time, often during their own lifetimes.
And insofar as Plato was himself a well-regarded head of a philosophical school, he could easily have made the argument himself that others now make on his behalf: namely, that he was using the historical context of Socrates, a real historical person, to provide a scaffolding for discussing his own philosophical ideas. It's not like he had to get his dialogues peer-reviewed for accuracy...they just needed to persist in history in order to become authoritative. And the quality of Plato's writing (and his is an excellent writer, even if I'm not a huge fan of Greek philosophy in general) would have ensured that it remained, whether it hewed closely to truth or not.
I'm not making a positive argument here that the depictions of Socrates that have come down to us are ahistorical; I'm just saying I don't find Taylor's argument that convincing. But that being said, he does a great job of outlining the key political, social and historical contexts for Socrates's life, and his discussion of what has been written about Socrates, his life and his thoughts, is valuable whether you think it's particularly trustworthy or not. Insofar as Plato is on the Must-Read list (and, somewhat unfortunately, he is), this is a really good way to get more out of it than you're otherwise likely to do. And it's a reasonable length!
*"Why does he do this to himself," the Reader wonders? He doesn't have a good answer.
February 6, 2015
This is a brief history of Socrates’ life and thought, with a particular focus on the “Socratic doctrine of the soul” and his “strong vein of mysticism.” Taylor draws primarily from Plato’s dialogues and comments that “Plato’s picture of his Master is substantially accurate.”
Socrates sees a realm where the soul is immortal. Knowledge and truth are about this immortal world. If Socrates does not actually possess this knowledge himself, he at least “knows its importance, and he knows his own ignorance of it….This is why he feels it a duty laid on him by God to persist in seeking the supreme knowledge, and to try to induce any man, fellow-citizen or stranger, who will listen to him to seek it with him.” Physical death is liberation of the soul from this life and its “entry into a better life.” Philosophy prepares one for this eternal life. The philosophic pursuit of truth for its own sake “is itself one long preparation for this blissful enlargement, as it is also the true service of God, who requires us simply to ‘make the soul’ – that within us which thinks and knows – ‘as good as possible.’”
Taylor states that Socrates “created the conception of soul which has ever since dominated European thinking.” The rational pursuit of truth is essential to Socrates’ “tending” mission." “To desist from this mission, he said, would be rebellion against God.” Rationality is about this eternal world. To be ignorant is to believe and to act without “rational justification,” which is knowledge of one single principle, “one excellence” that applies to all, without exception. This principle is the Good. Taylor also states that “the Good is the universal cause.” “In this way,” he states that “Socrates introduced into philosophy that ‘teleological’ or ‘finalist’ conception of the order of the universe as realizing an end of absolute value which was to be fully worked out and transmitted to later times as the chief heritage of Greek philosophical thought by Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus.”
Ironically, it could be that an absolute, objective, universal value can be found not in an immortal world but embedded in that physical body which Plato seeks to escape. If each of us is to be free to survive and to live a fulfilling life, that freedom works only if each respects the freedom of others to do the same. The universal value is not within each of us, as Plato knew, but it is a logic that flows from a universal condition where each of us seeks be free. It is a logic that also brings with it the attendant notions of personal ethics (golden rule and its variations), justice (enforcement against violations by the state), and conditions of equality (to prevent violations).
Socrates sees a realm where the soul is immortal. Knowledge and truth are about this immortal world. If Socrates does not actually possess this knowledge himself, he at least “knows its importance, and he knows his own ignorance of it….This is why he feels it a duty laid on him by God to persist in seeking the supreme knowledge, and to try to induce any man, fellow-citizen or stranger, who will listen to him to seek it with him.” Physical death is liberation of the soul from this life and its “entry into a better life.” Philosophy prepares one for this eternal life. The philosophic pursuit of truth for its own sake “is itself one long preparation for this blissful enlargement, as it is also the true service of God, who requires us simply to ‘make the soul’ – that within us which thinks and knows – ‘as good as possible.’”
Taylor states that Socrates “created the conception of soul which has ever since dominated European thinking.” The rational pursuit of truth is essential to Socrates’ “tending” mission." “To desist from this mission, he said, would be rebellion against God.” Rationality is about this eternal world. To be ignorant is to believe and to act without “rational justification,” which is knowledge of one single principle, “one excellence” that applies to all, without exception. This principle is the Good. Taylor also states that “the Good is the universal cause.” “In this way,” he states that “Socrates introduced into philosophy that ‘teleological’ or ‘finalist’ conception of the order of the universe as realizing an end of absolute value which was to be fully worked out and transmitted to later times as the chief heritage of Greek philosophical thought by Plato, Aristotle, and Plotinus.”
Ironically, it could be that an absolute, objective, universal value can be found not in an immortal world but embedded in that physical body which Plato seeks to escape. If each of us is to be free to survive and to live a fulfilling life, that freedom works only if each respects the freedom of others to do the same. The universal value is not within each of us, as Plato knew, but it is a logic that flows from a universal condition where each of us seeks be free. It is a logic that also brings with it the attendant notions of personal ethics (golden rule and its variations), justice (enforcement against violations by the state), and conditions of equality (to prevent violations).
January 14, 2013
Taylor surveys Socrates’ life and thinking, per Xenophon and Plato, and then offers his view as to Socrates’ continued importance focusing upon the soul, ethics and theory of knowledge… the soul, for Socrates was immortal, per the Orphic religion, but, uniquely, he felt it was the seat of “character and intelligence” and always aimed at the “good and happiness”; to reach the latter, it must make recourse to the dialectical question-and-answer approach which aims at uncovering or helping to recollect highest truths known prior to embodiment, i.e., the eternal, perfect Forms of Beauty, Justice, etc. As Taylor states: “(t)he soul has one fundamental activity, that of knowing realities as they really are, and it is only in knowing the Forms that this activity is successfully discharged. When the mind is not face to face with a Form, we only have opinion or belief…”
As with his study of Aristotle, Taylor offers a concise, clear, readable account of his subject; recommended for anyone studying ancient Greek philosophy…
As with his study of Aristotle, Taylor offers a concise, clear, readable account of his subject; recommended for anyone studying ancient Greek philosophy…
August 27, 2011
I knew most of this information and I don't know anything about Socrates.
Taylor mostly dredges through the minutiae of the contextual justifications for his arguments; some being convincing, others not - all being varying degrees of tedious.
Written in the 1930s, IDK.
Taylor mostly dredges through the minutiae of the contextual justifications for his arguments; some being convincing, others not - all being varying degrees of tedious.
Written in the 1930s, IDK.
Read
January 24, 2010This was very good. Pretty much nailed how much we can and cant really know. His arguments on what we can surmise about what Socrates actually was or said were fairly convincing.
December 4, 2015
It is good book, but I was expecting a bit more.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews