Book Description
The third edition of The Trial and Death of Socrates presents G. M. A. Grube's distinguished translations, as revised by John Cooper for Plato, Complete Works. A number of new or expanded footnotes are also included along with a Select Bibliography.Download Description
Includes Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo. The speeches and teachings of Socrates at the time of his trial, and the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (12)

The Trial and Death of Socrates (3rd Edition) by Plato, John M. Cooper
This purchase saved me a lot of money compared to the price in the campus bookstore.

Expensive
Of the eight books I bought, it was the most expensive (cost per page) for all that I received. Although it was in great condition, so were some of the others.

In the name of Iran
This book was pleseant to read because Socrates was accused of corrupting of young Greek people's mind. Socrates made mockery of his trial. Eventually, he was convicted and was order to drink poison to die.

The Trial and Death of Socrates
I was totally pleased with the entire process.The book arrived surprisingly quickly and was in perfect condition.

The Trial and Death of Socrates
This is a must for anyone who is interested in the writings of Plato and what little we know about Socrates.The footnotes provide excellent refrences to phrases, gods and place names that the average reader may not be familiar with. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

How is one to rate...
...a 2400 year old work of philosophy?The question, itself, is not without philosophic interest.

Rather than presume to judge Plato, or Socrates, or Plato-as-Socrates, I will simply add my own voice to the chorus of general opinion and say: TLDoS is as resonant and, in its way, relevant, today as it was so many aeons ago.Though hardly a work of unassailable logic it is, nonetheless, a deeply thoughtful, imaginative, and passionately argued one.As I made my way through it, I had to remind myself, from time to time, that what I had before me was a work of ancient literature.Tredennick and Tarrant are to be commended for their eminently readable translation.As I am not a classicist, I cannot speak to the quality of the translation, but if the quality of the endnotes serves as any indication, I would venture to guess that the translation is first-rate.

A very complex Socrates -- as remembered, as imagined, and perhaps also as invented -- emerges from the four dialogues in TSDoS.That this same Socrates still has power to reach across the ages to confound, inspire, frustrate, entertain, and teach is as sure a testament to his legacy, and to the legacy of classical Greek philosophy, as any.

Read and learn.

THE INDIVIDUAL AGAINST THE STATE
THE DEATH OF SOCRATES is a very inspiring book to read, especially now, when many of us may be facing the same situation he faced--though with a crucial difference.Whatever distortion of the real Socrates may have been introduced by Plato or other writers, enough comes through to paint a portrait of the first true individual in history-- the first person to be guided by his own individual conscience to do what is right, regardless of the consequences.Reading the Apology, one thrills to Socrates intransigence in the face of the Athenian jury which sentenced him to death.CRITO presents the best argument for government under law ever offered, and thus the beginning of the tradition of civil disobedience later taken up by Thoreau, Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr.When Socrates' friend Crito urges him to flee, saying that most people will think he was really guilty if he does not, Socrates says, "Why should we pay so much attention to what most people think?"Then he engages in a symbolic dialogue with the Law of Athens, which can be thought of as comparable to the US Constitution.It is clear that he is grateful to the Laws for having given him the opportunity to be a dissenter.The crucial fact is that they have permitted him the right to attempt to persuade his fellow citizens by permitting him free speech.Even when he was arrested for his teachings, he was allowed to speak in his own defense.Although the verdict was unjust, he was a victim not of the Laws but of his fellow men. (p. 95)

However, the tradition of civil disobedience which Socrates founded is only meaningful in a democracy, where people have the right to dissent and to have a fair and public trial.And it is rapidly becoming obsolete.For on October 17, 2006, President Bush signed into law the Military Commissions Act, initiating the gravest crisis in US history, not excepting the Civil War, Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 itself.Congress has had over a year to repeal or amend that act but has failed to do so.Now it is up for review by the Supreme Court.If that body, now nearly half-filled with "rubber stamp" justices, fails to strike down the law as unconstitutional we shall have to resort to a very different tradition than that of Socrates, one which has its roots in medieval England, and was transformed in the 17th century into John Locke's social contract theory.Jefferson expressed it in the immortal words of the Declaration of Independence: speaking of the American colonists, he wrote, "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them to absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government and provide new guards for their future security."Faced with the prospect of living in a society which would have made his dissenting individualism impossible, I'm sure Socrates would have agreed.

The Last Days of Socrates. Plato. (Penguin)
Although many accounts of Socrates' trial are known to have existed for some time after the actual events described by Plato, only Plato's and Xenophon's accounts survive. Both writers were sympathetic to Socrates, and so are somewhat suspect as to whether they adequately and accurately describe the full nature of the charges against Socrates. Plato, a 27-year-old admirer of Socrates at the time of the trial, describes the charges as being impiety (questioning the state sanctioned [poly]theology) and, thereby supposedly corrupting the minds of Athens' youth. A similar charge had, years earlier, driven Anaxagoras from Athens, but many scholars believe there were probably other factors involved in the case against Socrates. Here we find an intractable mystery (and some unwarranted speculations that are merely libelous)*.

Plato's telling of Socrates' last days consists in four parts:
(1.) Euthyphro: Socrates in Action. (2.) The Apology: Socrates on Trial. (3.) Crito: Socrates in Prison. (4.) Phaedo: The Last Conversation.

Euthyphro, The Apology, and Crito are better paced and more interesting than Phaedo, which is a long Socratic argument that the soul must possess some extra-material existence, which continues, or is somehow renewed, beyond corporeal death. I suspect that most readers will enjoy the first three sections of this text, but find the last (and longest) more of a chore; at least that is my opinion. Throughout the text, Plato presents Socrates as a man of both relentless curiosity and an admirable ethical heroism.

* As to the rather facile side bar discussion that seems to have been present in earlier reviews in this forum (while noting the forensic evidence indicating that the worst of these comments was deleted): Given the full weight of the available evidence, Socrates' supposed bisexuality can add up to nothing more than idle speculation. As to his relationships with young men, it cannot be confirmed that they involved males that were considered to be below an age at which they could accountably assent--and even more importantly, IF any such relationships were of a sexual nature at all. Given the available accounts, arguments that these were NOT sexual relationships seem clearly more defensible than (slanderous?) accusations that they were. In other words, as regards this charge, we simply enter an arena of irresolvable facts and potential slander. Why go there?! What we CAN glean from the only extant accounts of Socrates' character is that he considered himself to be one who strove to consistently abide by the highest ethical standards, and that this is consistent with Plato's account here. As cited in Phaedo, these comments of Socrates' seem particularly relevant to this [particular slander]:". . . true philosophers abstain from all bodily desires and withstand them and do not yield to them. . . those who care about their souls and do not subordinate them to the body dissociate themselves firmly from these others and refuse to accompany them on their haphazard journey; and, believing that it is wrong to oppose philosophy with her offer of liberation and purification, they turn and follow her wherever she leads."

The Last Days of Socrates
In this simply-organized compilation of Socratic Dialogues, I would offer that the way Penguin Classics presents them cannot be outdone. The playfully loquacious dialogues are pure-gold bricks of logic, and should therefore be cherished greatly. This book is easy to understand because there are endnotes on every page. Spanning the entirety of over 200 juicy pages, Harold Tarrant and Hugh Tredennick present The Last Days of Socrates to the reader in an easy to follow pattern of notes. These final works of Plato should not be thought of as poor entertainment, but rather highly intense and compelling Greek discussions. It is very well-done and should be read over and over again.



Although every Socratic dialogue is absolutely riddled with complacent people for Socrates to question, this collection actually reveals the largest variety of listeners. From crazy commoners to cynical and court-goers, a critical criminal and the crowd of conflicting friends, Socrates caught every category and class of character off guard. At first, the evidence that hints at Socrates' trial is a mere conviction and nothing more. He had been free then. He had boldly questioned commoners at the very steps to the courthouse that he would defend himself in later. This penniless philosopher inquired of many people during his spare time.



In this collection, the second and third dialogues are the ones that depict the powerful defense of Socrates using logic to its full extent.In brilliantly defending himself, Socrates caressed, persuaded, and rallied only just under half of the jury. Unfortunately, he had failed to win the jury over completely, but he had come so close. Sleeping in the cell that was later constructed for him, Socrates was aroused by Crito, a man who had been a believer in Socrates.The extent of the discussion is contained in the third dialogue titled Crito.Anyhow, the general public hated Socrates so much that only death would avenge their flaming lust for revenge. The second and third dialogues depict Socrates' infamous apologetics and must be read. That is not all, however.



In Phaedo, Socrates calmly awaited his own death by hemlock, in a full chamber of the courthouse. He first addressed his followers and comrades alike concerning the meaning of life. He wanted to reassure them that there was indeed life after death, and that he would be going to a better place. Before he drank the poison, however, Socrates spurred a discussion of the soul and its immortality, or at least as logic had presented it to him. (Of course he had to argue it.) When two of his followers timidly provided Socrates with their opposing views, he only smiled and destroyed each argument consecutively. This he did because he wanted to share his hopes with his friends and did not want them to doubt his reincarnation. Nobody could fight back tears as he took the poison and perished. Socrates' legend now carries from there on. In Phaedo, the philosopher convinced his pals that his soul had not been dying, but had rather been transcending.



I love how Penguin has organized these significant conversations. Socrates is much easier to comprehend because of this book. Socrates had been last heard saying, "Crito, we ought to offer a cock to Asclepius. (This is because Asclepius had been the god of pleasure.) See to it and don't forget." Buy this book. See to it and do not forget.When I purchased this book, which was in a used condition, it only cost two cents and has not disappointed me. Since it is known that Socrates is always welcome to thinkers, the price feels reduced even further for those who love logic. You will deprive yourself if you miss out on this intellectual classic of the Father of Greek philosophy.

let's not argue
First, let me commend this book on it's ability to maintain relevance over the course of hundreds, even thousands of years. It is a necessity to any "rooty" student of philosophy.

Secondly, let me acknowledge that Socrates was a seemingly unhuman grace to the acomplishments of the human race. However, as he encouraged us to face rational facts as opposed to common beliefs, you must face the reality that in fact Socrates had sex with young boys, as was the norm for that era in Greek history. There are no questions. Most of the great minds did, though I am both a devotee to their teachings and wise to the ugliness of those actions.

If Aristotle killed a stranger would that make his work of lesser importance?

Let me stress that dignity in experiences (your 4 years of study) should not extend to close the mind but to expand it. We are reading passionate works of a man who shaped our world.

To argue irrationally on the topic of Socrates is to hit a man who disrespects Gandhi. ... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (44)

Oh my gosh, so hard to get through...
I don't even know why I am bothering to listen... except for the hope that eventually this will get better. Maybe it will. I'm on disk 4 out of 5 and it seems to be picking up.

I read his other book: Way of the Peaceful Warrior and really enjoyed it. It doesn't seem like this Socrates can be the same person? Oh well. I'll keep listening.

All in all, I think Dan is a good author.

Mystery Man Revealed
In this novel, Socrates, the mysterious guru figure from "The Way of the Peaceful Warrior" is revealed. The story of his life is an inspiring
saga of the triumph of the spirit. As the ptotagonist struggles against
almost impossible odds to avenge a hideous crime, we see him learn and
grow into the master martial artist that we first encountered in "Way of the Peaceful Warrior." History, martial arts, mysticism, all wrapped
in a wonderful tale of adventure, this book has it all.

George J. Partington scribbler georgepartington.com

Mystical
I have not heard of Dan Millman so when a library patron told me that this was a great book, my curiousity was piqued and naturally, I had to check it out to see if it was as good as he said it was. It was very good and very well-written. It is a mystical reading and since I love anything Russian, this satisfied my thirst.

Why a four star? I found it predictable in places. I like to be surprised. I wasn't. But it is still a superb piece of writing though. If you study martial arts and the concepts behind them, you might find this interesting. My husband, if he has extra time on his hands, would absolutely love to read this book. He did study martial arts at one time. And it's not as drab as all that. Socrates meets enemies and friends alike on his journey through life. He was orphaned at an early age, sent to live at the Cossacks training school with his uncle. He saves an older cadet's life and realizes that it was a mistake to do so. He runs away. He meets the love of his life in St. Petersburg and tragically, she was taken away from him. Socrates spends the next ten to fifteen years training to take his revenge on her murderers, only to discover redemption.

It is, like I said, a beautifully written story. I have never heard of Dan Millman nor would I have been interested in reading his books, if it wasn't for a library patron. I plan to read "Way of the Peaceful Warrior" soon.

1/15/08

Peaceful Warrier part 1
Reading the prequel to the Peaceful Warrier was quite interesting.The story is a fit and I continue to enjoy Milman's work. This one is well worth the time.

This is my favorite book of all the books I have ever read
I bought this book 2 years ago, and since then I have read it twice. Every time I read it cover to cover without taking a break.

The story of Sergei Ivanov a.k.a. Socrates is the most extraordinary life story, spellbinding, educational, magical. I cried and I was awed.

If you like Harry Potter, you must read this book. ... Read more

Book Description
What Would Socrates Say? helps the armchair philosopher solve age-old quandaries and contemporary ethical dilemmas.

- If no one ever loves me during my lifetime—if I don’t have a relationship—will I have not lived a good life?
- Do the advances in the field of biotechnology threaten our moral values?
- Are there any reasons to have a child that aren’t selfish?
- Is there no such thing as bad art?
- What’s the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter?
- Am I morally bound to tell my sex partner if I fantasize about someone else while making love to him or her?

These are among the profound, paradoxical, playful, and classic questions asked and answered in this book drawn from AskPhilosophers.org, the popular website created by some of today’s most highly esteemed philosophers. Using their knowledge of the arguments laid down by the likes of Aristotle, Camus, Locke, and Socrates, and their own insightful interpretations, they break down tough issues in a digestible, personal, and even humorous style. Included are questions on today’s hot-button topics (war, euthanasia); timeless conundrums about religion and morality (how do we know God exists?); personal perplexities about adultery, child-rearing, and sex; and a few lighthearted topics like whether it’s right to let your kids believe in Santa.

Featuring real questions from real people around the world—doctors, lawyers, the uneducated, the elderly,and even young children (for example, “If everything has an opposite, like night and day, then what’s the opposite of a banana?”)—this book is for anyone seeking enlightenment on a complicated or an elusive concept relevant to the lives we lead today. Whether you agree with the answers given or not, this book reminds us of Socrates’ famous words—“a life unexamined is not worth living”—and, in doing so, encourages us to think a little more deeply, a little more critically, and, well, a little more philosophically about how we make our way in the world ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

I Cried Till I Laughed!
I have no idea what the title of my review means, but it sounds sufficiently philosophical to suit this book.

But, seriously folks, if you're looking for a great night table book chock-full of espresso cup-size (to blend my coffee metaphors) bits of incisive philosophical wisdom, you need look no further than "What Would Socrates Say?".

Highly recommended.

Wonderful...engaging, intelligent, and accessible
This book is a collection of some of the best questions and responses to appear on the website AskPhilosophers.org.The questions are wonderful: stimulating, fun, sometimes familiar and sometimes unexpected, ranging from age-old questions that humans have asked for centuries to questions that deal with the specific conditions of modern life.The responses are always thoughtful, mostly helpful, and often funny.It's great fun to browse through this book, but since most of the questions are really interesting (after all, they're about love, knowledge, God, the mind, war, traffic jams, sex toys, etc.--what better topics?), you might find yourself browsing for quite a long time.

The writing is neither dumbed down nor overly academic.It is intelligent and clear, and at its best moments it provides a great deal of insight into these thorny questions.A perfect gift for anyone who loved that philosophy course he or she took in college, or has wondered about philosophical questions from time to time, or really anyone at all who would enjoy reading great questions and interesting, insightful answers.It's also a rare chance to hear prominent philosophers speaking in a candid voice, approaching central philosophical issues in a non-technical, very readable way.Highly recommended. ... Read more

Book Description
In unraveling the long-hidden issues of the most famous free speech case of all time, noted author I.F. Stone ranges far and wide over Roman as well as Greek history to present an engaging and rewarding introduction to classical antiquity and its relevance to society today. The New York Times called this national best-seller an "intellectual thriller." ... Read more

Customer Reviews (30)

Weak effort
The analysis in this book seems to be that Socrates did a really bad job of defending himself at trial and insulted the jury, therefore he was put to death. Stone glosses over the Peloponnesian War and subsequent rule of tyrants, context much more useful for understanding the death of Socrates than anything in Plato's Apology.

A new look at an old question
Over 2000 years ago, Plato wrote beautifully of his ideas on various subjects.Two of the most striking were that the world should be governed by professors of philosophy, and that general arguments (ideals) were more important than specific examples.Both these ideas reverberate today.The second finds expression in complaints that the American public spends too much of its time following sensational scandals, such as the one associated with Monica Lewinsky.An anti-Platonist (such as the nominalist, John Locke) might respond that such specific cases are extremely useful in challenging plausible generalizations, such as the one that says that men in positions of power should never be forgiven for having sex with a subordinate.But it is the first idea that Stone challenges in his book.

It is hardly surprising that most professors of philosopy appreciate Plato - most of them grew up being told that getting good grades etc. was the supreme virtue and they became professors by doing just that.It must be very confusing for them to find that students who got inferior grades often go out into the world and make far more money than professors.That philosophy professors admire Plato's assertion that this is wrong, and deride someone like Stone who disagrees, is entirely predictable.

It is commonplace to buttress one's arguments by reference to authorities (preferably dead, so they cannot refute the reference).Plato did so by putting his words into the mouth of Socrates, a famous man who had been executed for treason in Plato's youth.The extent to which Plato quoted Socrates' views accurately is an interesting question: the views Plato expressed can also be discussed without concern for who first uttered them.Stone does both in this book.

The most thorough attempt to put Plato's (or, if you prefer, Socrates') ideas into practice was made by V.I. Lenin in Russia in 1917.The United States is the supreme example of a country founded on the opposite ideas of John Locke.In many ways, this book is a discussion of the foundations of the difference.

The Hobo Philosopher
Gosh, I haven't enjoyed a book this much in a long, long time. Stone actually learned to read Greek so that he could go back and research all of this from the originals. What a point of view, so obvious when one thinks about it but nevertheless so shocking because no one ever does. If you have always admired and loverd the tale of Socrates this book will knock your socks off. You will never believe it. Leave it to Mr. Stone.
This is a great book for Greek philosophy fans. You're going to love it. It is a classic.

an uncareful, uninformed study by an admitted amateur
Stone's book demonstrates little, if anything, about Socrates, Plato, or Athenian democracy besides the beliefs about them that are liable to be drawn by an ill-informed writer who hasn't made a very serious effort to inform himself of the relevant facts.Most people who pick up this book probably aren't aware of the almost universal negative appraisal that the book has received from writers who are vastly more well-informed about the topic.To quote just one such reviewer, T.H. Irwin:"...Stone's errors are so frequent and so serious that no readers should suppose they have been given good reasons for believing what he says about Socrates.He fails even to raise some of the fundamental questions that have been discussed by students of Socrates.His historical judgments are arbitrary.And his account of Socrates' philosophy is a caricature based on misunderstanding" (_Philosophy & Public Affairs_ 18 (1989): p. 185).(Irwin explains in a footnote that his criticism isn't that Stone hasn't read EVERYTHING that a professional scholar has; the point is rather that Stone hasn't paid attention "to the questions raised by some QUITE WELL KNOWN and QUITE ACCESSIBLE books and articles..." (my caps).)

I wonder why anyone--who doesn't have a peculiar interest in discovering Stone's personal beliefs--would squander time trying to figure out what Stone, a college drop-out, thinks about Socrates, when there is so much material written about Socrates by other, much more well-informed people.(By the way, among Irwin's credentials are these: a PhD in philosophy from Princeton and an MA from Oxford; he did his dissertation on Socratic ethics, later published as _Plato's Moral Theory_.)Of course there are those who eschew the opinions of professional scholars and who would much rather discover those of the "self-educated", especially when they write and/or speak in gripping, journalistic style.Professional scholars aren't infallible; and some college drop-outs are wise; but I imagine that anti-intellectual students rarely discover the truth, and they will profit little from reading Stone's book while neglecting more scholarly treatment of the issues.

See for yourself . . .
If you have any interest in ancient Athens and/or Socrates, read this book.Some earlier reviews question I.F. Stone's motives & politics, but
this book reflects a very favorable view of democracy & free speech. ... Read more

Amazon.com
For Christopher Phillips, philosophy is a passion: it is not so much a discipline to be learned as an experience to be lived. Taking his cue from Socrates, the inaugurator of the Western philosophical tradition, Phillips embarks on a search for truth and meaning through a series of conversations that is at once refreshing, humorous, troubling, confusing, encouraging, depressing, and provocative. What makes Plato's Socratic dialogues so enduring--and Phillips's book so intriguing--is that for both Plato and Phillips, philosophy is not something you read or study. It is something you do. Plato wrote in Parmenides that "without wandering around and examining everything in detail one is unable to secure understanding." Phillips takes this approach--the Socratic approach--to heart. In the course of Socrates Café, he travels around asking questions of everyone who's interested. Just like the real Socrates, who did not confine himself to the Athenian ivory tower, Phillips searches out public conversations--what he calls Socrates cafés--with children, seniors, psychiatrists, prisoners, ex-academics, students, lawyers, and everyday people. In a sense, the book is a series of short, modern-day Socratic dialogues interspersed with meditations on the nature of philosophical inquiry.

Phillips seizes upon what the Greeks called "elenchus," a method of inquiry that helps people see their own beliefs and opinions more clearly. In the course of the numerous Socrates cafés highlighted in this book, Phillips persistently reminds us that we ought to ask questions simply because the process is good for us. In each of the cafés, the participants vary as widely as the questions, and the dialogues are by turns candid, insightful, muddled, intelligent, bland, and piquant. The real meaning of Socrates Café lies in the contentious and wonderful space of human interaction. --Eric de PlaceBook Description
Christopher Phillips is a man on a mission: to revive the love of questions that Socrates inspired long ago in ancient Athens. "Like a Johnny Appleseed with a master's degree, Phillips has gallivanted back and forth across America, to cafés and coffee shops, senior centers, assisted-living complexes, prisons, libraries, day-care centers, elementary and high schools, and churches, forming lasting communities of inquiry" (Utne Reader). Phillips not only presents the fundamentals of philosophical thought in this "charming, Philosophy for Dummies-type guide" (USA Today); he also recalls what led him to start his itinerant program and re-creates some of the most invigorating sessions, which come to reveal sometimes surprising, often profound reflections on the meaning of love, friendship, work, growing old, and others among Life's Big Questions. "How to Start Your Own Socrates Café" guide included. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (43)

Okay...
I really enjoyed this book when I read it for the first time in tenth grade. Looking back on it, however, I see it now as a bit...well, a bit childish. The world of thoughts and opinions is much deeper than the bottom of a coffee cup.
It seems now, even then as I was reading the book in tenth grade, that Phillips has oversimplified complex matters. His whole philosophy, as put forth in this book, could be summarized easily in one sentence: "Let's all be happy because philosophy is cool." This is a gigantic simplification of the real issues at stake; namely: What is being? Who are we? Why are we here?
He leaves out the actual history too; historical mentions are scanty and not worth noting. He idealizes Socrates and his contemporaries; in his book they are very "Americanized" versions of what the actual men were probably like, their real likenesses adapted to fit the cultural norms of contemporary North America--when in fact they were part of a totally different culture which he didn't even mention (As one who studies anthropology, this really irked me).
And, on top of this, he never really says anything. Somewhere near the end of the book, he asks why we should philosophize, and answers it by saying "to be better people" or something like that. But then, why should we "be better people"?Instead of exploring these real issues, he kind of vaguely says that they exist--and then recounts a meeting at a cafe (or a prison or school, the locations vary) where, once again, people with very "American" mindsets talk about their experiences and try to delve into the issue.
One other problem is the length and difficulty level. It's just too short and too easy of a read to answer, or even attempt to begin to answer, the problems Phillips claims he is devoted to. For example, in one of the dialogs someone remarks that Phillips' wife has just "crossed the language barrier." There are two problems with this: First, the "language barrier" is never defined and like many other issues, just another abstract concept, now given a "philosophical" dimension.
Secondly, the barrier that is "crossed" in his book is between Spanish and English. Guess what people, those two languages are not very different. I am a budding linguist and nearly fluent in Spanish, Japanese, Arabic (Modern standard with a specialty in Saudi and Iraqi dialects), and am familiar with many other languages (one of which is ancient Greek, the language of Socrates). The "barrier" between Spanish and English just isn't very big. If a language barrier does exist between two given languages, it 1) is more related to culture and 2) can be crossed once the new "culture" is learned.
And lastly, there is one other problem, which is the biggest of all.
HE NEVER ACTUALLY CITES PLATO. You know, he could have written the book completely on what he's read about Plato and Socrates rather than what he actually did read of Plato's works. I couldn't believe that Plato's works weren't cited in the references section. He does mention a few, but they are relatively unimportant works like Gorgias and Euthyphro--I think there is only ONE mention of the Republic, without which Plato would have been an obscure philosopher, like Heraclitus. This is like talking about J.K. Rowling but never mentioning Harry Potter. When other philosophers are discussed, their views are oversimplified.
Looking back, this book poses serious problems historically, linguistically and anthropologically.
It was okay when I read it, a few years ago. I've grown up since then.

Using "reason" as a key to life.
Christopher Phillips, in the true tradition established by Socrates himself, has provided a road map to passing on the process of "reason".I enjoyed the book and have recommended it to others following the same philosophy.

The cafes have some unexamined chinks
Where does "everyman" go in this world for reasoned, open, and enlightened conversation outside an academic setting? The filtered, abbreviated, and sanitized output of the media and Internet sites hardly serves as a replacement. Into this vacuum stepped the author, a former journalist, enamored of philosophers and philosophizing, who decided to facilitate Socratic discussions in all manner of locations, but mostly cafes and bookstores. Of course, Socrates, an Athenian of the 5th century BC, was known for his penetrating questioning of the assumptions of the leading citizens of Athens, a habit which little endeared him to them. This book consists of a rather meandering look at the author's hesitant start up of this enterprise, simplified re-creations of several actual question and answer sessions at a variety of locations, and various pertinent philosophical points from philosophers of the past and from the author.

The questioning process at these discussions is pretty much ad hoc with honesty being the only requirement for asking or answering. Among the questions asked were "What is here?"; "What is home?"; "What is silence?"; "What is a friend?"; or "Why is what?". It is simply assumed that a group of near strangers who meet for two hours once a week, or less, benefits from kicking around these various, often vague or obscure, subjects. He doesn't address the impact of the disparity in backgrounds that such an assemblage is likely to have. The discussions can deteriorate into an endless series of not necessarily connected questions with limited results.

It is striking that virtually none of the topics presented for discussion in the book are controversial. Does the author suggest that politics, religion, economics, media, justice, war, etc are of no interest to people who attend his cafes. If these subjects were broached, how would that affect the functioning of the groups? The author asks "What is a church?" in one group. What if he had asked, "What is the basis of religious belief"? One suspects that Socrates would have gone right to that. There is not the sense that the author is after the truth in quite the unrestrained manner as a Socrates.

The author notes that ideas and conversation are essential to a democracy, however, neighborhood gathering places located in the midst of our sterile, zoned housing tracts are virtually non existent. These Socratic cafes could easily be seen as inadequate, artificial alternatives to real community gathering places. It's hard to imagine the people in "The Great Good Places" by Ray Oldenburg devoting much time to "Why is what" when so many real world issues having community impacts need to be addressed.

The author disappoints in another way. Many authors have web sites, and he is no exception. In this case it is for his institution, the Society for Philosophical Inquiry, which supposedly supports 300 dialogue groups. But one can find no evidence of these groups anywhere on the entire web site - very strange. From reading his book, one would think they would be front and center on the site. Perhaps there are legal issues. Instead those who access the site are given several means of buying goods or joining the SPI for a fee. It's disheartening to find an emphasis on the Socratic Café name as a brand for sale. [Note: It turns out that the list of local cafes is for sale also. Socrates is rolling over in his grave.]

At first glance, Socratic cafes seem to be an unqualified good - and they are as far as they go. But there is a certain amount of doubt as to whether that model can play a relevant and important role in public discourse in this era of isolation and spin. The book is unwilling to address any shortcomings of the concept, which is rather ironic given the author's insistence that he is "seeking Socrates." The autobiographical elements of the book are interesting, but there is an element of self promotion that lingers.

cool read
i can't speak for experts but for a firsttime philosophizer like me who wanted to get his feet wet in the field and know about Western philosophy, reading this book was a great experience, giving me just the taste of philosophy i hoped for without lots of intimidating jargon. Best for me was that it didn't just summarize the history of western philosophy but it brought it back to life in the modern world

likeable philosophy
i run a (dead)philosophy club, and couple of people recommended the book to me, so i was obligated to read it. i usually don't care for Socrates. He gets on my nervs. Not that he is a crafty sophist, but perhaps his optimistic intellectualism and loaded questions goest against my philosphical sensibilities. But I was pleasnatly surprised. It was not bad at all. Philips is a good philosopher. He knows how to run a show. And I know, running a philosophy club is harder than he makes it appear. If you want to be involved with philosophy in some serious ways; but you don't care for the academic type, maybe this will give you a heretic stand. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (9)

Oligarch
Nearly all those who studied Greek in high school were given a much distorted image of the Athenian (and certainly of the pedophilic Spartan) society. Who told us that the wealth of Athens was based on silver mines (the university city of Ioanina is still one of the world's biggest centers of the silver industry)? And who told us why Socrates was forced to commit suicide?
One can find the answers on many questions about Greek society in Xenophon's works, the clever writer of `Hellenika' (`All Persians are educated to become a slave, except one').
In his works about Socrates, Xenophon brushes a lively picture of the `real' Socrates and explains clearly his political views: 'Where offices were filled by men who satisfied the legal requirements, he considered the constitution to be an aristocracy; where they were filled in accordance with a property qualification, a plutocracy; where they were filled by anybody, a democracy.'
Socrates was an anti-democrat and defended oligarchy is his teachings.
What oligarchy really meant for the majority of the Athenians, one can also read in `Hellenika'. Describing the reign of the Thirty (comprising two uncles of Plato), Xenophon states: `The oligarchs went on a killing spree murdering all democratic opponents, more Athenians than all the Peloponnesians did in ten years of war ... when people could vote, it was in full view.'
Xenophon explains one of the main reasons for oligarchic rule in his rhetoric question: `if people uses its superior power to enact measures against the propertied classes, will that be violence rather than law?'
Socrates was a moderate anti-democrat, not as his pupil Plato who fulminated relentlessly against the democratic beast (Gerard Koolschijn). He respected the law: `He disobeyed the illegal orders of the Thirty on the ground that what he was ordered to do was illegal.'
He also was a moderate in his personal life (`to need nothing is divine').

Xenophon's works are key texts for understanding the ancient Greek society (daily life, morals, social issues, drink-parties, sex, politics). They are a must read for all those interested in human history and for all lovers of classical texts.

Against the government-clique of President Perikles ...
Perikles pushed Athens into risky power politics, those led into the Peloponnesi war (431-404 before Chr.). The second woman of Perikles, Aspasia, participated in the philosophical discussions of Socrates and became highly estimated by him. She was accused like Sokrates of being not as religious as they should be. Of course the boring-questioner Socrates became a feedback not only ironically (e.g. by the comedy poet Aristophanes) but also others with heavy rage: started by the government clique around President Perikles. To awaken the people from their sleep of propaganda-smeared opinions, - this had to provoke counter actions. In his defense speech at court Socrates didn't own much time. The limit was set by a pot of water, having a whole. The moment, all the water had run out, that was the very moment he had to stop his speech. The jury of 500 Athenians didn't like to listen at all - and they were happy, to bring that thing quickly to an end. The three prosecutors of Socrates by the way had been lynched a few weeks later. Probably the thoughts become accepted to which Socrates had wanted to inflame: "... perhaps you might possibly be offended, like the sleeping who are awakened, striking me, you might easily kill, then the rest of your lives you might continue sleeping..." - Socrates maintained his integrity as hero until the end. His radical critique of the Athenians fundamental values is the starting point of western philosophy, of the modern debate over civil disobedience (compare Henry David Thoreau, Martin Luther King Jr., Jane Fonda and so on...). Today it's still amusing to follow the way, how the master shredded the weaknesses in faulty arguments. Socrates had tried to make publicly, what later should be named as "try-and-error procedures of thinking". And he didn't allow the mighty ones to intimidate him. There are cultural fluctuations with regard to the allowance to think opposite. Jesus or Spartacus (or the American Socrates-scientist Vlastos, notified by the FBI and threatened with deportation to Canada because he didn't agree to the VietNam-war), Angela Davis, Sinead o'Connor or Michael Moore - they had their special versions of trouble. Today we don't need a death-sentence, there are smaller and more effective tricks, to produce a YES to nearly everything. So we still need such a hero of dissidence like Socrates - or should we stop thinking self-confidently? Nearly 500 years before Christ this Socrates gave an unforgettable sign of a solid character. He didn't beg the judge committee, to stop the death penalty, he didn't agree to accept exile - in the contrary he made a request for the highest honor in Athens at that time: the daily free meal-supply in the city hall. He was an ironic man and he knew, this request had been a little too much for the nervous jury ...

Against the government-clique of President Perikles ...
Perikles pushed Athens into risky power politics, those led into the Peloponnesi war (431-404 before Chr.). The second woman of Perikles, Aspasia, participated in the philosophical discussions of Socrates and became highly estimated by him. She was accused like Sokrates of being not as religious as they should be. Of course the boring-questioner Socrates became a feedback not only ironically (e.g. by the comedy poet Aristophanes) but also others with heavy rage: started by the government clique around President Perikles. To awaken the people from their sleep of propaganda-smeared opinions, - this had to provoke counter actions. In his defense speech at court Socrates didn't own much time. The limit was set by a pot of water, having a whole. The moment, all the water had run out, that was the very moment he had to stop his speech. The jury of 500 Athenians didn't like to listen at all - and they were happy, to bring that thing quickly to an end. The three prosecutors of Socrates by the way had been lynched a few weeks later. Probably the thoughts become accepted to which Socrates had wanted to inflame: "... perhaps you might possibly be offended, like the sleeping who are awakened, striking me, you might easily kill, then the rest of your lives you might continue sleeping..." - Socrates maintained his integrity as hero until the end. His radical critique of the Athenians fundamental values is the starting point of western philosophy, of the modern debate over civil disobedience (compare Henry David Thoreau, Martin Luther King Jr., Jane Fonda and so on...). Today it's still amusing to follow the way, how the master shredded the weaknesses in faulty arguments. Socrates had tried to make publicly, what later should be named as "try-and-error procedures of thinking". And he didn't allow the mighty ones to intimidate him. There are cultural fluctuations with regard to the allowance to think opposite. Jesus or Spartacus (or the American Socrates-scientist Vlastos, notified by the FBI and threatened with deportation to Canada because he didn't agree to the VietNam-war), Angela Davis, Sinead o'Connor or Michael Moore - they had their special versions of trouble. Today we don't need a death-sentence, there are smaller and more effective tricks, to produce a YES to nearly everything. So we still need such a hero of dissidence like Socrates - or should we stop thinking self-confidently? Nearly 500 years before Christ this Socrates gave an unforgettable sign of a solid character. He didn't beg the judge committee, to stop the death penalty, he didn't agree to accept exile - in the contrary he made a request for the highest honor in Athens at that time: the daily free meal-supply in the city hall. He was an ironic man and he knew, this request had been a little too much for the nervous jury ...

A Revelation
Very few extant works remain on the life of Socrates: mainly the works of Xenophon and Plato. In "Conversations of Socrates" Xenophon writes extensively on the philosophical thought of the master in a forthright and simple manner. Xenophon has not always been praised for his writing style but he covers the Socratic principles thoroughly. The subjects aren't organized particularly well with examples of Socrates' views on certain virtues scattered throughout the text. Nevertheless, since Socrates didn't write his own thoughts we are very fortunate that we have these works.

Xenophon divided his works into four books: Socrates' Defense; Memoirs of Socrates; the Dinner-Party; and the Estate-Manager. Xenophon writes in the second and third person so that we "hear" the Socratic Method throughout the text. We see how Socrates used questions of his followers to teach them to think. His method thoroughly flushed out the truth and often revealed the flaws in the arguments his opponents and followers made.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading Xenophon. One could almost imagine being right there with the master as he shredded the weaknesses in faulty arguments and uncovered hidden truths. His opinions on virtues may be dated to Twentieth Century people but one must remember that it was largely his teachings that had such a great influence on Western thought and ideas.

Underrated
While not as competent a writer as Plato, Xenophon's 'Socrates' is the historically more accurate (I refer to the chapter of Memoirs in this book.)The Dinner-Party was my favorite dialogue, there are also several brilliant vignettes throughout the memoir chapter. This is not to say that it doesn't 'drag' in parts, it does. The Estate-Manager, which is the last dialogue, terribly weighs down this volume; there Socrates is more a bystander than participant.

But I give this 5 stars, as its an indespensible volume for the Socratic enthusiast. ... Read more

Book Description
Widely adopted for classroom use, this book offerstranslations of four major works of ancient Greek literature which treatthe life and thought of Socrates, focusing particularly on his trial anddefense (the platonic dialogues Euthyphro, Apology of Socrates, and Crito)and on the charges against Socrates (Aristophanes' comedy Clouds). This isthe only collection of the three Platonic dialogues that also includesClouds, a work that is fundamental for understanding the thought ofSocrates in relation to the Athenian political community and to Greekpoetry.

Thomas G. West's introduction provides an overview of the principalthemes and arguments of the four works. There are extensive explanatorynotes to the translations. For this new edition, Thomas West has revisedthe introduction and updated the annotated bibliography, which includes thebest of the secondary literature on Socrates and on the texts included inthis book.

In their translations, the Wests capture successfully the simplicity andvigor of straightforward Greek diction. They strive for as high a degree ofaccuracy as possible, subordinating concerns for elegance and smoothness tothe goal of producing the most faithful and most reliable English versionsof these texts. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (6)

Disasterous, nauseating, incompetent translations. How does work this bad get published?
Never in my life have I been so outraged by what I have read as by the drivel spouted by Dr. West in this book (in his Translator's Note), and by the use of `unponderingly' and "the Thinkery" (among other things) in his translation of The Clouds. I also read his translation of Plato's Apology of Socrates, and found it grossly inferior to Jowett.

Four Texts on Socrates is not a book to be tossed aside lightly: it should be hurled with great force. (Apologies to Dorothy Parker.)

Not only are the translations themselves inexcusably inept, almost everything that he writes in his Translator's Note is wrong.

"The Clouds" is a play, not a scientific or mathematical treatise. As such, it has characters and dialogue. A 'modern' translation of a play must be something that could be presented on a stage and make sense to a 'modern' audience. If a character is supposed to be bizarre or out of the ordinary, one does not make him spout drivel such as 'unponderingly'; one gives him a 'shtick', which is a theatrical term. It's more or less a running gag associated with a particular character. You create, through clever ways of speaking or odd ways of stringing his words together, a characterization. He could be made to speak like a parody of William F. Buckley or the Star Wars character Yoda. As it stands, West's text cannot be presented as a play.

It is neither necessary nor useful to coin such nonsense as 'unponderingly'; indeed, it is inexcusable. It conveys neither humor nor cleverness. It comes off simply as stupid. The translator of a play must know something about theatre and drawing characters, which Dr. West obviously does not. To state it bluntly: The translation of plays should be left to people who understand theatre and characterization, and who are creative. Dr. West doesn't have a creative bone in his body.

In regard to his translation of Plato's The Apology of Socrates, the translation by Dr. West is both original and good, but the parts that are good are not original, and the parts that are original are not good. After all, when one has the work of such a brilliant predecessor as Benjamin Jowett to follow, the temptation to do something entirely different is strong. But it must be resisted. If Dr. West had merely lightly revised Jowett's great work, he would have made a contribution to learning. Alas, he did neither.

The version by Jowett is clearly superior. Here is a short excerpt:

"And I must beg of you to grant me a favor: If I defend myself in my accustomed manner, and you hear me using the words which I have been in the habit of using in the agora, at the tables of the money-changers, or anywhere else, I would ask you not to be surprised, and not to interrupt me on this account. For I am more than seventy years of age, and appearing now for the first time in a court of law, I am quite a stranger to the language of the place; and therefore I would have you regard me as if I were really a stranger, whom you would accuse if he spoke in his native tongue, and after the fashion of his country: Am I making an unfair request of you? Never mind the manner, which may or may not be good; but think only of the truth of my words, and give heed to that: let the speaker speak truly and the judge decide justly."

Compare West's inept version:

"...I do very much beg and beseech this of you: if you hear me speaking in my defense with the same speeches I am accustomed to speak both in the marketplace at the money-tables, where many of you have heard me, and elsewhere, do not wonder or make a disturbance because of this. For this is how it is: now is the first time I have come before a law court, at the age of seventy; hence I am simply foreign to the manner of speech here. So just as, if I really did happen to be a foreigner, you would surely sympathize with me if I spoke in the dialect and way in which I was raised, so also I do beg of you now (and it is just, at least, as it seems to me): leave aside the manner of my speech--for perhaps it may be worse, but perhaps better--and instead consider this very thing and apply your mind to this: whether the things I say are just or not. For this is the virtue of a judge, while that of an orator is to speak the truth."

"Speaking...with the same speeches I am accustomed to speak"? How utterly inept and repetitive! Didn't he even proof-read? One doesn't speak with 'speeches', one speaks with words!

It is obvious that Dr. West never read his version aloud as a test of its appropriateness, which is surprising, because this work is supposed to be a speech. Dr. West's version is clearly not suited to speaking aloud, whereas Jowett's is. In West's translation, Socrates is a clumsy, repetitive, and inept speaker. Needlessly so. If you want to read a good translation, see Jowett's 3rd edition (1892).

Why does Dr. West believe himself qualified to make translations? Nothing in his work suggests that he is competent in any way to do so. This is not the work of a scholar, but that of a bungling hack. These translations are travesties. How does work this nauseatingly bad get published?

NOT RECOMMENDED

the best English translations available
To date, this remains by far the best available English translation of Plato's _Euthyphro_, _Apology_, and _Crito_, and certainly the best English translation of Aristophanes' _Clouds_.

The major flaw in West & West's translation is their rendering of "phronimos" at _Apology_ 22a, 29e, and 36c as "prudent" (see their note 33 on p. 70).Insignificant though it may seem, West & West are really forcing upon the reader an interpretation that is not required by Plato's Greek; their translation of these passages has the practical effect of entirely begging the question of what it is that Socrates has in mind when he speaks of virtue in the _Apology_.Presumably, they assume that it is sufficiently clear that Socrates has in mind specifically *practical* wisdom in these passages.The Greek word, however, does not particularly connote prudence except in Aristotle, who obviously uses it as a technical term.It is worth noting that at Apology 25c, 28d, and 29e "to give thought to" is the rendering West & West give to "phrontizein".What would otherwise be an obvious connection is obscured by their translation of these two crucial words in Plato's text.To maintain consistency and to avoid begging important questions, West & West could perhaps have translated "phronimos" as "thoughtful" instead of "prudent".At least "thoughtful" in English has enough ambiguity to leave open the question of what Socrates is exhorting when he exhorts everyone to be as "phronimos" as possible (29e and 36c; compare 30b, 31b, 39d, 41e).This, I take it, is the paramount interpretative problem facing readers of Plato's _Apology_, whatever translation they use.

This flaw in West & West's translation shouldn't keep English readers from using their translation, since the alternatives offer even greater impediments to interpreting Plato.

A Great Help for Teachers
This is an outstanding translation of these Greek texts.These are texts that many of us regularly teach in introductory classes, and it is a great help to have such a reliable translation: the translation is clear and accessible, but maintains an unusually strict adherence to the form of the original Greek.This makes it useful for advanced study as well.The running footnotes to the text are especially helpful for giving students the relevant points of historical and legal context for understanding Socrates's position, but they are sparse enough that they do not intrude in the interpretation of the text.This is the only translation of these texts that I will use in my courses.

Model translation
This is a real rarity in Platonic scholarship--a synoptic translation of four important works on the life of Socrates; in other words, the translators use the same English words to convey the same important Greekterms in each of their translations in order to aid the reader inrecognizing how those terms evolve in meaning and shape the drama of eachof the works, or in short, in recognizing the dialogue which exists betweenthe works rather than merely within them.A former reviewer seems to havemissed the point of this work:if you want someone to TELL YOU WHAT PLATOMEANS, you can read a two line summary in an encyclopedia, but if you wantto find out why Plato went and wrote an entire dialogue rather than a twoline summary, you have to pay close attention to what he actually says. These translations are about as close as you can get without havingadvanced knowledge of Greek, and even then, the Wests note specific usagesof key terms which even a native speaker of ancient Greek might not havenoticed on a first reading, and which are largely ignored by the scholarlycommunity.This is an ideal translation for students of politics, history,philosophy, and classical literature who want to know why the most profoundand poetic civilization of antiquity put the first philosopher to death,and why he let them.

An Excellent Collection of Important Texts on Socrates
Thomas and Grace West translate Plato's Euthyphro, Apology and Crito and Aristophanes' Clouds in a clear and modern fashion. The useful background information and clear footnotes help make this an important book to have ifyou want to read about Socrates. This book is a "must have" forany Socrates fan indeed! ... Read more

Book Description
From Socrates To Satre presents a rousing and readable introduction to the lives, and times of the great philosophers. This thought-provoking book takes us from the inception of Western society Plato's Athens to today when the commanding power of Marxism has captured one third of the world. T.Z. Lavine, Elton Professor of Philosophy at George Washington University, makes philosophy come alive with astonishing clarity to give us a deeper, more meaningful understanding of ourselves and our times. From Socrates To Satire discusses Western philosophers in terms of the historical and intellectual environment which influenced them, and it connects their lasting ideas to the public and private choices we face in America today From Socrates To Satre formed the basis for the PBS television series of the same name. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (20)

Great Introductory Book
This was one of the first philosophy books I read and it turned out to be very helpful for my introductory philosophy classes.

This book doesn't cover all the famous philosophers in depth, but that is not a problem beacause the book follows a nice theme and is clearly written.

The themes that stick their head out are the status of concepts and how we know them. Concepts are given by different names, such as forms, but they are basically the same, depending on what you subscribe to. However, seeing them as concepts will make for easier reading.

Starting from Socrates and Plato we get the idea that concepts have their existence in some other world, neither in our mind nor the spatialtemporal reality. We come to know these concepts by reasoning using the socratic method.

Aristotle counters with the idea that concepts exist in the objects we observe and neither in our mind or some Platonic world.

Eventually we get to Kant who says that concepts are in our mind and existed there since we were born and are necessary for us to even experience reality itself.

Hegel takes the idea of concepts even further and uses them to explain just about everthing.

The idea of concepts eventually are no longer in the world or a Platonic world nor even permantely in our mind, but are nothing more than just concepts that are made up and constitute language.

We come to know these concepts by learning their meaning from theculture we are a part of.

I gave a very simple synopsis, but you will see these themes too and will make for better reading if you keep them in mind.

There are many other themes that are weaved throughout this book, but all these other themes are related to concepts. For example, ethics revolves around values and their justification, but when one examines ethical values we come back to an examination of concepts. This is also true with political and social themes that run through this book and philosophy. In politics there is an examination of values too, called liberty, justice, equality etc, which in the end are just concepts that are examined and eventually justified or so it seems.

A solid survey, but a bit brief
Thelma Lavine's _From Socrates to Sartre_ provides a good introduction to the major western philosophers, and a truly outstanding summary of their ideas; however there were a number of thinkers I wish she had discussed in more detail.

Her survey begins with a brief discussion of the pre-Socratic thinkers and does a fantastic job of summarizing Socrates beforegiving a truly outstanding overview of Platonic and Aristotlean logic.This, (and her later overview of Existentialism) were real highlights of the book.

The contributions of St. Ausustine and Thomas Aquinas are touched upon, before providing a lengthy analysis of Descartes - it, too, is first rate, although I found myself wishing she had given more detail to Sir Francis Bacon's empricism.Lavine next turns her attention to the Enlightenment and Hume - the treatment of his ideas and general philosophy is good, although again, I wish greater attention was given Immanuel Kant.

Her sections on Hegel and Marx were solid - I particularly enjoyed her biography of Marx, but again, more information on Feurbach and his influence on Marx would have been helpful.

In discussing the predecessors to Existentialism, Kierkegaard and Nietzsche are discussed, but I had hoped for a deeper explaination of their ideas about the human condition.I was disappointed that Heidigger was scarcely mentioned at all.

The last 100 pages detail Existentialism in general and Sartre in particular, which is the strongest part of the book.The ideas behind Existentialism and its influences are very well explained, and were very insightful.

For a book on philosophy, its accessable for the layperson (such as myself) and provided a good overview of a few of the major western thinkers.Her lists of recommended readings are also helpful - but I kept finding myself wanting to know more.This, of course is the measure of a good survery, as it serves to whet the readers appetite for deeper material.

From Socrates to Sartre
A nice summary of the study of philosophy from the time of Socrates (before Christ) to Sartre (20th century). It is written in clear, simple language, explaining philosophical concepts at a high level overview. I used this book to understand the history and context of Husserl's philosophy for a graduate paper. It is a handy reference for a philosophy course.

the Realm of Existentialism
Thought Provoking, Quick Reference...

From Socrates to Sartre:the Philosophic Quest, by T.Z. Lavine.

This was my introduction compilation to all things philosophical--and that foggy world of philosophy.Tattered and yellowed from years of reference,I concure with Professor of Philosophy Peter Diamandopoulos, "...it is an elegantly written, lucid and informative work."

The Preface states "Try to imagine a world without philosophy.In From Socrates to Sartre, the works of six philosophers and their views of man, God, nature, truth, ethics, and politics will be explored."Granted, six philosophers does not seem like very many, but have you ever tried to read all the works by just one philosopher and thoroughly understand what you have read?"...and the philosophic viewpoints dominating the contemporary sense in philosophy are examined."What a plus, one gets it all right here!

This book is very easy to understand and absorb. One gets a peek at Plato with Virtue is Knowledge, Shadow and Substance, The Divided Line, The Tripartite Soul, The Ideal State.Delve into Descartes with Historical Transition to the Modern World,his ever popular Doubting to Believe, God Exists, The Clockwork Universe, and Body and Soul. Next, the philosophical quest takes you into the world of Hume with How do you Know? (a favorite of mine), A Well-Meanin' Critter, Will the Sun Rise Tomorrow?, and Reason:Slave of the Passions.

Part Four deals with Hegel.You will learn about his Revolution in Thought,The Real is the Rational, Master and Slave, The Cunning of Reason, and The Owl of Minerva -- Hegel's ethics and political philosophy.On to Marx with The Young Hegelian, Alienated Man, The Conflict of Two Classes, and The World to Come.

Sartre is the last of the six philosophers that Lavin explores -- this is my favorite:My Existence is Absurd (The Fundamental Existentialist premise:Existence precedes essence, a major theme of Existentialism), Nausea, Condemned to be Free, and No Exit.A good section for all studying, or even curious about Existentialism.

The last Chapter deals with Contemporary Science in Philosophy.--Katharena Eiermann, 2005, the Realm of Existentialism -- Presidential Hopeful

Indepth Overview of 6 Philosophers
I gave the book a 3 in the thought that there are better philosophy overview books than this one here, otherwise, I would give the book a 4.The book isn't necessarily a great start for anyone looking to get a good overview of most Western philosophy.Although, if one were looking to get a more indepth look at the six philosophers of Plato, Descartes, Hume, Hegel, Marx, and Sartre, then, yes, the book is certainly not bad.The book brushes briefly on the philosophers that pertain, at least marginally in some fashion, to the other philosophers mentioned (i.e. Aristotle to Plato, Locke to Hume, Nietzsche to Sartre).

On a side note, from what I've heard the hardcover version of this book, wrriten by a different author, is far better, and as for a good overall introductory philosophy book I recommend Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder instead. ... Read more

Book Description

Customer Reviews (10)

true to the socrates' principles
Excellent book highlighting the need and importance of logical reasoning for a better understanding of everything one encounters

All you need to know on how to live a good life
is in this book.Socrates was proclaimed (by the Oracle at Delphi, the voice of Apollo) to be the wisest man in Athens.After the Democracy had come back after the defeat in the Peloponnesian Wars, the mob needed someone to take the blame, and Socrates was the designated victim.He continues on his path happily, knowing that he has served Athens in the best way that he could.You can't beat the price for this copy of the four dialogues that make up his trial and death, and you can't ask for a better role model than Socrates!

Highest rating!

" The unexamined life is not worth living"
The four dialogues collected in this volume tell the story of the trial and death of Socrates. The "Euthrypo" is a philosophical dialogue on the subject of piety and holiness, set against the background of Socrates' having been accused of impiety towards the gods. The 'Apology' contains Socrates largely monologic defense of his own actions. In this he defends his own devotion to truth, to seeking out the way of true Wisdom. His well- known claim is not that he is wise, but rather that whatever wisdom he has comes in knowing he and others are not wise. Socrates role as gadfly, as one who questions conventional truths is here highlighted. In the 'Crito' Socrates refuses the pleas of his friends, andshows himself to be a dutiful citizen of the state by refusing to illegally escape, run away from the death- sentence. In the 'Phaedo' Socrates nobly choses to accept the verdict of Death , and indicates that his concern is more with his own immortal soul than with the evanescent life in this world.
The Four Dialogues together are central to Plato's thought, and constitute one of the central stories of Western Philosophy.
'Philosophy' as Socrates practices it is an unending searching for the truth, an unending process of questioning and dialoguing , undermining one's own assumptions in the process. It is an exposing of the folly and error which is at the heart of most conventional opinion.
In these 'Dialogues' Plato creates the figure of Socrates as first great hero of Western Philosophy. And this though Plato's own thought will have a dimension of certainty and discovery of the Absolute Ideal which aims to be go beyond Socratic activity and dialogue.
These 'Dialogues' are not simply a central work of Western thought, but also a powerful work of Literature. They portray a remarkably , courageous figure, one who stands for the 'truth' and for his own moral integrity despite the entreaties and pressures of the mass of his countrymen. Socrates ia also the great martyr of truth, and as this sets the pattern for a whole series of 'heroes' of thought who defy Authority to present the Truth as they understand it.
With all this there are questions to be raised about Socrates value- system, wisdom and general morality. He has often been faulted for neglecting not only the shrewish wife Xantippe, but his three sons, for in short holding responsibility to family as secondary value. His 'questioning - of- everything' attitude is of course one which comes most naturally to adolescence and the young people he taught, but is problematic for those adult Athenians who truly had to be responsible for running Athenian democracy under difficult times.
This neat, small Dover Edition presents a classic piece of philosophical Literature in an attractive and inexpensive popular non- scholarly edition.

A Great Translation
This translation by Benjamin Jowett, a great translator of Plato's works, is the one you want to get. There are other translations that are simpler and more colloquial, but none more elegant and beautiful than Jowett. This translation was finished in the 19th century; it is the most famous of all Plato translations, although there are numerous other translations available today. (You will be able to find critics that love and hate each translator, so it is up to you to get the one that you think is most true and, if you are like me, most beautiful.) Here is a translation comparison of the same lines of a few different translations so you can see the difference:

(From the "Apology")

Tredennick:

"Well, now it is time to be off, I to die and you to live; but which is the happier prospect is unknown to anyone but God."

Jowett:

"The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways--I to die, and you to live. Which is better God only knows."

Rouse:

"And now it is time to go, I to die, and you to live; but which of us goes to a better thing is unknown to all but God."

To my ear, the Jowett sounds the sweetest. Just so you know, the Jowett translation is a public domain text (finished in the late 19th century) that you can find on the internet if you don't want to buy it; but it only costs pennies, so go ahead and buy the book so you can make your notes in the margins...and also so you don't have to stare at a computer screen for hours.

Some links to other versions that feature the Jowett translation:
Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo (Great Books in Philosophy)

Six Great Dialogues: Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus, Symposium, The Republic (Thrift Edition)

Plato and Socrates and the Immortality of the Soul.
This edition of _The Trial and Death of Socrates_ contains Plato's four famous dialogues between Socrates and his friends and detractors before the noteworthy philosopher was condemned to death by the Athenian tribunal in ancient Greece.I find this topic of interest because of the close relationship between Platonic thought and early Christian philosophy during the period of roughly 250-750 A.D. when the fundamentals of Christian doctrine were formed.It is clear from a reading of this series of texts why Plato, although a pagan preceding Christ for several hundred years, was very popular among Christian prelates, monks, polemicists, theologians and philosophers.The texts make somewhat awkward reading because they are presented in the forms of dialogue between Socrates and his friends and detractors and thus Plato does not have to express unequivocally what his own opinions are regarding the debates.The first text discussed in this volume is entitled "Euthyphro" and discusses the nature of piety.Here Plato has Socrates question many of the concepts associated with the polytheistic worship and piety of ancient Athens.Socrates' famous "Apology" is a treatise against the accusations of the courts of Athens.Socrates argues for the fact that only God is ultimately the source of wisdom and in all his interactions with fellow poets, artists, philosophers, statesmen, etc., he has not found true wisdom, at least not any wisdom that he himself does not already possess.In "Crito" Socrates debates with those among his followers who entreat him to flee Athens and take up refuge in a safer city."Phaedo" contains the account of Socrates' last dialogue and concludes with Socrates' death by consuming hemlock poison as ordered by the Athenian court.Socrates explains that he does not fear death because the physical things of this world are impermanent and only the soul is ultimately immortal.Death is in fact an improvement in man's condition and he advocates a type of otherworldly asceticism (disdaining external appearances, food, clothing and human love) as the true path for the philosopher who wants to understand and contemplate the nature of reality in a pure fashion.The body dies and the soul is immortal and therefore the most important thing is to attend to the metaphysical realities while in this life.Socrates argues, among other things, that the soul is pre-existent of the body, a concept which was taken up later by the Christian philosopher Origen and later condemned as heresy.He also believes in a concept of the afterlife where the soul is either punished for wrongdoing or rewarded for good.Some souls go through a process of purification before they can advance, similar to the Roman Catholic doctrine of Purgatory._The Trial and Death of Socrates_ is an excellent read about an important figure in the history of religion and philosophy, especially as it shows the mindset of one who was willing to die for his beliefs (martyrdom).Not all of Plato and Socrates ideas were adopted by the Church but despite certain discrepancies they were nonetheless influential. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (11)

Non Fiction
Socrates runs afoul of the authorities and others, and expounds upon the situation that he finds himself at the time, and in the process, you see something of the political and legal system at work in the process, and what some of his followers thought about the whole thing.

Really quite readable.

There are better translations
This is a descent translation of Plato, but not the best. It is an easy to understand translation, and there is nothing wrong with that. Tredennick and Tarrant (the translators of this book) have given us a nice translation that is definitely readable and, at times, enjoyable. There's a guy called W.H.D. Rouse that has some nice translations of Plato. They feel like literal translations, although I don't know Greek. I'm not sure if he translated "Euthyphro", but I know that he did the other 3 that are collected in this book (Apology, Crito, and Phaedo). Here is a link to the Rouse translation: Great Dialogues of Plato (Signet Classics)


I would suggest the Jowett translation for its elegance and beauty. (You can actually read the Jowett translation online if you want to; it was done in the 19th century, so it is now a public domain text.) Here are some links to the Jowett translation: The Trial and Death of Socrates: Four Dialogues (Dover Thrift Editions) and Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo (Great Books in Philosophy) and Selected Dialogues of Plato: The Benjamin Jowett Translation (Modern Library Classics).

If I were you I would get this book for the endnotes (it is an awfully cheap book after all). And I would get the Rouse or Jowett translation as well, if for no other reason than to have a second source that you can go to if a particular passage in the Tredennick and Tarrant version confuses you. I have found that this is an invaluable tool to understand translated texts. However, the Tredennick/Tarrant translation uses such simple language that it might not be needed. If you are a philosophy student, or just someone who wants to fully understand and digest the text, I would keep an alternative translation in the holster whe