Fathers and Sons
In the dialogue Laches, Socrates took his desire for infinitely perfect definitions into the realm of virtue. He didn’t always have to bother people with these questions since many who knew him and respected him would want to know his opinion. In this case, fathers Lysimachus and Melesias were on the lookout for trainers and experts to teach their sons what was needed to become upstanding citizens and chose to ask Nicias and Laches. They even had some wisdom of their own in that parents who sacrificed time for their children may have had to give up some of the time necessary for their good deeds or remove all personal time for themselves to juggle good parenting with community achievements, or outsource their parenting to those who they trusted. “These are our sons. This one is his and has his grandfather’s name, Thucydides. And this one also has a name from his grandfather, my father; for we call him Aristeides. Now, it seemed to us that we ought to take care of them as much as possible and not to do what the many do—let them loose, when they have become lads, to do what they want—but rather already now begin to take care of them to the extent that we are able. So then, knowing that you too have sons, we thought that you, if anyone, must have been concerned with how they should be cared for so as to become best, but that, if you have not often turned your mind to such a thing, we would remind you that one must not neglect it and would summon you in common with us to devote some care to our sons…Now, Melesias here and I take our meals together, and the lads eat with us. As I said when I began the speech, we will be frank with you. Now each of us, concerning his own father, has many noble deeds to tell the young men, which they accomplished both in war and in peace, managing the affairs both of the allies and of this city, but as for our own deeds, neither of us has any to tell. These things make us rather ashamed before them, and we blame our fathers for letting us live a soft life, when we became lads, while they were busy with the affairs of others. We point out these very things to these young men, telling them that, if they neglect themselves and do not obey us, they will be without fame, but if they take care, they might become worthy of the names that they bear…What should [our sons] learn or practice so as to become as good as possible?”
Nicias was a prominent general and statesman, and Laches also served as a general, being competent in several situations in the Peloponnesian war, but in terms of intellectual debate they immediately sought help. “I am amazed, however, that you summon us as counselors on the education of the young men but do not summon Socrates here; first because he is of your [township] and next because he is always spending his time wherever there is any noble study or practice of the sort you are seeking for the youths.”
Courage
The first thought from the parents was to have their sons dress in armor and train to fight. Nicias agreed that nothing teaches confidence like learning how to fight and confidence makes one better on all other areas. “…In my opinion this study is helpful for youths to know in many ways. For it is good that they not pass time elsewhere, in places where the young love to spend their time when they have leisure, but in this, from which they must necessarily be in better bodily condition—for it is not inferior to any of the gymnastic exercises, nor does it offer less toil—and at the same time this gymnastic exercise, as well as horsemanship, most befits a free man. For only they who exercise themselves in the implements relating to war exercise themselves in that contest in which we are competitors and in those things for which the contest lies before us…This study will be of some benefit even in the battle itself, when one must fight in the ranks with many others. Its greatest benefit, however, will be when the ranks are broken and one must, one on one, either pursue to attack someone who is defending himself or defend oneself even in flight from another who is attacking. One man who knows this would not suffer anything from one man, at any rate, nor perhaps from several, but in this way he would gain the advantage everywhere…Such a study summons one to a desire of other noble study too. For everyone who has learned fighting in armor would desire the study that comes next, concerning orders of battle, and when he has grasped these and sought honor in them, he would eagerly press on to the whole of what concerns generalship…We shall further attribute to it no small addition: this knowledge would make every man in war not a little more confident and more courageous than himself…The man will also appear more graceful where he must appear more graceful and where at the same time he will appear more terrible to the enemies through his gracefulness.”
In Laches’ experience he saw many who were trained but in the heat of battle, it took more than training to be reliable. “As if on purpose, of those who have practiced this business of armor, no man has ever yet become highly esteemed in war…So then, as I said even at the beginning, whether it is a study but is of such little help, or whether it is not a study but they claim and pretend that it is—it is not worth endeavoring to learn it. And in my opinion, if someone cowardly thought he knew this study, he would become bolder on account of it and would be more clearly revealed for what he was. And if courageous, he would be under close watch from human beings, and if he made even a small mistake, he would receive great slanders; for the pretense of such knowledge evokes envy, so that unless he is distinguished from others in virtue to an amazing degree, it is not possible that someone who claims to have this knowledge should escape becoming ridiculous.”
In the same tack as Socrates followed in prior dialogues, he interjected on behalf of the need for expertise. He was not content with cultural beliefs that were unexamined or being influenced by public shaming. “Even if, concerning your son’s athletic competition, you were deliberating on how he should train, would you then obey the greater number of us or that man who happens to have been educated and to have trained under a good trainer? For what is to be finely judged, I think, must be judged by knowledge, not by majority.”
By going backwards from the present concern Socrates could find out what the underlying support for a definition really was. “For presumably when sons become good or the opposite, so too the whole house of the father will be governed in a manner corresponding to the sort of people the children become…So then should we first ask what this thing is, of which we are seeking teachers? When someone examines a drug for the eyes, to see whether he should smear it on or not, do you think that the deliberation then is about the drug or the eyes? Do we now assert that we are examining a study for the sake of the soul of the young men? Which of us is expert concerning the care of the soul and able to do a fine job of caring for this, and which of us has had good teachers of this, must therefore be examined.”
The dialogue provided hints as to the complexity of what was being discussed, which made Laches frustrated. When people are looking for a teacher, especially back then, it was often about age, but Socrates felt the judgment misplaced once again. “…You would not be willing to trust [experts], if they claimed they were good craftsmen, unless they could show you some work of their art that was well done, either one or more.”
Laches agreed that wisdom doesn’t always come with age. “He must necessarily be more forethoughtful for his life afterward who does not flee these things but is willing and deems it worthwhile, in accordance with Solon’s saying, to learn as long as he lives and does not think that an old age possessed of intelligence will come forward of itself…[The expert has to] live his own life as a concord of speeches in relation to deeds…I am willing in growing old to be taught many things but only by worthy men. Let this be conceded to me, that the teacher himself be good, so that I am not revealed to be a poor learner by learning without pleasure, but it is no concern to me if the teacher is younger or is not yet a man of reputation or anything else of that sort.”
Zeroing in on the basis of what skill is, and maybe an area where people can include the word “love,” Socrates confirmed that “if we happen to know, about anything whatever, that which, when present in something, makes that thing in which it is present better, and if we are furthermore able to make it be present in that thing, it is clear that we know this very thing concerning which we would be counselors as to how someone might obtain it in the easiest and best fashion…Are these two now summoning us to a consultation on the way in which virtue, through being present in their sons, might make their souls better? What, then, of the parts of virtue should we choose? Or should it clearly be what the learning about armor seems to aim at? To the many it seems, presumably, to aim at courage—isn’t that so?”
Laches then gave an example of soldiers who remained in their ranks to fight, only to have Socrates mention examples of military maneuvers that supported fleeing to fight again and those who moved quickly and fought while fleeing or escaped temporarily and returned to fight at the most opportune moments. Socrates then further added many contexts in which courage would be necessary beyond military examples. “This, then, is what I was just saying, that I am to blame for your not giving a fine answer, because I did not ask in a fine manner. For I wished to inquire of you about not only those who are courageous in the heavy-armed soldiery but also those in the cavalry and in every form of warfare, and not only those in war but also those who are courageous in dangers at sea, and those who are courageous toward sickness and poverty or even toward politics, and yet further not only those who are courageous toward pains or fears but also those who are terribly clever at fighting against desires or pleasures, whether remaining or turning around in retreat—for there are presumably some courageous people, Laches, in such things too…So then all these men are courageous, but some possess courage in pleasures, some in pains, some in desires, and some in fears, and others, I think, possess cowardice in these same things…What is it that is the same in all these? What power is it that is the same in pleasure and in pain and in all those things in which we were just now saying exists, and that is therefore called courage?”
“LACH: In my opinion, then, it is a certain steadfastness of the soul…”
The way forward was to grasp at intuitions as they came up to see what was missing in the definition of courage, but to also see how interconnected good qualities were. Any weakness in one area would leave a good quality in another without enough support to avoid evil or incompetence. “Not quite all steadfastness, I think, appears to you to be courage…Is steadfastness accompanied by prudence noble and good? And what about it accompanied by folly? As the opposite of this, isn’t it harmful and evildoing? Wasn’t foolish daring, and steadfastness, revealed to us in what preceded to be shameful and harmful?”
Knowing what was good or folly required knowledge. A lack of knowledge is ignorance. Socrates turned to Nicias for the reminder. “I have often heard you say that each of us is good in those things with respect to which he is wise and bad in those with respect to which he is unlearned.”
“SOC: But I seem to understand, and the man seems to me to be saying that courage is a certain wisdom.”
“NIC: This, Laches, is what I say it is: the knowledge of terrible and of confidence-inspiring things, both in war and in all other things.”
Laches became frustrated with the constant additions to his steadfastness. “Wisdom is doubtless distinct from courage.” Nicias and Laches debated over the power of diviners and their ability to provide wisdom that would make one feel courageous. Whether it was being dependent on experts with skills, or deities that could predict the future, knowledge that was of a higher or lower predictive value always affected how daunted or courageous a subject felt. Can a subject see themselves doing something well or are there gaps in knowledge?
They discussed how not just humans can make predictions related to danger, but also wild animals, but on the contrary, without wisdom, ignorance in many animals or children could lead to fearlessness, when respecting fear would be more reasonable. Wisdom from knowledge is difficult and skill is the only thing that can make a person feel confident when dealing with uncertainty and risk. One must be ready for actions that take care of a situation one step at a time until the good deed is complete. It has to be seen to the end and only a person with skill, or the how. There has to be a science. “We assert that future evils are terrible and future nonevils or goods are confidence inspiring. Do you speak in this or in some other way about these things? For example: in regard to the healthful, for all times no other knowledge than medicine, which is one, oversees the things that are coming into being and those that have come into being and those that will come into being, as to how they will come into being. And again, in regard to the things that by nature grow from the earth, farming does likewise. And as for the things relating to war, doubtless you yourselves would bear witness that generalship uses forethought in the finest manner in other respects and also concerning what is going to be, and it thinks that it must not serve, but rule, divination, on the grounds that it has a finer knowledge of the things relating to war, both those that are coming into being and those that will come into being. And the law ordains thus, not that the diviner rule the general, but that the general rule the diviner.”
Exhausted Deer Had Given Up When Officer Rushed In – We Love Animals: https://youtu.be/PqhwgKOo-CU?si=cst-dB1ZtOY_WAQA
Because courage has to be implemented in so many arenas, the definition of courage became lost on Socrates. He could see it’s connection with virtue, but there was not enough differentiation between the two. “And terrible and confidence-inspiring things have been agreed to be on the one hand future goods and, on the other, future evils. And of the same things, the knowledge is the same, both of things future and of things in all conditions. Courage is therefore not knowledge only of terrible and confidence-inspiring things. For it understands not only about future goods and evils but also about those that are coming into being and that have come into being and that are in all conditions, just like the other knowledges. Courage is not knowledge only of terrible and confidence-inspiring things, but, as your argument now runs, courage would be the knowledge about pretty much all goods and evils and in all conditions…So then, in your opinion, [acknowledging the inner voice], would such a one lack anything of virtue if indeed he knew how all good things, in all ways, come into being and will come into being and have come into being and all bad things in the same way? And do you think that this one would be in need of moderation or justice and piety—he to whom alone it belongs, as regards both gods and human beings, to be thoroughly on his guard for the terrible things and for those that are not, and to provide himself with the good things, through his knowing how to associate with them correctly? Therefore, Nicias, what you are now saying would be not a portion of virtue but virtue entire. Therefore, Nicias, we have not found what courage is.”
Criticism and analysis
Despite failing to detail courage in a satisfying way, Socrates provided a lot of food for thought for later philosophers to engage with. Critics have also thought to balance out wisdom, divination, and steadfastness to come to a more satisfactory conclusion. Much of what was needed was still in the dialogue, if the reader continued the debate on his or her own, in that one could add or takeaway attributes so as to get to a finer definition. The reality is that people are faced with imperfect knowledge. There’s always risk involved and many people can accept mistakes and refrain from blaming when vital information that is missing would confuse any person making an important decision. “But such knowledge, which could be thought to make courage unnecessary, does not exist, and indeed courage is needed above all to enable us to act as we should in the face of an uncertain future.”
The topic of courage appeared in other dialogues like Symposium, where Alcibiades said that Socrates possessed “emphron—[being] in possession of his mind…Unlike Laches, Socrates is not moved most deeply by patriotism, love of honor, and fear of shame or ridicule to courageous actions; rather, his courageous actions are made possible by his philosophic thinking. He has followed the rational direction in which Nicias’ definition points through to a philosophical standpoint that is radically different from ordinary human concerns. As philosopher, Socrates is most deeply concerned with the search for permanent truths, with knowing those eternal entities that are truly intelligible…Socrates sees and accepts the unavoidable role of chance or fortune in the world: he can recognize uncertainty and act reasonably in the face of uncertain dangers without the support of limited opinions such as those of Laches and without seeking delusory assurance through the divination so dear to Nicias or through any other spurious knowledge of the future.”
What was introduced by Socrates, but not explored fully, was how people deal with emotions. Laches described the virtue here as steadfastness, which is important when Socrates focused more on how courage connected with virtue and overtook it. “The particular parts of virtue (the virtues, like courage) are particular modes of applying intellectual virtue in different situations and with regard to different aspects of our complex being. Philosophic courage does require intellectual virtue, but as courage it requires also something else, which I have called a natural temper of bravery.” By balancing bravery with knowledge one gets a little bit closer to a working definition of courage. “Socrates’ philosophic courage combines intellectual virtue with a natural temper sufficiently brave to enable him to persevere in reasonable action despite full awareness of uncertainty and danger. Indeed, as Socrates suggests to Laches, courage as steadfastness of soul is required for the very search for genuine knowledge. Without such courage, one may refuse to see the truth about the situation and take refuge instead in divination.”
Emotions interfere with steadfastness even when there is enough knowledge and skill and so there’s no guarantee that the subject will take courageous action. And if one has the wrong information or is ignorant it’s quite easy to see oneself as a hero when others only see villainy. “Why does Plato single out courage for such special treatment? One possible reason is that courage, more than any of the other moral virtues, seems to be the crucial test case for the Socratic thesis that virtue is knowledge. The more common view is that morally good conduct requires two things which are distinct: the recognition of what one ought to do, and the resoluteness or strength of will to act in accordance with one’s resolves. It is claimed that one often fails, through weakness of will, to do what one knows to be morally right. Resoluteness and strength of will are qualities associated especially with the virtue of courage. If courage is thought of as a virtue displayed not only in conflicts on the field of battle, but also in all inner conflicts between reason and the passions, then the common view can be paraphrased as follows: morally good conduct requires the knowledge of what one ought to do as well as the courage to do it, and these two things are quite distinct. Weakness of will is simply lack of courage, understood in this broad sense…Professor Taylor remarks: ‘A man may show himself a brave man or a coward by the way he faces danger at sea, poverty, disease, the risks of political life; again, bravery and cowardice may be shown as much in resistance to the seductions of pleasure and the importunities of desire as in facing or shirking pain or danger…'”
By adding and subtracting attributes, one can see how a subject would appear more or less courageous in the eyes of onlookers for each scenario. “Socrates seems to be thinking of courage as something made up of two components: boldness (and perhaps other related qualities of temperament) and wisdom. Boldness combined with wisdom is beneficial; boldness without wisdom is harmful…If wisdom is subtracted from courage, what remains is not courage but boldness or something of the sort. And it is precisely the addition of wisdom which makes boldness into the virtue of courage…The quality which Laches picks out is endurance. But, as Socrates points out, courage is a noble thing, while endurance may be either noble or base depending on whether it is accompanied by wisdom or folly. Therefore, courage must be equivalent, not to endurance simpliciter, but to endurance accompanied by wisdom…Men without skill or training who boldly dive into wells are not courageous but mad. On the basis of such examples he draws the conclusion that courage is equivalent to wisdom or knowledge.”
Most readers are happy with a good enough definition of courage, but Socrates didn’t want to leave out its interdependence with virtue. “Virtues are separate in definition but inseparable in existence. In other words, although the virtues have different definitions, an individual cannot have one or several of the virtues without having all of them…I believe it is clear from the way in which Socrates concludes the argument that he rejects Nicias’s definition of courage because he thinks it leads to the consequence that courage is not a part of virtue…Plato resolves these tensions and articulates a more coherent doctrine; on the one hand, he drops the claim that the virtues are identical, and on the other, he develops and refines the idea that the virtues are parts of a whole and that wisdom is the key to their unity.”
When being too abstract, Socrates gets into a trap, because again, most people have imperfect knowledge and that’s why there’s often risk involved. By thinking about perfect knowledge the discussion goes off the rails. “Taylor comments: ‘We must not miss the point of this difficulty. Socrates does not seriously mean to suggest that ‘unwise’ resolution or persistence is courage. His real object is to distinguish the ‘wisdom’ meant by the true statement that courage is ‘wise resolution’ from specialist knowledge which makes the taking of a risk less hazardous. The effect of specialist knowledge of this kind is, in fact, to make the supposed risk unreal.”
In reality, knowledge is rarely perfect and so courage involves taking a risk that affects our emotions by meeting a challenge with a certain level of measured skill, but skills may not “change our inclinations…In the Laches, for instance, he describes the courageous man as one who is ‘mighty in battle’ against pain and fear, desire and blandishments of pleasure…and in the Protagoras he speaks of knowledge of good and evil as something strong and masterful, capable of overcoming and ruling such opposing forces as fear, anger, pleasure, pain, and carnal passion. The protagonists in this internal struggle are not parts of the soul, but knowledge on the one side, and desires, fears, etc. on the other…Socratic virtue as a kind of self-control or continence; reason (or reason informed by knowledge) guarantees virtuous conduct, not by silencing or redirecting unruly desires, but by overpowering them…The Socratically virtuous person is one who can hold out against strong forces in a struggle to act as knowledge bids. Such a person has endurance, or what we might call ‘will power’; but this power does not derive from the will, but solely from one’s knowledge of the good.”
Many people know right from wrong, but most who have watched the news are aware that knowing right from wrong for some people is not enough to overpower debilitating fear. “Feelings are very much relevant to this favorite doctrine of his. Isn’t it possible, we want to ask, that a man has all the knowledge that Socrates is talking about, and yet fails in virtue because he cannot endure the pain? Or, he is near paralyzed with fear? Or, because he is unable to control his desires or resist pleasures? Socrates has listed the feelings that play an important part in courage and cowardice, but he has not dealt with them. He begins to do so in later dialogues, the Protagoras, the Republic, the Philebus, the Timaeus. In the Laches Plato has made only a beginning, but a very fruitful one.” It’s also important to look at the emotions and motivations of others. A courageous person trying to be virtuous often finds that they have to defend their form of continuous improvement against those who are threatened by those reforms. This means that being the person who’s making a positive contribution can actually be a more dangerous place, especially when those improvements reorder power in society. Many feel that doing a good job for a powerful person who can protect them is a much safer situation. All would be reformers need security and the courage to carry on.
Plato: Euthyphro: https://rumble.com/v6t9kbl-plato-euthyphro.html
Plato: Apology: https://rumble.com/v6tvdm3-plato-apology.html
Courage also has an existential element to it where unconscious dread of mortality attacks the motivation to act because one episode of courage will have to be followed by another and another until one faces total failure in injury and death. Meaninglessness can sap courage altogether until Platonic perfectionism is abandoned. Courage may fail at some point, but the consequences of cowardice can be worse. What bad things will happen if I don’t act? Without action there are no results, and since Socrates prizes knowledge at a high level, in a situation of inaction, there can be no reality testing or learning. Courage also includes the worry about what would happen to loved ones if one just sat back or escaped by oneself. You need courage to help others at your own risk. That thought can move those who have a conscience from debilitating meaninglessness into a more manageable fear, but purpose. “The courage with which he is concerned is not the prudential bravery of the citizen or the soldier. It is in fact courage: an ability to face the past that lives on in us, to face the present which I am, as well as to face death in the present and the future. It is a courage to know in face of the ultimate inadequacy of all finite statements and, finally, a courage to be in face of the ultimate inadequacy of all finite being…Socrates goes beyond our usual interpretation of Plato. For on Plato’s terms, dread and meaninglessness could be reduced to fear and ignorance, [but] faced with right knowledge, Socrates testifies to a far more profound courage: to a courage which can remain open, and which, in a life which is not a closed microcosm, is the only courage sufficient to meet the threat of death, guilt and meaninglessness which are the inevitable companions of openness.”
This is why stress, pressure, and emptiness is felt because there’s a gap in skill, visualization, and actual performance, while the stakes may steadily increase, even toward death. The risks can vary in what’s at stake, like temporary or permanent rejection from an opportunity to better one’s life, or even worse, being taken prisoner, suffer injury or death. The emotional pressure comes at people from in front and behind based on consequences for both action and inaction. Being in “possession of mind,” is not something that is uniform for all people. In the same situations, different people will respond in different ways depending on how much pain they feel in their gut, which is affected by how skilled they feel they are, and possibly genetics. Many people desire to be courageous but their personal reactions in their guts and fear responses could be so pathological that even the most basic courage is not even attempted. Those who keep their wits about them offer space and time because caving to pressure also leads to reacting without thinking, which goes back to the danger of folly. Then you have to look at situations where people are allowed the opportunity to make repeated attempts until success, which is often called what is accessible. In other situations mistakes are met with rejection and no generosity is allowed for time to practice or clemency from prison, slavery or execution in the most extreme environments. A certain amount of preparation can help for those things that can be foreseen, but nothing compares to engagement with reality where the current level of skill meets the challenge at the right time. The less time that is allowed for oneself to learn, the more skill is demanded by the situation and other people. It isn’t easy to know which people and situations will provide the right conditions and so trial and error can only be met with opportunities for practice when we find them in the environment or engagement in solitary practice if applicable.
In the end, we all want the success that courage was aiming at all along. Unless there’s enough knowledge about an environment ahead of time that will allow us to survive with our current skill level and allow further skill development, to also survive in that environment for longer periods of time, we can stay or we’ll have to go. Wisdom in the view of Socrates sounds to the modern reader like a Platonic withdrawal to an ivory tower where only meditation on mathematical perfectionism is allowed. Where’s the reality testing? For practical readers, courage is learning from wisdom that is already available and accepting that there is always risk when insider knowledge is left out. As time passes, one has to be allowed to have access to insider knowledge sooner or later for skill to develop, regardless of age and how grey one’s beard is. That is done with experts who are willing to help, and who have no insecurity about helping, which you can’t always count on, or the wheel has to be reinvented all by oneself. Courage is not just boldness—it is boldness to find out the truth of the matter, with no guarantees, made wise by preparation, humility, and care for others.
“When you cut into the present, the future leaks out.”―William S. Burroughs
The Roots of Political Philosophy: Ten Forgotten Socratic Dialogues – Thomas L. Pangle (Editor) – Plato: https://www.isbns.net/isbn/9780801494659/
The Road to Wisdom: Lessons on Education from Plato’s “Laches” Author(s): Erazim V. Kohák Source: The Classical Journal, Vol. 56, No. 3 (Dec., 1960), pp. 123-132.
Plato’s Laches Author(s): Robert G. Hoerber Source: Classical Philology, Vol. 63, No. 2 (Apr., 1968), pp. 95-105.
Socrates at Work on Virtue and Knowledge in Plato’s “Laches” Author(s): Gerasimos Santas Source: The Review of Metaphysics, Vol. 22, No. 3 (Mar., 1969), pp. 433-460.
Devereux, D. (1977). Courage and Wisdom in Plato’s Laches. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 15(2), 129–141.
Devereux, D. T. (1992). The Unity of the Virtues in Plato’s Protagoras and Laches. The Philosophical Review, 101(4), 765.
Morris, T. F. (2009). Manliness in Plato’s Laches. Dialogue, 48(03), 619.
Philosophy: https://psychreviews.org/category/philosophy03/