I’m going to think about this more. What first springs to mind though, is the definition of “examined”. Perhaps it need not be as “deep” as one thinks?

Another comment I’d like to make is on your final sentence. It does make me think of the practice of commenting on blogs to get traffic to one’s own site…

Thank you for the thoughts.
Juliet

I'm therefore more about criticizing the statement itself, the way it is parroted, than really criticizing Socrates himself, who seemed like a great chap to have a chat with, and who may have intended to say something different. Since he could have kept examining his life in exile from Athenian society, what he may have been saying is that it was his life's work to teach others in his society how to examine their lives, and if he was denied that right by Athenian authorities, than he would use his conscious choice of death as a final lesson to his society of how much worth he ascribed to what he was trying to teach.

That sentiment I find interesting, kind of a judo move on the society in which he lived that has lasted in the minds of philosophers ever since. But the actual statement that the "unexamined life is not worth living" I don't think is right, for all of its resonance through the ages. I think that just because a statement resonates with our minds doesn't make it true. In fact I'd argue that a lot of great ideas that have resonated at times in history have been fundamentally flawed.

Arguably Socrates also understood this point, as he saw his understanding of his own ignorance as the source of his wisdom. Which is why I've always thought it strange that the statement "the unexamined life is not worth living" is translated in that fashion, attributed to him and itself left unexamined.

Damn, Dude, you hit it right on the head. Life IS always worth living. Who the h3ll says Socrates gets to decide the worth of a life?

Clearly Anita and others have completely missed the moral dilemma you've uncovered. "A life not worth living", as you point out, is really just a different way of saying "it would be better if that life had never been lived at all". The question is…why would Socrates say such a thing?

Well, maybe the answer to that question also answers your dilemma….it's possible that Socrates never said "The unexamined life is not worth living." Another English translation is "The unexamined life is not to be lived". Read that way, you could interpret more of a "Repent!" than "Damnation!" intent, couldn't you? I know I can.

So, if you believe that Socrates was a decent, moral human being…as you and I clearly do…then this alternative translation is a little easier to swallow, no? Otherwise, we're all left rationalizing the "better off dead" implication, which does nothing but lead us all out into the tall weeds where we're left to wander aimlessly about with Anita, Nietzsche and the rest of the Immoral Elitists.

Great job, I love that a guy from India has no compunction about throwing huge haymakers at one of Philosophy's most Sacred Cows…Socrates the Martyr. Kudos!

BTW…if you're interested, here's a paper written by a scary-smart philosophy guy with a bunch of Ph.D.s who delves into the same muck and seems to strike serious pay dirt:
Richard Kraut
"A companion to Socrates"
Chapter 14, page 228
"The Examined Life Examined"
you can find and read a free preview here online:
http://books.google.com

Cool blog, thanks for the interesting read.

Regards,

SchwingBlade

As you mention, what Socrates really chose was death via hemlock over exile. Arguably he saw exile as being deprived of the right to teach the examination of life in the manner he thought wise to the community he wanted to belong to, and saw this as worse than choosing death. By choosing death he could transform himself in the minds of his philosopher student community into the protector of the community's ideals. He would also be proving to his society and all future persons the strength of his conviction. The small irony is he could still have examined his life all he wanted, while in exile. He would have lost the ability to teach his current students in his current society. He would also have lost his halo of respect to the like minded community of philosophers that have followed him in time. To Socrates staying loyal to his community was very important, even at the cost of death. I think that's the real choice Socrates made.

To my mind, worth is in the eye of the beholder. If you don't examine yourself at all, you could assume your self worth and you could have worth to other people in your life. What Socrates said wasn't "If you have the wisdom to correctly examine your life and you fail to examine your life you may make mistakes that you later regret or you may not have as rich a life." What he said (according to Plato) is "The unexamined life is not worth living."

It seems to me some people examine their lives hardly at all, but still have worth to their families, their friends, themselves. Many animals don't appear to examine their own lives, but they are ascribed worth by others. A plant doesn't appear to examine its life, but it is ascribed worth.

Socrates statement has a potent ring, but its vagueness has left it open to a myriad of interpretations. Self examination is how we may define self worth, but a person may define great self worth with even a cursory self examination or an unexamined belief. We may feel they are wrong, but that's our judgment of their worth. The point I'm making is that worth is not defined just by self examination. It can actually be assumed without any examination at all.

To pretend that it requires great self examination is really an unexamined statement put forth by philosophers. I do think unexamined statements may have worth. They could have worth because they are actually right or because they have meaning to those who fail to examine them. The point I'm making is that worth is a value judgment, so the statement "The unexamined life is not worth living" is only true to those who want it to be true. To everyone else, it's false. Philosophers have interpreted Socrates' statement as if it is universally true, and that can't be right. To them it has worth, and to me it doesn't.