the individual is ignorant (asthenes). Exposing such ignorance, Socrates remarked, is“not
unpleasant”(Apology, 33c). Indeed, unmasking pretentions is the heart of comedy.^12 Or as
Bergson, put it:“the specific remedy for vanity is laughter, and the one failing that is essentially
laughable is vanity.”^13
To be even more specific, in theApologySocrates transforms the meaning of shame, (aidos),
away from its social context, which modern philosophers identify with the blush (Nietzsche) and
the gaze (Foucault), to the soul, to that part of human existence that is indifferent to shame. The great
problem, as Zeus declared in theProtagoras(322d), is that he who is withoutaidosis a disease to
the city, no matter how just he may be. Just as comic poets expose all pretentions and vanities on
stage, so“for Socrates nothing is too sacred to escape thrusting it forward for observation and
examination.”^14 That is one meaning of the examined life. Equally important, Socrates accom-
plishes his transformation ofaidosby mockery, jokes, and irony–by comedy.
When Socrates exposes the ignorant as ignorant they are ashamed as well as mocked. In contrast,
Socrates is not ashamed of his ignorance. His questioning of others aims to prove even the god of
the Oracle ignorant and so even to shame the god. Socrates, however, is proud of his ignorance and
proud that,“in truth”(23b) his wisdom is worth nothing, which also explains his poverty. Thus does
Socrates flaunt both his ignorance and his poverty,“apparent failings that most others would wish to
hide”out of shame. In short, Socrates“mocks what causes them shame”and teaches the young men
to be shameless as well.“For this Socrates will be executed.”^15
As has often been noted, like the execution of Jesus, the execution of Socrates was a historic
event.^16 But Plato’sApology, as is true of the perhaps more subtle account of Xenophon, is not a
transcription of the trial record.^17 All we have are the reports of Socrates’defenders, Plato and
Xenophon: who knows what inculpatory evidence they may have suppressed? What counts, then,
is the dramatic and philosophical question of the relationship of the philosopher to the non-
philosophical Athenians and, by extension, to the non-philosophical (or not-yet-philosophical)
undergraduates. And“the meeting of the philosophers and the non-philosophers”Strauss said,“is
the natural theme of comedy.”^18 Interpreting theApologyas a comedic drama means highlighting
and then explaining Socrates’many jokes. Strauss once referred to such an interpretive activity as a
“loathsome business.”^19 Since I am pretty confident I did not find all Socrates’jokes, the result
could have been even more loathsome.
TheApology
The first impressions most students experience upon reading theApologyare variations on
indignation. If Plato’s intent were also comic, however, here is another: Socrates claims to be
innocent but was found guilty, sentenced, and executed. Clearly his life was a failure. He spent his
life looking for wisdom and, for his pains, was killed. He cannot even answer the one question he
said matters: what is virtue? He did not even make a start in answering that question. All he knows is
that he is ignorant. What a disappointment! What a loser!^20
Turning to the text, Socrates’first speech to the jury dismisses the accusers as liars. The most
outrageous of their lies is that Socrates is a clever speaker.^21 Soon enough they will be refuted when,
by his actual speech, Socrates will be revealed as a simple truth-teller. This is Socrates’opening
joke–Question: how do you refute the accusations by a clever liar that you are a clever liar?
Answer: by showing you are not a clever liar. But if the accusers were right, plain speaking when
accused of being a clever speaker would just show how clever you really were. Maybe Socrates
and his accusers were both clever liars. How can you tell?
Socrates says that he tells the truth, the whole truth, and that doing so is just. Or rather, Socrates
trusts (pisteuein) it is just to tell the whole truth, which raises the obvious question: whom do you
trust, Socrates or his accusers? Then, as if to put his appeal to trust him to the test, he says it would be
unseemly for an old man to use rhetorical devices, that is, to speak cleverly. Who could imagine
Socratic Method and Existence 23