Was socrates a martyr for revealing secrets?

Well, MasonicLight mentioned that it *might* be true, based off of some of Plato's writings, also, I don't believe Socrates was ever married, I think these two things taken together do suggest homosexuality at the least and perhaps also pederasty.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
I don't believe Socrates was ever married, I think these two things taken together do suggest homosexuality at the least and perhaps also pederasty.

Wow.... I guess Newton was homosexual and a host of other geniuses as well... You do realize that Tesla was never married. What does never having been married have to do with someone's sexual orientation?You do realize that a large percentage of people who are thirty years old and younger say they have no desire to ever marry...


I have never been married. I certainly am not a homosexual or a pederast.
It seems to me that you are generalizing here, and not very logically, I might add. I am not trying to criticize, but you are the first that has ever suggested that Socrates was some kind of a sexual malfeasant, as far as I am aware.


[edit on 19-7-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Speaker, you must also realize that in Ancient Greece marriage was expected of every man and it was considered odd when a man did not marry.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Speaker, you must also realize that in Ancient Greece marriage was expected of every man and it was considered odd when a man did not marry.

You obviously haven't done much research on Sparta.

As to a married man with 3 kids I take exception to homosexuality being called deviant. "Deviant" was that the right word?

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Speaker, you must also realize that in Ancient Greece marriage was expected of every man and it was considered odd when a man did not marry.

Maybe so... Regardless, the guy, by all accounts was brilliant. I don't really care if the guy was heterosexual, homosexual or if he was asexual and abhorred both of the sexes. (Yes, there are people that are not attracted to either sex.)

GASP

I think it is much more pertinent to focus on a person's ideology or what they tried to get people to understand, than to focus on their personal life.

That is part of why this country is so messed up now. Everyone is overly concerned about everyone else's personal life... Instead of being worried about what some politician is personally like, maybe we should be more concerned with his ideas. No?

Yeah, speaker, I guess it was a bit tabloidish for me to bring up Socrates' personal life. Nevertheless, I think it may be oversimplification to simply say that Socrates was a political martyr who boldly sacrificed himself.

Uber, I mean, hey, this is a discussion board and you are free to say whatever you wish. However, others are free to disagree. You may be right, but I haven't ever heard any such thing in regards to Socrates. The wikipedia article that you cite doesn't even imply, at least not to me, what you are suggesting.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Uber, I mean, hey, this is a discussion board and you are free to say whatever you wish.

However, others are free to disagree. You may be right, but I haven't ever heard any such thing in regards to Socrates. The wikipedia article that you cite doesn't even imply, at least not to me, what you are suggesting.

Well, I am one to speculate and try to read b/w the lines...a lack of corroborating sources does not always imply disproof.

Uber, that's true... Like I said, I guess what you suggest is possible. I am not completely "trashing" your idea. I personally don't believe that what you are saying is the case, but, that doesn't make it unviable...

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Uber, that's true... Like I said, I guess what you suggest is possible. I am not completely "trashing" your idea. I personally don't believe that what you are saying is the case, but, that doesn't make it unviable...

Regardless of whether or not it is, I still think many commentators on Socrates' execution are guilty of an oversimplification of the event into a morality play of one brave soul standing up against "the man".

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Wasn't Socrates a pederast and a homosexual? Could this have perhaps had something to do with his sentence? Wasn't he charged with "corrupting the youth".

Also, we must remember that Socrates had the option to flee Athens but he refused to do this.

en.wikipedia.org...

Hmmm...my understanding is that homosexuality was socialy acceptable, even expected, in the upper strata of ancient Greek society. Alexander was well known to be bi-sexual too. I somehow don't think homosexuality had anything to do with charges of 'corrupting the youth' in Socrates case.

J.

Be that as it may, Jimbo, pederasty, depending on what period of Greek history we're talking about, was sometimes viewed as exploitative.

Originally posted by uberarcanist
Be that as it may, Jimbo, pederasty, depending on what period of Greek history we're talking about, was sometimes viewed as exploitative.

In the Socratic period, however, it was acceptable. Nevertheless, Socrates appears to be opposed to the practice in Plato's "Republic". Of course, it's next to impossible to discover if this was Socrates' true stance, or if Plato was just putting words in his mouth.

But practically all historians agree that Socrates' arrest and execution were due to the fact that the new government considered him an accomplice of the Thirty Tyrants, instead of sexual irregularity.

I don't think that Socrates could be considered gay based upon if you read Phaedo towards the end we find him being visited by his sons and his woman (it is unclear if she is his wife or simply the mother of his children), although homosexuality was not taboo during this time ( I believe that there is some quotation similar to a woman for children a man for pleasure), and also if I remember correctly didn't they mentor people younger than them and maintain a relationship with them?

I would argue that most people in a society such as this would be classified as bisexual.At any rate as mentioned above sexuality is not very important, what is important are ideas.I am straight but someone's sexuality plays such a little role in who they are as a human (unless you meet someone who is sexually addicted, regardless of their sexuality who lets having sex define who they are as a person and make it the end all/be all of existence), that it is completely foolish to judge someone on.

I don't care who you sleep with at the end of the day if you are trying to improve society, on a local or global level, at the end of the day you are a success as a human.

i just thought i'd post this:



what do you guys think??

Originally posted by adrenochrome


what do you guys think??

I think it's spot on. In Plato's Republic, Socrates condemned democracy as the "tyranny of the masses over the individual", an argument very difficult, if not impossible, to counter.

Originally posted by adrenochrome
what do you guys think??

No, I don't think that Socrates was one of us. He pointed out the ignorance of the masses, yes, but only to show the necessity of there being a Philosophical Elect which guides society from behind the scenes. And in Laws, Plato specifically calls for the maintenance of such a secret brotherhood. The story of his trial and execution, like the "just man [who] will be scourged, racked, bound, will have his eyes put out, and will at last be crucified" (Republic), is meant to illustrate the ignorance of the masses when confronted with the light of Reason.

The collected works of Plato are more damning than anything contained in the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, and yet somehow people keep chasing after "ze Joos".

[edit on 18-6-2009 by Eleleth]

This thread could do with a little Xenophon love.

reply to post by Masonic Light


Well, it's important to realize that Socrates favored the monarchy over all forms of government.

[edit on 18-6-2009 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth


Well, it's important to realize that Socrates favored the monarchy over all forms of government.

In a sense, but not the common definition of "monarchy". He didn't approve of family royalty, but instead he spoke of a "natural aristocracy" based upon merit.