Xenophon's Socratic Discourse: An Interpretation of the Oeconomicus (review)

Abstract

Book Reviews Xenophon's Socratic Discourse: An Interpretation o[ the Oeconomicus. By Leo Strauss. (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1970. Pp. viii & 211. $6.95) Like Mr. Strauss' On Tyranny, the present work attempts to demonstrate that Xenophon grasped the core of Socrates' thought (83). Within the merely academic debate concerning Xenophon's philosophic prowess, Strauss, if I understand him rightly, discerns a serious difference about the possibility of philosophy in the hurrah soul. Strauss' Xenophon believes that philosophy is inseparable from an ironic rhetoric which both reveals and conceals the true nature of the Socratic enterprise (I04-I05, 114, 190). Shaped by a sober evaluation of the internal and external dangers to philosophy, this rhetoric is essential to Socratic self-knowledge. As such, it is the hallmark of the "Great Tradition of political philosophy . . . originated by Socrates" (83). In Strauss' interpretation of the Oeconomicus, Socratic economics is informed by this Socratic rhetoric. The dialogue concerns Socrates' half-serious efforts to remind Kritoboulos, the lazy extravagant son of Kriton, an Athenian gentleman, of his household duties (191). Kritoboulos prefers to idle away his time watching comedies and engaging in other profitless activities. Although Socrates' reputation for idle pastimes was notorious (159-160), Xenophon prudently presents him as exhorting Kritoboulos to avoid such pitfalls. In this way, Socratic economics is shown benefitting the most honorable and respected members of his city. Socratic economics concerns acquisition of the money required to manage one's home (oikia) well. For Socrates, the best money was influential patrons such as Kriton who, for many years, shielded him from punishment by citizens indignant over the impious effects of his idle chatter on their most gifted youth (90, 95, 103-104, 185). After Socrates' death, Xenophon performed the same service for his reputation which Kriton and others had performed during his life. Thus Xenophon was an executor and protector of Socrates' estate. Strauss' interpretation revolves around this problematic estate. What was Socrates' estate or home (oikia)? Was he, like eros in Plato's Symposium, essentially poor and homeless? In that case, what were Kriton and Xenophon protecting? Strauss' meticuIous, reserved interpretation, with its low-key humor, makes it most difficult to uncover his position on problems of this kind. The questionableness of Socratic economics emerges with Socrates' suggestion that a good economist could manage anyone's house well and not simply his own. Just as the Republic's philosopher-kings mind everyone's business, so the Oeconomicus" expert economist manages everyone's home. Thus Strauss incorrectly ascribes to Kritoboulos the introduction of "management of the household in terms of increase " (93). For Socrates' divorce of household management from "one's own" implies national, international, and even cosmic economic worries (93-96, 113, 148). The modern meaning of economics springs from Socratic extension of the original-one is tempted to say, the natural (97, 168)----concern with one's own home and family. Socrates' economist knows how best to manage anyone's home to increase his money. But, like the philosopher-kings, he is a professional, and not an amateur like Socrates whose knowledge of ignorance would seem to preclude economic expertise. [239] 240 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Strauss notes Socrates' reluctance to supervise mankind's private and public economies (97, 176-177). Kritoboulos touches upon this unwillingness in his complaint about expert economists adverse to the practical application of their expertise (97-99, 104, 138). If this is a veiled criticism of Socrates, one might wonder whether that idle babbler is a sound teacher of economics (107, 109). Strauss notes that Kritoboulos probably respects Socrates' economic skills more than those of his own father (101). His idle pursuits seem to cause neglect of the most obvious teacher of his household management. However, in contrast to the comic Socrates in the Clouds, the Oeconomicus" Socrates exhorts Kritoboulos to performance of his duties as a gentleman (163-164, 19I). Yet, this exhortation would probably be superfluous, if Kritoboulos had not been led to respect Socrates much more than his own father. The Xenophontic or postcomic Socrates seems to benefit his patrons in this way. Receptivity to Socratic economics apparently presupposes susceptibility to the rhetoric which made Kritoboulos respect Socrates more than his...