No, is the only person who solved the problem: he took everything, everything, with him to the grave. Marvelous ... you kept the highest enthusiasm closed up airtight in the most eminent reflection and sagacity, kept it for eternity-you took everything along. Therefore the professors are disparagingly saying of you now-O, Socrates!-that, after all, you were only a personality, that you did not even have a system. Kierkegaard, Journals and Paper (IV 4303, 224) There are indeed, as those concerned with the mysteries say, many who carry the thyrsus but the Bacchants are few. in the Phaedo (69c-d) In this essay I seek to capture an image of Socrates, the single individual, as he exists in Plato's Phaedo. This existing Socrates, I shall conclude unconcludingly, is existentially analogous to the Abraham of Fear and Trembling, authored by Kierkegaard's pseudonym Johannes de Silentio; thus I hope to reveal in the Phaedo as a of To this end I shall first consider the picture of rendered by Kierkegaard's pseudonym Johannes Climacus in Philosophical Fragments and Concluding Unscientific Postscript to Philosophical Fragments. In fact these two works present two, existentially distinct Socrateses. In the former represents an orthodox rendering of Plato's epistemology of recollection; this is a Knight of Infinite Resignation but not of Faith. In the latter, however, Climacus presents as an exemplar of A-pagan or Socratic faith-as distinct from B, which refers to Christian faith. The pagan faith of Religiousness A is also the faith of Abraham, Fear and Trembling's, of Faith, and, as I hope to indicate, of in the Phaedo.1 Thus I shall first give a brief account of Johannes Climacus's characterization of the and religious Socrateses, as set forth, respectively, in Fragments and Postscript. Second I shall observe Socrates' unconcluding argumentation in the Phaedo, from which we can infer the presence not of a systematizer but of an existing philosopher. Third I shall extend my consideration of the Phaedo to include its more poetic elements in order to flesh out this existing Socrates. Finally, I shall compare the existential postures of and Abraham in order to justify each as a Knight of Faith. Climacus's Socrateses In Fragments, Climacus invokes the Platonic as merely the for knowledge, as distinct from the appearance of the eternal in time which alone gives the of faith and truth-that is untruth. The significance of this is not that of radical doubt or presuppositionlessness, a logically necessary point of departure which dispels all deception in order to assure the rational certainty of the philosophical system; rather, this condition is the transcendent telos of human existence and the truth of subjectivity. In Fragments himself is merely the occasion for the awareness of subjective untruth, but this is not the decisive is untruth of Postscript because in Fragments is the occasion for the recollective recovery of objective truth, which entirely swallows subjectivity: recollection presupposes that only by gathering the soul to itself and out of the bodily world-a radical subjective withdrawal-can one achieve truth. Recollection thus tempts one toward speculative and away from the truth that subjectivity is untruth-the truth of subjectivity itself. The Socratic of Postscript, however, though still shadowed by recollection, resists the temptation of recollection's speculative solace rather to exist: Socrates essentially emphasizes existing, whereas Plato, forgetting this, loses himself in speculative thought (CUP 205). lacks both the condition of the historical God in time and the decisive category of sin, which together would block all recourse to the speculative path back to objective truth; thus it must be the vocation of this existing continually to annul recollection in order to actualize himself. …
Read full abstract