The thinking-philosophizing of Plato in its entirety is held together by a demand for self-knowledge, that is, by a demand for knowing oneself, for coming face to face with oneself.
This demand for self-knowledge permeates Plato’s writings and dialogues, although it is often indirectly and implicitly introduced, thought, and set forth. This demand calls upon the mortals to know themselves and warns them against self-deception.
Ignorance as a Form of Self-Knowledge
The ancient Delphic inscription “Know Thyself” was generally accepted as a demand calling upon and reminding the mortals to know themselves by realizing their own limits and limitedness and their place in the universe as mortals, as mere mortals, distanced from and turned toward the gods.
Socrates’s awareness that the only thing that he knows is that he knows nothing is itself a form of self-knowledge, for it is an acknowledgment of his own limits and limitedness in a universe brought about and rendered possible by the gods.
In the Apology, ignorance is offered as a way of living in which self-knowledge is constantly announced as a demand. In other words, the awareness and the acknowledgment that one is ignorant is offered as a path in which self-knowledge resides as a genuine possibility, as a quest, and as that toward which the life of the mortal in its entirety should be directed in its philosophizing, questioning, and investigating.
That is, the Apology grounds the possibility of self-knowledge in ignorance itself, in the awareness and acknowledgment that one is ignorant and therefore knows nothing about oneself or the universe.
In a word, acknowledging one’s ignorance indicates that the limitedness pertaining to the human being as a mortal is completely realized and accepted by oneself. This realization transfers oneself into a philosophical journey toward self-knowledge, toward one’s self; continuously and repeatedly.
Self-Knowledge as Care for the Soul
In the Alcibiades I, self-knowledge takes place as caring for the soul, as caring for one’s own soul. According to Socrates in the Alcibiades I, human beings should first care for their own souls and be concerned about their own ways of living in the universe before they care for others and before they enter the public realm.
In this dialogue, Socrates convinces Alcibiades that caring for the soul delivers the mortal into self-knowledge; that is, caring for the soul allows human beings to know themselves, for it brings them face to face with themselves through the continuous activity of caring.
Socrates says that what is needed is a mirror so that human beings could observe and examine themselves. The mirror reflects the self and thus renders possible this activity of inspecting. Caring for the soul renders available this mirror and hence brings the self closer to itself.
Besides, the soul, Socrates says, must observe the most divine part of another soul, which is knowledge and wisdom, and then takes this knowledge and this wisdom as paths bringing it closer to itself and finally delivering it into itself as self-knowledge.
Knowing Oneself Through One’s Ancestors
In the Charmides, another approach to self-knowledge is suggested and set forth, which argues that knowing one’s ancestors allows one to know oneself. That is, self-knowledge occurs through knowing one’s own ancestors.
The suggestion that self-knowledge occurs through knowing the origin and identity of one’s parents and ancestors is also offered in other dialogues such as the Theaetetus and the Laches, which argue that parentage could reveal the nature of oneself.
Erotic Encounters and Self-Knowledge
In the Phaedrus, Socrates says that the erotic encounter between the lover and the beloved leads to self-knowledge, for it allows the self to recognize itself in the Other.
Then the boy is in love, but has no idea what he loves. He does not understand, and cannot explain, what has happened to him. It is as if he had caught an eye disease from someone else, but could not identify the cause; he does not realize that he is seeing himself in the lover as in a mirror.
The Phaedrus, 255d
Erotic encounters, according to the Phaedrus, render self-knowledge possible and the self accessible. The lovers see and recognize themselves in each other; together, they recall the gods that they follow and thus offer themselves to each other as horizons, as extents and scopes through which they extend themselves into each other so that they could truly become themselves; they philosophize together; they search for virtue together; they pursue wisdom together; their togetherness is confirmed by their friendship; their friendship delivers them into themselves as nearness to each other and to themselves, that is, as self-knowledge.
Knowing Oneself Through Writing and Conversing
In the Phaedrus, Socrates says that writing and conversing with others could also render self-knowledge possible.
In the second half of the Phaedrus, writing is offered as a way through which self-knowledge could take place. The argument, the suggestion, or the hope, is that the self reveals itself, its secrets, and its depths to others and to itself through writing. This revealing allows the self to know itself, to come face to face with itself.
Conversing with others, Socrates argues, also delivers into self-knowledge. For Socrates, he needs other human beings in order to be able to reach and examine his own self and in order to be able to know whether he is monstrous, simple, or divine.
Socrates says that nature cannot be the path bringing him closer to himself or delivering him into himself and thus into self-knowledge. Other human beings are essential, Socrates says, in any attempt at reaching and knowing his own self.
Introspection and Self-Observation
The Charmides offers another way of acquiring self-knowledge, which is introspection. The mortals, human beings, Socrates insists, should constantly observe and investigate themselves; they must turn toward themselves, toward their hidden and concealed depths; they should search within themselves for themselves to find out whether they hold within themselves order or disorder, harmony or disharmony, rationality or haphazardness, divinity or chaos.
Plato on Self-Deception: The Greatest Obstacle to Self-Knowledge
In the thinking-philosophizing of Plato, the greatest danger lies in self-deception. Self-deception is the greatest obstacle to self-knowledge.
When human beings deceive themselves about themselves, about who they are, about their limited place in the universe, or about their nature, origin, journey, or destination, they prevent themselves from coming face to face with themselves, they turn away from the mirror reflecting their selves before themselves, they stop caring for themselves and their souls, they conceal and lose themselves.
Philosophy and Death
Death is a recurrent theme in the thinking-philosophizing of Plato. There are, therefore, many ponderings on grief, mourning, sorrow, and healing in the dialogues philosophizing and thinking toward death and dying. The fear of death, Plato says, burdens humans while they are awake and haunts their dreams.
Schopenhauer on Death and Afterlife
In the thinking-philosophizing of Schopenhauer, death is central because it is linked together with the “will-to-live”. Death is the fragility pervading our existence; a fragility necessarily delivering into philosophizing
At the end of Division One of Being and Time, Heidegger says that investigating the everydayness of Dasein makes understandable and hence brings nearer to Dasein’s being, yet it does not bring Dasein wholly, completely, or fully face to face with itself; that is, it does not bring “Da-sein as a whole in view”.
Heidegger on “Being-Toward-Death”
For Heidegger, death brings closer to the question of the meaning of Being: “Death opens up the question of Being”. Heidegger says that only to the human being belongs the possibility of being brought face to face with death: “Only humanity ‘has’ the distinction of standing and facing death, because the human being is earnest about Being: death is the supreme testimony to Being”.
In Being and Nothingness, Sartre criticizes Heidegger’s conception of death in Being and Time and offers his own account of the finitude of existence, which is grounded not in the certainty of death, but rather in our choices and freedom.