![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
It's interesting to come back to reading Socrates again after all this time. I think it was a bit more than a year ago, and it surprises so very much to see just how much I have grown since first reading him. Reading the annotations on the sides of the pages at times makes me want to laugh at how silly they are. Other times I read it and go, well duh, why did I even bother writing that. But I remember that I was struggling to have something, anything to discuss in class every week, so it's understandable.
Really though, I find it so much clearer to understand now that I have read so much of C.S. Lewis' stuff. At times I can see so very clearly the line of thinking shared between the two great philosophers, but of course, it is not often long before Lewis leaves Socrates in the dust. The way I see it, Socrates was brilliant for his time and for what he had to work with. Working before Jesus and without the aid of having an extensive background in being a Hebrew, he really did understand as well as one might hope to. The thing is though, he didn't have it all because it all hadn't yet been here. He lacked that which Lewis knew and what we know now, and that is Jesus.
Reading C.S. Lewis is at times like reading Socrates had he had the new testament with him, well that, and without all the rather ego-filled, deceptive, and annoying qualities that old Soc. seemed to exhibit at times. But like I said, Soc. was before Jesus, and was only human, so of course he wasn't perfect. Not that Lewis is mind, but he was closer to the font of truth and a little less likely to be wrong in certain matters.
Anyway, reading Socrates, I notice slightly less the misinformed and human ideas of his, unless he gets rather long winded with them, and seem to notice those ideas that have that gleam of truth buried deap within them. I am given a new, slightly brighter perspective on Socrates now, I think. He did as well as can be expected from a man who didn't have God.
Really though, I find it so much clearer to understand now that I have read so much of C.S. Lewis' stuff. At times I can see so very clearly the line of thinking shared between the two great philosophers, but of course, it is not often long before Lewis leaves Socrates in the dust. The way I see it, Socrates was brilliant for his time and for what he had to work with. Working before Jesus and without the aid of having an extensive background in being a Hebrew, he really did understand as well as one might hope to. The thing is though, he didn't have it all because it all hadn't yet been here. He lacked that which Lewis knew and what we know now, and that is Jesus.
Reading C.S. Lewis is at times like reading Socrates had he had the new testament with him, well that, and without all the rather ego-filled, deceptive, and annoying qualities that old Soc. seemed to exhibit at times. But like I said, Soc. was before Jesus, and was only human, so of course he wasn't perfect. Not that Lewis is mind, but he was closer to the font of truth and a little less likely to be wrong in certain matters.
Anyway, reading Socrates, I notice slightly less the misinformed and human ideas of his, unless he gets rather long winded with them, and seem to notice those ideas that have that gleam of truth buried deap within them. I am given a new, slightly brighter perspective on Socrates now, I think. He did as well as can be expected from a man who didn't have God.
