E-book
Štefan Jusko
The goal of the monograph is to highlight the significant problem of interpreting the Socratic question, as its approach represents a method of interpreting the history of philosophy, specifically in our case, the interpretation of Socrates and Plato. The Socratic question can be grasped in diametrically different ways, as shown by Patočka and Nietzsche, among others. The former aligns with Socrates and innovatively updates his question for the present. The latter is ambivalent towards Socrates but ultimately labels him a decadent.
In the first part of the monograph, Patočka's characterization of human existence is presented, which he formulates as unified and morally firm. Patočka interprets the Socratic question as care for the soul, for its well-being, without deriving the concept of good from something positively defined but from the whole world, which can only be defined negatively due to its constant openness. This sphere of negativity is for Patočka something immensely positive because transcendence lifts humans from relative goods to the overall meaning, making them morally capable in the true sense. The good, i.e., the requirement for a surge, for a turn of humans from the world of things to the whole world, is for him a program that Socrates first formulated through his knowing ignorance.
The second part of the work is dedicated to Nietzsche's concept based on the non-unified nature of human existence, which is not derived from the whole world or overall meaning but from situational meaning. Nietzsche strives to prove that in every situation, human existence is exposed to two opposing perspectives, between which it is impossible to decide which is correct. He concludes that both perspectives are equally valid and mutually conditioned, meaning that the opposite of good, what threatens meaning, is a beneficial condition for situational meaning. He labels this level as immoral, as a sphere where human existence creates meaning outside the thinking of good and evil in opposition.
The conclusion of the work is open because, as it turns out, we do not have a common denominator that could decide on the correctness of one or the other concept. Precisely in this lies the fact that the Socratic question remains a serious philosophical problem even today.
Download the e-book for free (pdf)
Slovenčina
