Page:Ferrier Works vol 2 1888 LECTURES IN GREEK PHILOSOPHY.pdf/267

212 life and movement, whereas the other party was stiff and stolid, was sunk in a dogmatic slumber, was stationary if not retrograde. But Socrates was not compelled to choose between these two parties; another course was open to him, and on that other course he entered. He agreed with the Sophists in calling for free inquiry; but he demanded, further, that that inquiry should be thoroughgoing and complete, more thoroughgoing and complete than it had been under the management of the Sophists. This, then, was the preliminary ground on which Socrates opposed the Sophists; their inquiry into the nature of man he held had been partial, inadequate, and superficial; his professed to be more radical, more searching, and more comprehensive.

3. We have now to consider in what respect Socrates deemed the inquiry of the Sophists to be partial and incomplete, and how he endeavoured to supplement it; but, first of all, let me apprise you, that in attempting to work out the philosophy of Socrates, I shall be compelled, in the absence of full and accurate historical data, to draw considerably on my own reflections for materials, and to fill in details, which, though implied and hinted at, are not explicitly presented in any of the remains which are extant of the Socratic doctrines. In attempting to give a consistent and intelligible account of the Socratic system, both as it is in itself and as it stands opposed to the doctrines of the Sophists, I