Page:Philosophical Review Volume 2.djvu/358

344 merely Xenophontic Socrates, the theory of virtue and of the conceptional dialectic assured to us as really Socratic by the testimony of Aristotle and the agreement of the followers of Socrates. By means of this criterion we can, by the comparison of the Memorabilia with the other writings of Xenophon, arrive at the separation sought; we also secure the text of the Memorabilia against unjustifiable changes, besides obtaining a standpoint for a juster view than has hitherto been possible of the Platonic Dialogues as historic accounts of Socrates. – Joël gives a very full and clear showing as to the main point in his argument, – that the personality of Xenophon must have intruded itself into the accounts given by him of Socrates. A particularly faithful report of discourses and dialogues corresponds, he points out, neither to the individuality of Xenophon, to the custom of antiquity, to universal psychological experience, nor, finally, to the testimony of the ancients, who rate the Memorabilia as lower in historical value than the Socratic Dialogues of Plato, or of the philosopher Aeschines. The dialogical portions of the Memorabilia are probably more ficticious than the non-dialogical, as the new criticism makes out. The very shortness of the Xenophontic dialogues is an evidence against their historical fidelity; for how could Socrates, in a few words (containing as a rule only shallow wisdom), reconcile foes, establish friendships, refute Sophists, convert atheists, reform voluptuaries and effeminate persons, instruct generals, statesmen, artists, and others? Xenophon, as himself participating in Socratic dialogues, is mentioned by himself only once. Further, Xenophon shows a defective knowledge of the life of Socrates, – for instance, he neither mentions the Leon episode, nor cites the Delphic oracular saying, and passes lightly over the military deeds of Socrates. Why should a special knowledge of the doctrine of Socrates be ascribed to him? Xenophon clearly partakes of the character of an age in which declamatory oratory, apology-writing, encomiastic discourse, Sophisticism, demagoguery, were special fashions; he is a panegyrical rhetor rather than a historian. The fact that Xenophon's own personality distinctly colors his reports of Socrates is so clearly revealed by a comparison of his various writings as to deprive the advocates of the traditional view of Socrates of their last support.

The general result reached by our author, by the criterion and method above outlined, is that Socrates was, in his doctrines and his activity, a pure rationalist, and that the accounts given by Xenophon which would represent him as anything other are pure "fictions," To begin with the religious opinions of Socrates, – the daemon was