[TheStranger]

I considered posting this in the philosophy forums, but since this is primarily a psychological focus on Socrates, I think it fits best here. An excerpt from A Case for Irony presents an interesting interpretation on the notion of Socrates and his peculiar propensity for standing still while "deep in thought":

	By contrast, on my interpretation, Socrates' coming to a halt is a necessary outcome and manifestation of the situation he is in. Socrates' thinking is practical thinking: it is focused directly on himself and what he will do. It literally concerns the next step he will take.

The narrowed point:

	If Socrates is aware that he does not yet know what his next step should be, then, practically speaking, he cannot take a next step.

The author then goes on to mention that such indecision is a form of self-knowledge, and that standing still is a silent self-admission of Socrates' own ignorance (narrowed to the self and correct or incorrect actions stemming from it), as if the mental road is not complete before him.

Thoughts? More relevant information towards the end, but I don't have the time to type it out.

(link to book excerpt)

To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[Starbucks]

Am I correct to think that the link you posted is to a book that discusses the viewpoints of other authors in other books about the interpretation of Socrates "coming to a halt"?

And you want our opinion of who got the better interpretation?

I'm a bit confused and I might be completely off but it's rather vague to me.

[blueback]

I've always disliked Socrates.

If you don't know where you want to go, then it doesn't matter whether or not you move, and it doesn't matter in what direction you move, because none of them are the wrong direction. Without a goal nothing is right or wrong, so it's not "right" to stand still until you come up with something.

Socrates is a self-important, smarmy pedant.

[Chameleon]

His coming to a halt may be a perception for himself of stepping out of time. He is aware of reality; but must give full focus by stepping out of time. Thus, full focus can be given to reality after his thoughts. Realizing that one who wanders while wondering is neither here nor there, and has no true grasp of either.

[vampyroteuthis]

Tentative suggestion: One can observe while moving. Then standing still is more about letting oneself be acted upon? Socrates does nothing in his own defense in the Trial and Death.

[ppu6502]

In my deepest moments of thought, I have to literally stop moving.

That isn't an unusual thing, is it? I mean, some people pace back and forth or even talk out loud, but plenty of thinkers need to just "space out" and detach from physical as much as possible while figuring out something complex. It's not the only way to think, but it's a way. Plenty go so far as to specifically deprive their senses by going into a dark, quiet room.

I'm not too familiar with Ti, but for Ni, full focus is entirely inside the head, so anything external is just noise - IMO.

Anyway, I'm probably not actually answering this question in the right context, I haven't done any real reading about Socrates.

[stillgale]

One afternoon Socrates was walking along deep in thought. So focused was he that, in his concentration, he fell into a ditch. Thereafter he made it his practice to stay still when deep in thought.