Nietzsche’s Procrustean Bed: A Critical Examination of the 'Wisest Sages' in 'The Problem of Socrates'

 “Crito, I owe the sacrifice of a rooster to Asklepios; will you pay that debt and not neglect to do so?”

 1. Introduction

Nietzsche’s portrayal of Socrates and Plato in Twilight of the Idols significantly reduces their philosophical depth and multifaceted personalities to align with his critique of life-negating ideologies. In the section The Problem of Socrates, he identifies Socrates as a figure embodying decline, a “pseudo-Greek” whose approach, rooted in dialectics, reflects a hostility to life’s instincts. He extends this critique to Plato, portraying him as perpetuating this descent into rationalism and metaphysical abstraction. Nietzsche bolsters his argument with the concept of the “consensus sapientium,” claiming that the agreement among ancient sages about life’s negativity stems from their shared physiological malaise: That consensus sapientium—this I grasped better and better—demonstrates least of all that they were right about what they agreed on. Instead, it demonstrates that they themselves, these wisest ones, were somehow in physiological agreement, so that they took the same negative stance toward life—and had to take it.

However, his interpretation, while thought-provoking and incisive, imposes a narrow framework on these thinkers, distorting their contributions to fit his philosophical narrative. This article contends that such a treatment simplifies the richness of Socrates and Plato, reducing their complexity and overlooking life-affirming elements within their ideas and characters.

2. Nietzsche’s Critique in “The Problem of Socrates”

Nietzsche presents Socrates as a symptom of societal and physiological decay, an individual whose rationalism signals a waning instinct for life. His reliance on dialectics, Nietzsche claims, arises from ressentiment—a deep-seated bitterness and an effort to seek revenge on life itself. By promoting reason over instinct, Socrates initiates a tradition that the German philosopher views as destructive to vitality, a trajectory Plato continues with his metaphysical focus.

Key passages in the text illustrate this critique. Nietzsche interprets the Athenian’ last words, “I owe a rooster to Asclepius,” as a declaration of life-fatigue, a belief that death is a cure for the sickness of existence. Additionally, he cites the anecdote of the physiognomist labeling Socrates a “monstrum,” using it as proof of Socrates’ inner corruption and alignment with decadence. These examples anchor his argument that the teacher of Plato epitomizes a life-denying metaphysical stance.

3. Identifying Nietzsche’s Selectivity and Oversimplification

Ancient Greek philosophy was far from uniform, encompassing diverse schools with contrasting perspectives. Movements such as Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Cynicism each articulated unique stances on pleasure, reason, and the role of instinct, illustrating a rich philosophical plurality that Nietzsche overlooks. The Academy’s founder, often criticized for promoting metaphysical abstraction, also celebrated life-affirming ideals. His emphasis on the soul’s harmony—balancing reason, spirit, and desire—and his exaltation of love and beauty in dialogues like the Symposium and Phaedrus suggest a nuanced perspective on human existence.

Similarly, Nietzsche’s portrayal of Socrates neglects the multifaceted depictions found in Plato, Xenophon, and Aristophanes. The sage was not only a probing dialectician but also a convivial participant in feasts, a courageous soldier, and an individual deeply connected to Athenian life. Far from alienated, his method encouraged growth, truth-seeking, and intellectual humility, challenging complacency rather than denying vitality.

4. Reinterpreting Nietzsche’s Evidence

Nietzsche interprets Socrates’ final words, “I owe a rooster to Asclepius,” as an admission of life-fatigue, viewing death as a cure for existence’s burdens: Even Socrates said, as he died, “Living—that means being sick a long time. I owe a rooster to the savior Asclepius.”Even Socrates had had enough. However, alternative readings present this statement differently. Socrates may have perceived death as a form of healing, aligning with Platonic dualism, where the soul’s liberation from the body symbolizes transcendence. Such an interpretation reflects acceptance of mortality, not disdain for life.

Nietzsche also invokes a physiognomist’s judgment of Socrates as a “monstrum” to portray him as a symbol of inner corruption and decadence: A visitor who knew about faces, when he passed through Athens, said to Socrates’ face that he was a monstrum—that he contained all bad vices and cravings within him. And Socrates simply answered: “You know me, sir!” Yet another response attributed to the Greek dialectician— “I conquered all of them, sir!”—highlights his self-discipline and mastery over base instincts. This interpretation aligns with the image of a philosopher striving for virtue and control, contradicting the author’s claim that Socrates embodied moral weakness. Together, these reevaluations suggest a more complex figure than Nietzsche’s reductive portrayal allows.

5. Nietzsche’s Philosophical Agenda

Nietzsche employs Socrates and Plato as symbolic contrasts to his philosophy of life-affirmation and the concept of the Übermensch. By emphasizing their rationalist and ascetic tendencies, he portrays them as architects of a tradition that prioritizes abstraction over vitality. This selective framing aligns with his broader critique of life-denying ideologies but overlooks significant dimensions of their thought.

This critique also reflects Nietzsche’s rejection of Western rationalism and metaphysical traditions, which he sees as undermining instinct and the affirmation of existence. His antipathy to Platonic idealism likely led him to exaggerate its supposed disdain for corporeal life and sensory experience. In doing so, the author of Twilight of the Idols positions his views as an antidote to what he perceives as a historical trajectory of decline, using Socrates and his disciple as rhetorical foils to sharpen his critique of Western philosophy’s foundations.

6. Complexity Versus Reductionism

Nietzsche’s critique, though provocative, risks oversimplifying the nuanced legacies of Socrates and Plato. By reducing these figures to emblems of life-denial, he transforms multifaceted personalities into one-dimensional representations. While his polemical style is undeniably powerful, it invites caution against uncritical acceptance of his claims.

Both Socrates and Plato grappled with profound existential questions in ways that can be interpreted as deeply life-affirming. Socrates’ unrelenting search for truth and ethical integrity reflects a commitment to meaningful existence, while Plato’s exploration of beauty, love, and the harmony of the soul suggests a celebration of life’s potential. Recognizing this complexity allows for a more balanced understanding, countering Nietzsche’s reductive narrative while preserving his critique’s philosophical provocations.

7. Conclusion

Nietzsche’s portrayal of Socrates and Plato in The Problem of Socrates is a compelling but ultimately reductive interpretation. While his critique illuminates their influence on Western metaphysics and rationalism, it fails to capture the breadth and vitality of their ideas and lives.

This critique reveals the philosopher’s tendency to selectively emphasize aspects of history to serve his philosophical objectives. As readers, we must critically engage with his polemical methods, appreciating their insights while maintaining historical nuance. By doing so, we honor the complexity of figures like Socrates and Plato, exploring their contributions without reducing them to symbols of decline.

Nietzsche’s critique should inspire deeper reflection on the intricate dimensions of their thought, challenging us to balance philosophical innovation with historical fidelity in our interpretations.

Bibliography

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Twilight of the Idols. Translated by R.J. Hollingdale. London: Penguin Books, 1968. Originally published as Götzen-Dämmerung (1889).

John M. Cooper, ed., Plato: Complete Works (Indianapolis, Indiana: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1997).

Peter Adamson, Classical Philosophy: A History of Philosophy without Any Gaps, Volume 1 (Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2014).