A few months back, Cornel West joined Simon Critchley in conversation at BAM. Critchely was there to discuss his new book, Faith of the Faithless:Experiments in Political Theology. (I didn’t make it. I’m just finding out the conversation happened and happened a few block from my house. I know, I know… Shame on me!.)
The short clip above shows Critchley’s refusal to accept Socrates as a ideal figure. For Critchley, Socrates was high in society and also selfish in his desire to decide to die when he had a way out of the matter. On the other hand, St. Paul bought himself down low from high Jewish status in his conversion to Christianity. Paul’s message of love and concern for the oppressed in the New Testament letters are more inspiring to Critchley.
Although Cornel West is a “Socratic Guy” (he believes that the Socratic method is a way to challenge authority and live out a true democratic spirit), he too has issues with Socrates. He addresses some of these issues in his book, Democracy Matters. His primary concern is that Socrates loved wisdom but not people. For West, Socrates lack of tears and thus maybe compassion makes Jesus more of an inspiring figure.
After watching the video, I have a few concerns. I disagree with Critchley’s critique of Socrates as one who was selfish and Cornel’s critique that Socrates was only a lover of wisdom and not of people. Socrates life’s long journey of serving the people of Athens, being their gadfly, challenging them to be the best they can be by pursing wisdom, while also remaining poor while doing it is far from selfish. It shows true love. Tough love. It may not had been pretty like Jesus, but it was love none the less.The conclusions that West and Critchley lead to concerning Socrates is not in full focus of his work and discredits Socrates on weak grounds.
Moreover, I would be careful with the characteristics we quickly give the apostle Paul. St.Paul’s conversion may have not gotten him easy acceptance among “true apostles’ like the disciplines, but he constantly knows and remind others of his status as a scholar and Roman citizen and uses it for his advantage. His letters (or at least the ones we credit to him) can serve as inspiration to oppressed people, but as a woman, I do not draw much strength from his passages concerning women and lack of equality with men (i.e. I Cor. 11:3. 1 Cor. 11:7-9). Other passages that provide some sense of equality only then makes Paul seem more schizophrenic than democratic.
I think we can draw both on Socrates and St. Paul as resources of love, truth, and service to the oppressed. I think they both bring something to the table. But I will be careful with bringing one down using slippery and irrational tools in order to hold another up while lacking proper rational scrutiny.
I agree with your views on Socrates. He was a lover of wisdom but also for the people. He concentrated on self devolpement and developing the people to develope friendships and to love one another. The two speeches of The Symposium expressed his views on love as well. Socrates quoted,”a warrior does not give up on what he loves, he finds love in what he does. Also I agree with your views on St.Paul on his views toward women. There is a book entitled,’paul,women, and wives’ where he goes into great details on women at that time. What are your views being married to be affiliated with the Sanhedrin that St.Paul was apart of. Maybe his views on women of that time was based on his relationshop with his own wife? Overall I enjoyed the video.