The Layman

“I know that I know nothing”

Explaining your life’s work to a crowd that wants you dead-and citing that as the culmination of it all-may seem empty to a layman. To a layman who works for his life, ending up in such an empty state is horrifying. To a layman who “fakes it until he makes it”, admitting such grave defeat in the end is his worst fear. 

“How did Socrates get to this point? How was this seemingly brave, strong man finally worn down?” one curious layman asks. 

Indicative of most people, this layman must have his questions answered. “What’s the point if no one knows? Where can one go without these answers but down?”

 Until he has the answers, he will fake his knowledge, spout hollow platitudes and use big words, making sure his oblivious peers know not that he, too, is on the same level. There is but one problem with this.

Too caught up in posting the platitudes and the big words online, just as his ancestors did in painting them on the walls of a longhouse, or scribing them on parchment with a quill pen in a powdered wig, our layman forgot to actually seek the answer. He writes instead of reading, and speaks instead of listening, never satisfying his thirst for the answers, forgetting about them instead. In fact, the layman so blocked his thirst from his memory that he forgot the simplest place to look for the answer. In his choosing to write instead of reading, and speak instead of listening, the layman overlooked the work in which the quote was originally extracted from. The work known as Plato’s Apology.

Also known as its original title Apologia, which is Greek for “apology”, Plato’s recollection of Socrates' three speeches made at his trial is possibly both philosophers’ magnum opus, as it combines Plato’s beautiful style of writing, and Socrates “spiritual and moral beauty”, observes G.M.A. Grube in his translation of Plato’s Five Dialogues. 

If he had chosen to read instead of write, the layman would have easily found out everything from why Socrates began his work in the first place to why he came to such an “empty” conclusion. 

As with many other consequential figures in history, Socrates cites a claim of the divine as his chief motivation for his pursuit of wisdom. Upon visiting the oracle of Delphi, Chaerephon, Socrates' childhood friend, inquired as to if there was anyone wiser than Socrates. To which Apollo replied “No.”

Puzzled, Socrates decided to put the oracle’s claim to the test. 

“I am wiser than this man; it is likely that neither of us knows anything worthwhile, but he thinks he knows something when he does not, whereas when I do not know, neither do I think I know” 

Because the layman missed this in his refusal to read, he lacks the knowledge that wisdom has nothing to do with the amount of knowledge one professes to have. 

Wisdom is not the confidence of knowing everything, but the knowledge that one knows nothing.

Our layman is no different than those of Socrates’ time, for if he had been there, he too would have called for the philosopher’s death. This is no speculation because he works only for his life. Because the layman does not believe in life after death, to him, his life is the only thing to work for, which is why he finds Socrates’ quote as empty as he does, and partakes in “faking it until he makes it”. 

In dismissing the idea of any afterlife, it is only logical to work solely for one’s worldly life. The opposite holds the same truth too, as one would have to recognize he is wrong in working for his life if he recognizes that there is an afterlife that needs to be worked for as well. Because the laymen involved in the death of Socrates only worked for their life, they showed no resistance when told to jail, try, and execute him. If they had cared about their status in the next life, they would have resisted the unjust commands in the name of eternal good, despite facing the cost they would pay on Earth. 

In other words, laymen have no motivation. No purpose.

As expected, our layman would disagree, and, slightly offended in being deemed a purposeless piece of meat, claim he has quite a lot of motivation, citing the infamous platitude about making it. 

But, that’s not what “no purpose” means Mr. Layman. In your worldview you have no purpose, not in the worldview that believes in an afterlife and a god. In the latter, you have infinite value and purpose, which should provide infinite motivation. 

“Fake it until you make it”. 

If all that happens is death, what would you have made it to? Physical death is inevitable, so there’s no need to fake that. Make it to success? No matter how much one succeeds, if all that looms is death and nothing more, what’s the point of succeeding anyway? Make it to virtue? What even is virtue if there is no God or afterlife, Mr. Layman?

Why was Socrates comfortable with knowing he knew nothing? At the feet of Apollo, he exchanged hubris for humility. He never lost his thirst for knowledge, he never faked having it, and believed in the perpetual source of purpose, which led him to the greatest knowledge one could ever have. 

The knowledge that he knew nothing. 

So where does our layman end up? Well, being indicative of the billions of laymen throughout time, there are billions of answers.

But the layman is also indicative of us, meaning there is one answer we can be sure of.

Our own.