Editing Socratic problem (section)

== Scholarly analysis ==
{{refimprove section|date=April 2015}}
The German classical scholar [[Friedrich Schleiermacher]] addressed the "Socratic problem" in his essay "The Worth of Socrates as a Philosopher" (published in 1818).<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=MXnzAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA538 The Philological museum, Volume 2] (edited by J.C. Hare) Printed by J. Smith for Deightons, 1833 [Retrieved 2015-05-03] (sourced firstly at [https://books.google.com/books?id=_KBex4rtlXMC&pg=PA2 L-A Dorion in D.R. Morrison - The Cambridge Companion to Socrates])</ref> Schleiermacher maintained that the two dialogues ''[[Apology (Plato)|Apology]]'' and ''[[Crito]]'' are purely Socratic. They were, therefore, accurate historical portrayals of the real man, and hence history and not Platonic philosophy at all. All of the other dialogues that Schleiermacher accepted as genuine he considered to be integrally bound together and consistent in their Platonism. Their consistency is related to the three phases of Plato's development:
# Foundation works, culminating in ''[[Parmenides (dialogue)|Parmenides]]'';
# Transitional works, culminating in two so-called families of dialogues, the first consisting of ''[[Sophist (dialogue)|Sophist]]'', ''[[Statesman (dialogue)|Statesman]]'' and ''[[Symposium (Plato)|Symposium]]'', and the second of ''[[Phaedo]]'' and ''[[Philebus]]''; and finally
# Constructive works: ''[[Republic (Plato)|Republic]]'', ''[[Timaeus (dialogue)|Timaeus]]'' and ''[[Laws (dialogue)|Laws]]''.

Schleiermacher's views on the chronology of Plato's work are rather controversial. In Schleiermacher's view, the character of Socrates evolves over time into the "Stranger" in Plato's work, and fulfills a critical function in Plato's development, as he appears in the first family above as the "Eleatic Stranger" in ''[[Sophist (dialogue)|Sophist]]'' and ''[[Statesman (dialogue)|Statesman]]'', and as the "Mantitenean Stranger" in the ''[[Symposium]]''. The "Athenian Stranger" is the main character of Plato's ''[[Laws (dialogue)|Laws]].'' Further, the ''Sophist–Statesman–Philosopher'' family makes particularly good sense in this order, as Schleiermacher also maintains that the two dialogues, ''[[Symposium]]'' and ''[[Phaedo]],'' show Socrates as the quintessential philosopher in life (guided by [[Diotima of Mantinea|Diotima]]) and into death, the realm of otherness. Thus the triad announced both in the Sophist and in the Statesman is completed, although the Philosopher, being divided dialectically into a "Stranger" portion and a "Socrates" portion, is not called "The Philosopher"; this philosophical crux is left to the reader to determine. Schleiermacher thus takes the position that the real Socratic problem is understanding the dialectic between the figures of the "Stranger" and "Socrates".

[[Søren Kierkegaard]] addressed ''the Socratic problem'' in Theses II, III and VII of his ''[[On the Concept of Irony with Continual Reference to Socrates]]'' (1841).<ref>RL Perkins - [https://books.google.com/books?id=wi8bNUBdjUkC&pg=PA210 The Concept of Irony (p.210)] Mercer University Press, 2001 {{ISBN|0865547424}} ''Volume 2 of International Kierkegaard commentary'' [Retrieved 2015-04-20] (mentions Thesis VII)</ref><ref>Søren Kierkegaard (translated by HH Hong & EH Hong) - [https://books.google.com/books?id=rNEjpTvgAYwC&q=S%C3%B8ren+Kierkegaard+-++The+concept+of+Irony+with+continual+reference+to+Socrates Kierkegaard's Writings, II: The Concept of Irony, with Continual Reference to Socrates/Notes of Schelling's Berlin Lectures (p.6)] Princeton University Press, 21 Apr 2013, {{ISBN|1400846927}} [Retrieved 2015-04-20] (shows details of Theses II, III & VII)</ref>

[[Karl Popper]], who considered himself to be a disciple of Socrates, wrote about ''the Socratic problem'' in his book ''[[The Open Society and Its Enemies]]'' (1945).<ref>Malachi Haim Hacohen – [https://books.google.com/books?id=3VtHcYGp2pIC&pg=PA424 Karl Popper – The Formative Years, 1902–1945: Politics and Philosophy in Interwar Vienna (p. 424)] Cambridge University Press, 4 Mar 2002 {{ISBN|0521890551}} [reference Retrieved 2015-04-20, material added at a prior date]</ref>