In a latest weblog, Vincenzo Di Nicola, MPhil, MD, PhD, FCAHS, DLFAPA, DFCPA, FACPsych, invokes Socrates’ execution as a chance to assume philosophically about euthanasia, suicide, and assisted suicide—that’s, medical help in dying (MAID).1 di Nicola additionally invokes Socrates’ selections main as much as his execution as a chance to assume philosophically about autonomy, morality, and the character of loss of life. In doing so, di Nicola hopes to point out that Socrates’ selection applies to “philosophy as a life apply” and to “the apply of psychiatric drugs.”
That the talk over the ethics of MAID can profit from an understanding of philosophical ethics is true at its face, given the philosophical foundations of the research of ethics. It additionally is smart to invoke Socrates in a common introduction to philosophical ethics, since Socrates is the godfather of Western philosophy writ giant and Western ethics particularly. In fact, we all know Socrates primarily by way of the work of his disciple Plato, about whom Alfred North Whitehead famously stated2:
“The most secure common characterization of the European philosophical custom is that it consists of a sequence of footnotes to Plato. I don’t imply the systematic scheme of thought which students have doubtfully extracted from his writings. I allude to the wealth of common concepts scattered by way of them.”
So, kudos to di Nicola for suggesting that folks engaged within the debate concerning the morality of MAID ought to research philosophy, beginning with Socrates.
Then again, di Nicola’s declare that the MAID debate can profit from learning “the selection made by Socrates to finish his life by way of suicide” is problematic in its obvious effort to attract an analogy between Socrates’ loss of life and the loss of life that MAID sufferers search.
To start, Socrates didn’t commit suicide, search physician-assisted loss of life, or search euthanasia. Socrates was executed. Had he not drunk the hemlock, he in all probability would have been thrown right into a pit, nailed to a board, bludgeoned to loss of life, or decapitated.3
At Socrates’ trial, during which he was convicted of impiety and corrupting the youth of Athens, he was given the possibility to suggest his punishment.4 His accuser, Meletus, known as for loss of life. Socrates disagreed, claiming that he ought to be given what he was due. He claimed first that he ought to obtain “upkeep within the Prytaneum,” that’s, free meals and lodging from Athens, for the providers he supplied her.5 Socrates knew that that might not be accepted, so he proposed subsequent that he pay a tremendous of 30 minae (3000 drachmas—a drachma being a day’s wages for a soldier), which his associates supplied to cowl.6 He wouldn’t suggest jail or exile, as a result of he can be unable to apply philosophy within the market, which he noticed as his sacred responsibility. He didn’t deal with the penalty of loss of life till the jury voted to impose it.
Upon receiving the sentence of loss of life, Socrates refused to plead for leniency, claiming that (1) it’s silly to worry loss of life, since solely the gods know whether or not it’s unhealthy or a blessing, and (2) he should see his divine goal—selling the examined life—to the top and operating from this responsibility can be shameful.4 A couple of days later, when his buddy Crito supplied to assist Socrates escape from jail, Socrates added that by escaping he can be unjustly violating the legal guidelines of Athens.7 Though Socrates felt that the jury had acted unjustly (that it was morally incorrect for them to have him killed), he didn’t assume it was morally good to repay injustice with injustice.
To date, whereas one is likely to be tempted to say that Socrates died effectively, it could be deceptive to name it an excellent loss of life. Plato thought it was an outrage, and he dedicated to preaching the Gospel of Socrates for the remainder of his life, thus perpetuating the “crime” for which Socrates was executed.8
To make certain, neither Socrates nor Plato thought loss of life itself was essentially unhealthy; certainly, it is likely to be a blessing. However this was certainly not an argument for a untimely loss of life, suicide, or killing a legally harmless particular person. In Phaedo, Socrates explicitly condemns taking one’s personal life.9
Aristotle, Socrates’ philosophical grandson and promoter of his advantage principle, thought loss of life was “a fearful factor,” and thus “an evil factor.”10,11 Upon studying that Demophilus and Eurymedon the Hierophant had accused Aristotle of impiety, Aristotle fled Athens into exile “lest Athens sin in opposition to philosophy twice.”12
Thus, it’s not useful to have a look at “Socrates’ selection” for perception about the potential of morally good MAID.
For example this level additional, think about a psychiatrist who encounters two folks, each with loss of life on their minds. The primary, a 70-year-old mason turned philosophical market gadfly, and in apparently good psychological and bodily well being, reviews that he has been unjustly sentenced to loss of life by an Athenian Jury, however that he’s not upset about it. In spite of everything, loss of life could also be a blessing, and he feels responsibility certain to obey the legal guidelines and corresponding choices of his beloved city-state. He has no want to die, and God forbid he ought to take his personal life, however he’s at peace with the circumstances. He asks nothing of the physician, apart from to interact in a little bit of dialectic whereas he awaits his finish. Maybe the physician questions the rationality of Socrates’ accepting the loss of life penalty when he might have argued for a lesser penalty or escaped, however there seems to be no name for the physician’s skilled intercession.
The second particular person, experiencing insufferable struggling or terminal sickness, however of sound thoughts, asks the physician to kill him or to point out him tips on how to kill himself. What has the physician realized from the primary particular person’s selection that allows the physician to find out the morally proper response to the second?
Socrates was not experiencing insufferable struggling or a terminal sickness, whereas would-be MAID sufferers current with both or each of these complaints. Socrates didn’t search to die or be killed, whereas would-be MAID sufferers search both to die at their very own hand or to have a physician kill them. Socrates believed that his killing was unjust, whereas would-be MAID sufferers and advocates argue that the request for loss of life and the physician’s compliance are simply—certainly, some argue that to disclaim the affected person’s request is unjust. Socrates’ brave acceptance of his loss of life might have been good, however his loss of life was not.
Maybe there are different facets of Socrates’ philosophy that may inform dialog about MAID, autonomy, morality, and the character of loss of life, however Socrates’ “selection”—that’s, his trial and execution—aren’t such facets.
Concluding Ideas
Philosophical ethics has a vital function in any debate concerning the morality of MAID. And Socrates, because the godfather of Western philosophy and ethics, ought to be included in any complete research of philosophy and its sensible purposes.
Nonetheless, given the variations between Socrates’ loss of life and the loss of life of MAID, the try to attract an informative analogy between the 2 fails.
Rev Dr Dreisbachis affiliate director of Organizational Management in Johns Hopkins College’s Kreiger Faculty of Arts & Sciences, professor of Ethical & Systematic Theology (part-time) at St. Mary’s Ecumenical Institute, and an Episcopal priest. He has been a philosophy professor since 1980, with an emphasis on public philosophy and utilized ethics. He has served on the Ethics Committee of Sheppard Pratt Psychiatric Hospital since 2009, and he was lately appointed by Maryland Governor’s Workplace to function a bioethicist on the Maryland Stem Cell Fee.
References
1. Di Nicola V.Socrates’ selection: a philosophical perspective on euthanasia, suicide, and assisted suicide. Psychiatric Occasions. April 28, 2025. https://www.psychiatrictimes.com/view/socrates-choice-a-philosophical-perspective-on-euthanasia-suicide-and-assisted-suicide
2. Whitehead AN. Course of and Actuality: An Essay in Cosmology. Free Press; 1978.
3. Brouwers J. The loss of life penalty in Athens. Historical World Journal. April 6, 2018. Accessed Could 1, 2025. https://www.ancientworldmagazine.com/articles/death-penalty-classical-athens/
4. Plato. The Apology. Undertaking Gutenberg; 1999:24b-28a, 38c-42a.
5. What did Socrates imply by “there isn’t a extra becoming reward than upkeep within the prytaneum?” Philosophy Stack Change. October 5, 2015. Accessed July 23, 2025. https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/28527/what-did-socrates-mean-by-there-is-no-more-fitting-reward-than-maintenance-in
6. Andreyev S. What was the price of Socrates loss of life? Syllogism. March 21, 2018. Accessed July 23, 2025. https://sergeyand.wordpress.com/2018/03/21/what-was-the-cost-of-socrates-death/
7. Plato. Crito. Undertaking Gutenberg; 1892:46b-50a.
8. Mark J. Plato’s larger, higher world within the final days of Socrates. April 11, 2023. Accessed July 23, 2025. https://www.worldhistory.org/article/825/platos-greater-better-world-in-the-last-days-of-socrates
9. Plato. Phaedo. Undertaking Gutenberg; 1892:61c-62c.
10. Werner D. Suicide within the Phaedo.De Gruyter;2018:157-188.
11. Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Undertaking Gutenberg; 1915:1115a8, 26.
12. Nussbaum M, Osborne C, Aristotle. The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilization. Oxford College Press; 2014.
