\u00abSobre la Apolog\u00eda de S\u00f3crates y el Crit\u00f3n de Plat\u00f3n\u00bb \/ I<\/span><\/p>\n Le\u014dnardus Str\u016bthi\u014d (1899-1973)<\/span><\/p>\n \u0112RVD\u012aTI\u014cRIBVS <\/span>***<\/span><\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n Podr\u00eda parecer extra\u00f1o que S\u00f3crates nunca haya intervenido en la actividad pol\u00edtica. En la primera digresi\u00f3n (23b8-9<\/a>) hab\u00eda dado una explicaci\u00f3n, para entonces perfectamente suficiente, de esta abstenci\u00f3n: el ajetreo que le impon\u00eda el servicio al dios, consistente en examinar a cada uno de los que cre\u00eda sabios. Pero esta explicaci\u00f3n ya no tiene validez luego de que se ha revelado como alguien que exhorta o refuta a todo ateniense, y no s\u00f3lo a los que cree sabios; luego de que su servicio al dios ha demostrado ser id\u00e9ntico a su servicio a los atenienses (31b3<\/a>), o luego del giro de una concepci\u00f3n puramente negativa de la sabidur\u00eda humana a una concepci\u00f3n m\u00e1s positiva, indicada por el t\u00e9rmino \u00abfilosofar\u00bb. Ahora, atribuye su abstenci\u00f3n de la pol\u00edtica a su daimonion<\/em> (\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd) \u2014algo divino y daim\u00f3nico que llega a \u00e9l.1<\/a><\/sup>El profesor aclarar\u00e1 este t\u00e9rmino con m\u00e1s detalle en el siguiente fragmento. Vea ah\u00ed el v\u00ednculo al diccionario LSJ, donde incluye la versi\u00f3n castellana del DGE de la entrada.<\/span> Esto no es nada nuevo para la audiencia; S\u00f3crates le ha hablado de ello muchas veces y en muchos lugares, y ha brindado a Meleto<\/a> la oportunidad de caricaturizarlo como un creyente en nuevos daimonia<\/em>. Desde la infancia, esta voz le llega o se le presenta, y cuando aparece, siempre le impide hacer lo que est\u00e1 a punto de hacer y nunca lo insta a seguir adelante. Es ese daimonion<\/em> el que se opone a su actividad pol\u00edtica. Tal oposici\u00f3n le parece del todo justa, porque si mucho tiempo atr\u00e1s hubiera intentado ser pol\u00edticamente activo, habr\u00eda perecido hace tiempo y no habr\u00eda sido de utilidad alguna para sus conciudadanos ni para s\u00ed mismo: si un hombre que lucha por la justicia desea conservar la vida siquiera por un breve lapso, debe llevar una vida privada, y no p\u00fablica. El daimonion<\/em>, pues, permiti\u00f3 a S\u00f3crates cumplir con la misi\u00f3n que le impuso el or\u00e1culo de Delfos<\/a>. Sin embargo, es radicalmente diferente de ese or\u00e1culo. Por no mencionar el hecho de que la audiencia estaba familiarizada con el daimonion<\/em>, en tanto que nada sab\u00eda de la orden d\u00e9lfica impartida a S\u00f3crates, el daimonion<\/em> actuaba desde la infancia, mientras que la orden de Apolo<\/a> le lleg\u00f3 cuando ya se lo conoc\u00eda como sabio; el daimonion<\/em> nunca lo apremi\u00f3, mientras que Apolo siempre lo hizo, y as\u00ed como su obediencia a las \u00f3rdenes del dios lo hizo odiado y, de esa manera, lo puso en peligro de muerte, el daimonion<\/em>, al apartarlo de la vida pol\u00edtica, lo salv\u00f3 del peligro mortal o preserv\u00f3 su vida; actu\u00f3, por decirlo as\u00ed, seg\u00fan la premisa de que la vida es buena y la muerte es mala, en tanto que la orden d\u00e9lfica act\u00faa a partir de la premisa opuesta (cf. Socrates and Aristophanes<\/em>, pp. 82, 114 y 123).2<\/a><\/sup>Refiere a este t\u00edtulo de su propia autor\u00eda (New York: Basic Books, 1966), reeditado en Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.<\/span> La digresi\u00f3n que empieza con la proclamaci\u00f3n de un absoluto desprecio de la preocupaci\u00f3n por la autoconservaci\u00f3n culmina en una justificaci\u00f3n de esa misma autopreservaci\u00f3n: de In autopreservaci\u00f3n que est\u00e1 al servicio del bien m\u00e1s elevado. En vista del prop\u00f3sito primario del discurso de S\u00f3crates, no resulta superfluo se\u00f1alar que de lo que dice del daimonion<\/em> no puede derivarse argumentaci\u00f3n alguna para refutar la acusaci\u00f3n de impiedad.<\/span><\/p>\n Perge ad sequ\u0113ns caput<\/a><\/p>\n Redde ad prius caput<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad initium paginae huius<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad indicem<\/a><\/p>\n It could seem strange that he never engaged in political activity. In the first digression (23b8-9<\/a>) he had given a then perfectly sufficient explanation for this abstention by the busy-ness imposed on him by the service to the god which consists in examining everyone whom he believes to be wise. But this explanation will no longer do after he has revealed himself as exhorting or refuting every Athenian and not only those whom he believes to be wise, or after his service to the god had proved to be identical with his service to the Athenians (31b3<\/a>) or after the shift from the purely negative understanding of human wisdom to a more positive understanding indicated by the term \u201cphilosophizing.\u201d He traces now his abstention from politics to his daimonion<\/em> (\u03b4\u03b1\u03b9\u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd)\u2014something divine and daimonic which comes to him. This is nothing new to the audience; he has spoken to them about it many times and in many places, and it has given occasion to Meletos<\/a> to caricature him as believing in new daimonia<\/em>. From his childhood this voice comes or arises to him, which when it arises always turns him away from doing what he is about to do and never urges him forward. It is this daimonion<\/em> that opposes his political activity. This opposition seems to him to be altogether fair, for if he had attempted a long time ago to be politically active, he would have perished a long time ago and would not have been of any benefit to his fellow citizens or to himself: if a man fighting for the right wishes to preserve his life even for a short time, he must lead a private not a public life. The daimonion<\/em> then enabled Socrates to perform the mission imposed on him by the Delphic oracle. It is, however, radically different from the Delphic oracle<\/a>. Not to mention the fact that the daimonion<\/em> was familiar to the audience while they knew nothing of the Delphic command<\/a> addressed to Socrates, the daimonion was effective from his childhood while Apollo\u2019s command reached him when he was already known as wise; the daimonion<\/em> never urged him forward while Apollo always did; and while his obedience to Apollo\u2019s commands made him hated and thus brought him into mortal danger, the daimonion<\/em> by keeping him back from political activity saved him from mortal danger or preserved his life; it acted as it were on the premise that life is good and death is bad while the Delphic command proceeds from the opposite premise (cf. Socrates and Aristophanes<\/em>, pp. 82, 114, 125).3<\/a><\/sup>Titulus libr\u012b su\u012b. Originally published in New York: Basic Books, 1966. Reissued in Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.<\/span> The digression which begins with voicing utter contempt for concern with self-preservation culminates in a vindication of self-preservation\u2014of self-preservation that is in the service of the highest good. With a view to the primary purpose of Socrates\u2019 speech it is not superfluous to note that from what he says about the daimonion<\/em> no argument can be derived for refuting the impiety charge.<\/span><\/p>\n Perge ad sequ\u0113ns caput<\/a><\/p>\n Redde ad prius caput<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad initium paginae huius<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad indicem<\/a><\/p>\n El texto en lengua inglesa fue publicado de manera p\u00f3stuma en un volumen en honor al prof. Jacob Klein: Essais in Honor of Jacob Klein<\/em> (Annapol\u012b, \u0113 Typographe\u014d Acad\u0113m\u012bae S\u0101nct\u012b I\u014dhannis MCMLXXVI). Aunque nosotros tomamos como base lo aparecido en una antolog\u00eda dedicada a escritos del prof. Str\u016bthi\u014d en ingl\u00e9s en 1983: Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy<\/em> (Sicag\u012b, \u0113 Typographe\u014d \u016aniversit\u0101tis Sicag\u012b MCMLXXXIII). La versi\u00f3n castellana es obra de Aemilia Aquad\u012bs, aparecida en la traducci\u00f3n del volumen mencionado anteriormente (Bon\u0101eropol\u012b, \u0113 Typographe\u014d Am\u014drrort\u012b MMVIII). La publicaci\u00f3n de estos fragmentos promueve la difusi\u00f3n en castellano de la obra del profesor Le\u014dnardus Str\u016bthi\u014d con fines acad\u00e9micos y de formaci\u00f3n. Conminamos a visitar su biblioteca m\u00e1s cercana o adquirir el volumen f\u00edsico en su librer\u00eda de confianza.<\/span><\/p>\n Perge ad sequ\u0113ns caput<\/a><\/p>\n Redde ad prius caput<\/a><\/p>\n Perge ad initium paginae huius<\/a><\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/atriumphilosophicum.es\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/Leo_Strauss_USA_1939-239x300.jpg\")
<\/p>\nVersi\u014d hisp\u0101nica Aemili\u0101 Aquad\u012bt\u012b auctr\u012bce 10<\/span><\/h1>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/atriumphilosophicum.es\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Socrate_daimon-221x300.jpg\")
Le\u014dnard\u012b Str\u016bthi\u014dnis verba 10<\/span><\/h1>\n
I\u016bra<\/span><\/h1>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/atriumphilosophicum.es\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/creative-commons-symbols-300x111.jpg\")
<\/p>\n