In a current weblog, Vincenzo Di Nicola, MPhil, MD, PhD, FCAHS, DLFAPA, DFCPA, FACPsych, invokes Socrates’ execution as a chance to suppose philosophically about euthanasia, suicide, and assisted suicide—that’s, medical help in dying (MAID).1 di Nicola additionally invokes Socrates’ decisions main as much as his execution as a chance to suppose philosophically about autonomy, morality, and the character of demise. In doing so, di Nicola hopes to indicate that Socrates’ alternative 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 sensible to invoke Socrates in a common introduction to philosophical ethics, since Socrates is the godfather of Western philosophy writ giant and Western ethics specifically. In fact, we all know Socrates primarily via 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 collection 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 via them.”
So, kudos to di Nicola for suggesting that individuals engaged within the debate in regards to the morality of MAID ought to research philosophy, beginning with Socrates.
Then again, di Nicola’s declare that the MAID debate can profit from finding out “the selection made by Socrates to finish his life via suicide” is problematic in its obvious effort to attract an analogy between Socrates’ demise and the demise that MAID sufferers search.
To start, Socrates didn’t commit suicide, search physician-assisted demise, 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 demise, 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, referred to as for demise. 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 provided her.5 Socrates knew that that will not be accepted, so he proposed subsequent that he pay a advantageous of 30 minae (3000 drachmas—a drachma being a day’s wages for a soldier), which his associates provided 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 tackle the penalty of demise till the jury voted to impose it.
Upon receiving the sentence of demise, Socrates refused to plead for leniency, claiming that (1) it’s silly to concern demise, since solely the gods know whether or not it’s dangerous or a blessing, and (2) he should see his divine function—selling the examined life—to the top and operating from this responsibility can be shameful.4 A couple of days later, when his good friend Crito provided to assist Socrates escape from jail, Socrates added that by escaping he can be unjustly violating the legal guidelines of Athens.7 Regardless that Socrates felt that the jury had acted unjustly (that it was morally incorrect for them to have him killed), he didn’t suppose it was morally good to repay injustice with injustice.
To this point, whereas one may be tempted to say that Socrates died nicely, it could be deceptive to name it a very good demise. 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 sure, neither Socrates nor Plato thought demise itself was essentially dangerous; certainly, it may be a blessing. However this was certainly not an argument for a untimely demise, 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 demise 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 towards philosophy twice.”12
Thus, it’s not useful to take a look at “Socrates’ alternative” for perception about the opportunity of morally good MAID.
For example this level additional, think about a psychiatrist who encounters two folks, each with demise 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 demise by an Athenian Jury, however that he’s not upset about it. In any case, demise could also be a blessing, and he feels responsibility sure to obey the legal guidelines and corresponding selections 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, aside from to interact in a little bit of dialectic whereas he awaits his finish. Maybe the physician questions the rationality of Socrates’ accepting the demise penalty when he may 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 indicate him methods to kill himself. What has the physician realized from the primary particular person’s alternative 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 demise 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 demise could have been good, however his demise was not.
Maybe there are different features of Socrates’ philosophy that may inform dialog about MAID, autonomy, morality, and the character of demise, however Socrates’ “alternative”—that’s, his trial and execution—are usually not such features.
Concluding Ideas
Philosophical ethics has a vital function in any debate in regards to 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’ demise and the demise 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’ alternative: a philosophical perspective on euthanasia, suicide, and assisted suicide. Psychiatric Instances. 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 demise 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. Challenge Gutenberg; 1999:24b-28a, 38c-42a.
5. What did Socrates imply by “there is no such thing as 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 demise? 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. Challenge Gutenberg; 1892:46b-50a.
8. Mark J. Plato’s better, 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. Challenge Gutenberg; 1892:61c-62c.
10. Werner D. Suicide within the Phaedo.De Gruyter;2018:157-188.
11. Aristotle. Nicomachean Ethics. Challenge Gutenberg; 1915:1115a8, 26.
12. Nussbaum M, Osborne C, Aristotle. The Oxford Companion to Classical Civilization. Oxford College Press; 2014.