The Wisdom of Knowing What You Don’t Know

Socrates’ timeless teachings on courage, critical thinking, and self-understanding

*This is Part III of a series on How To Think Like Socrates by Donald Robertson*

Read Part I here:

https://modernbookclub.substack.com/p/living-wisely-lessons-from-socrates?r=1z39b7

Read Part II here:

https://modernbookclub.substack.com/p/aspasia-socrates-and-the-love-of?r=1z39b7

For Socrates, the pursuit of wisdom was his life’s purpose. It consumed him every day. After being labeled the wisest man in the world, Socrates set out to prove otherwise. He couldn’t believe that he was truly the wisest human. His method of investigation was simple yet revolutionary: he questioned every so-called “wise” man in Athens. Predictably, this relentless questioning did not make Socrates popular, but it fulfilled its purpose.

“So long as you know that you do not know something, you’re not confused. It’s only when we think we know something that, in fact, we do not know, that we become confused.”

Virtues, Courage, and Cognitive Realizations

In one of these debates, Socrates explores whether virtues—justice, courage, discipline, and wisdom—can be taught. Initially, he argues they cannot. However, through dialogue, both Socrates and his debate partner end up reversing their positions. Socrates comes to argue that courage, for example, can indeed be taught, but only when examined through the lens of a cost-benefit analysis.

If a person values the rewards of confronting a fear more than they fear the consequences of facing it, they can become courageous. For example, a soldier may overcome their fear of battle because they value protecting their family or country more than their own safety. This realization was groundbreaking for Socrates—and for the world. He understood that the root causes and solutions for emotional struggles are cognitive; they exist within our minds.

This insight laid the groundwork for what we now call Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT).

“Socrates explains that as our true nature lies in the mind and not the body, to know oneself surely means to know the mind.”

Socrates and the Origins of Cognitive Techniques

A core principle of CBT is learning to view yourself in the third person. This idea is closely tied to a concept known as Solomon’s Paradox, which suggests that we can see others’ problems more clearly than our own. Wisdom, it seems, is easier to offer to others than to apply to ourselves.

Socrates intuitively practiced this method, often engaging in deep conversations with himself after one of his questioning sessions. This technique, known as “illeism,” involves referring to yourself in the third person. For example, instead of saying, “I am really upset,” you might say, “Bryan is really upset.” This simple shift in language can help create distance from your emotions and allow you to view problems more objectively.

Cognitive Distancing: Viewing Thoughts as Opinions

Socrates also developed the ability to see his thoughts and beliefs as opinions rather than absolute facts—something modern psychology refers to as cognitive distancing. Most of us don’t take the time to examine our thoughts. Instead, we simply accept them as truths and interpret the world through their lens.

For instance, if you’re feeling depressed, you might see everything around you as bleak and hopeless. Your emotions and thoughts can prevent you from perceiving the world objectively. Socrates teaches us that before we can question our thoughts, we must first recognize them as opinions, not facts. Without this perspective, we become vulnerable to manipulation and persuasion, particularly by those skilled in rhetoric.

Socrates vs. the Sophists

This vulnerability is exemplified in Socrates’ encounters with the Sophists—the so-called “wise men” of ancient Greece who specialized in persuasive speech. Sophists were known for their ability to sway crowds, not by offering wisdom, but by mastering the art of rhetoric.

Socrates criticized the Sophists for teaching how to appear convincing rather than imparting genuine knowledge. He argued that relying solely on rhetoric enables ignorance to masquerade as wisdom. The Sophists were not interested in truth or understanding; their focus was on winning arguments and persuading others to accept their opinions.

This lack of substance had dangerous consequences. In Athens, leaders who prioritized the appearance of intelligence over true understanding often made poor decisions. They routinely placed the military and citizens in perilous situations because their actions were based on the illusion of knowledge rather than its reality.