The Lost Socratic Dialogue - Apótomos

It’s always a time for celebration when we discover a new Socratic dialogue. This is the fourth such dialogue recovered and translated in the last four years. Early analysis suggests it may have been composed by the same author as the other three (Aikaterina, Ilioloustos, μέλισσα) as it lacks many of the qualities of Plato’s works, or those of the known Greek authors. Socrates is portrayed differently, and his methods in conversing with his partners has changed just a little bit. Like the other three recently found dialogues, Apótomos is marked by a realism that seems to reflect a more modern attitude toward discussion and dialectic than the attitude seen in Socrates’s own time. Scholars are split over this attribution, however, due to one thing that sets this dialogue apart from the other recent discoveries. 

Unlike the first three, this dialogue sees Socrates engaged in philosophical discussion with a man, the typical setup of a Socratic dialogue. The three dialogues found between 2020 and 2023 center on Socrates discussing matters of import with women. As reported before, some scholars have suggested that these stark contrasts to the normal dialogues, and the apparent dullness of intellect, reactionary combativeness, and eagerness to shut down the conversation in each woman’s portrayal means the author was a deeply sexist person. It is of course fashionable and safe to make these assertions with no evidence, but if the present dialogue is written by the same author, and there is good reason to think so, those worries of sexism may be misplaced. What we have in Apótomos is perhaps the gold standard of low character: simple-minded fanaticism, dogmatic certainty, authoritarian impulses, lack of self awareness, a habit of inconsistency and contradiction, and an erratic temper usually only seen in children. This is all encapsulated in a single man, the titular antagonist or protagonist, depending how the audience chooses to read him. 

There are two dialogues in the preserved text, both taking place between Socrates and Apótomos. Some context is important. In the first dialogue, Apótomos begins by demonizing an institution called Hail Hades. Chronicles from the era, and clues from the present dialogue, seem to point to Hail Hades being a music performance organization. Hail Hades would fund various performers from around the continent to perform original music for audiences at the Hail Hades auditorium in Athens. Apótomos and Socrates frequented these performances, and the former’s anger toward the organization for allowing certain kinds of music to be performed forms the basis of the dialogue.

THE LOST SOCRATIC DIALOGUE — APÓTOMOS

(APÓTOMOS is speaking to a group of his friends in the town square, all of whom are looking at an announcement of upcoming performances by musical groups invited by the Hail Hades organization. Socrates is in the vicinity, curious to see who will be performing in the coming months.)

APÓTOMOS: Hail Hades really should show some courage and stop allowing performances by bands spouting Spartan philosophies. I have had it with this organization. They bring some great performers but I will stop supporting them if they don’t stop letting neo-Spartans perform. It’s cowardly to continue bringing in these performers. Everyone sees it my way that this is terrible, it is beyond the pale.

SOCRATES: The funny thing about that sentiment, Apótomos, is that it is the other way around. The way you have it is backwards.

APÓTOMOS: Oh, here comes the contrarian Socrates to disagree with everything I say. What do you mean, stupid old man?

SOCRATES: I mean that succumbing to the majority sentiment of the people of Athens and barring all Spartan bands from performing is not indicative of courage. That is the opposite of courage. Showing courage would, in this case, be to do what Hail Hades are already doing. It would be to allow performers who are unpopular by majority thinking or tastes to continue performing, since there are some who enjoy those performances. Giving in to popular sentiment is never the courageous thing, it is the easy thing.

DUPPLE, a mutual acquaintance of Apótomos and Socrates speaks up: Hello Socrates. I’m not surprised you show up as soon as he mentions Spartans, since everyone knows of your love for Spartans. You defend them everywhere you go. Look at how angry you’re getting. Zeus almighty, you can’t even keep it together, you are getting so angry.

SOCRATES: I think you are confused, Dupple. I am not angry about anything today. And I have plenty of times criticized the Spartans, for example in their lack of intellectual and philosophical contributions to the world. I have enjoyed music made by those who happen, as an unrelated matter, to celebrate Spartan ideals but this does not reflect my views of Sparta. Might you tell me what you’re talking about?

DUPPLE: Some years ago I attended a lecture you gave at the gymnasium about some sort of garbage, I don’t remember the topic. I listened along at first and thought it was alright, but then out of nowhere you started talking about how great Spartans are and how everyone should be a Spartan and Spartans should come take Athens.

SOCRATES: I see your confusion, my friend, and I will show you where you made the error. The lecture you are referring to was one in which I extolled the virtues of a man decoupling his thoughts and his analysis from his emotions. The lecture had nothing to do with Spartans, I simply used the opinions about Spartans as an example to illustrate the points I was making.

DUPPLE: Yes! That is the one. I remember it now. It was not so bad at first. But then you began singing all the praises of the Spartans and I could not listen any further.

SOCRATES: I can tell you didn’t listen, because you have it wrong. What I did was use the average Athenian’s opinion toward Spartan music as an example of a person’s inability to decouple their emotions from their examination of the world. Most Spartan music sounds just like other music that is popular with Athenians, but it is the words or the sentiments sometimes espoused in the music that Athenians find so disagreeable. And so I showed that the Athenian who cannot detach himself from his feelings will be blind to the fact that the Spartan music he claims to hate sounds exactly like the music he claims to love. As I said in the lecture, we see this too with the Athenians who are overly fond of Zeus, and who do not realize that the music which speaks ill of Zeus, and which they claim to hate, sounds just like the music they claim to like. All three forms of music are the same music, but it is the shape the words take, things separate from the music itself, which convince people they cannot stomach the music they in fact love. These examples show how foolish and inconsistent people become when they let their emotions guide them through their affairs.

DUPPLE: I see. Perhaps I proved your point, then…

SOCRATES. You did, and I thank you for doing so, if accidentally. You have similarly misunderstood the nature of this conversation. But back to the topic at hand…

APÓTOMOS: Socrates, you are wrong. It takes courage to only allow music performances by musicians whose message and words one can stand behind. 

SOCRATES: So you believe that courage entails limiting one’s exposure only to art and ideas with which they find absolute agreement? 

APÓTOMOS: I didn’t say that. No, I don’t believe that at all.

SOCRATES: You are arguing for that, though.

APÓTOMOS: No, I am saying that is what Hail Hades should do.

SOCRATES: Yes, which you said would be the courageous thing to do. 

APÓTOMOS pauses for a moment, blinks twice, then continues: They should get rid of Spartan performers and only allow performers whose lyrics and image favor the moral righteousness that all Athenians should believe in.

SOCRATES: If so, Hail Hades should stop bringing in performers whose songs speak of violence or death or disaster or horror or lust or gruesome things. You know, most of the music that is performed has lyrics that are of a dark nature, morbid or morally questionable. Equally as sinister as Spartan music. So do you believe in these things? Are you saying that you favor death and plagues and war and disaster and suffering? That is what many songs are about, and I do not see you complaining about them. I see you enjoying them and talking about them happily to everyone around town. It seems it is every day you are going on about some new song whose lyrics are in a similar style to the Spartan lyrics you say should be barred from the auditorium.

APÓTOMOS: Don’t be stupid Socrates. Of course I don’t favor those things. No good Athenian does. 

SOCRATES: So since you do not believe in the things sung in those songs, and no good Athenian should want these things, your logic suggests that Hail Hades should stop inviting these performers to the auditorium, since their lyrics are so morally bleak.

APÓTOMOS: You can’t take lyrics literally. They are entertainment. Art is subjective and provocative and challenging and should disturb people and make them uncomfortable and shake them from their mundane reality.

SOCRATES: This is not consistent with the argument you just made. You seem to have forgotten your own position. If what you have just said is true, then there is no reason the same should not apply to Spartan music by the same rationale. Their lyrics are art, entertainment, not to be taken seriously.

APÓTOMOS: You idiot, Socrates, stop twisting my words. What are you on about? You aren’t following very well.

SOCRATES: It seems I am the only one following the course of our conversation well enough to avoid contradicting myself.

APÓTOMOS: Ugh. Stop it. Spartan music is diabolical and is very different from what I have just described. It advocates a militaristic and warlike philosophy, a destructive and hateful set of ideas that have caused suffering and evil and horrors across the world. This is why it shouldn’t be allowed. It is that simple.

SOCRATES: I see you have returned to the argument which you abruptly abandoned and argued against earlier. Interesting. You have gone from saying lyrical content is to be censored and abhorred if it is not in line with good Athenian morality, to saying that lyrics are only entertainment and should not be taken seriously, and have now returned to the former. You are all over the place today.

APÓTOMOS: Spartans are real, though. Spartan warriors have really killed people in battle, and wars have been fought by their ruthless militaristic leaders. So real danger lurks below their lyrics.

SOCRATES: And do you believe that Spartan musicians are the same as Spartan warriors? They have also killed people?

APÒTOMOS: No, don’t be stupid. I know they are different. But the music embodies the same ethos that the warriors have.

SOCRATES: Ah, so a new argument appears. Hail Hades then ought to no longer invite performers whose music speaks of any immoral action at all, am I right? Because it seems now you believe that lyrics possess a certain power to influence people to do things. Do you believe that love songs have made Athenians a more loving people?

APÒTOMOS: No, that is absurd. Don’t insult my intelligence, Socrates. When I was very young my tutors always admired my wit and said I was one of the brightest boys they had ever seen. I was in special classes for the brightest boys.

SOCRATES: Very good. And do you believe that the songs about war or plague or death or lust that we mentioned a short while ago have caused more people to die or kill or rape or spread disease than otherwise would be so in the absence of this music? 

APÒTOMOS: No, that is absurd. As I said, lyrics are entertainment, they are art. They do not have the power to make people do things or to change the nature of humans.

SOCRATES: That’s an interesting concession to make, considering what you have been arguing about Spartan music.

APÓTOMOS: I don’t follow. I don’t know what you’re talking about. The point remains — Hail Hades should discontinue the performances of all Spartan musicians or any musician whose lyrics or imagery has any remotely Spartan influence. It must be wiped from existence. It is disgusting and has no place in Athenian society.

SOCRATES: You still have not demonstrated that this is a sound position. You have only contradicted yourself on countless occasions, such that no one could reliably state what you believe without making enormous leaps of logic and reasoning.

APÓTOMOS: I have been entirely consistent this whole time. 

SOCRATES: You have not. And you have not demonstrated that it would be morally wrong, even from an Athenian point of view, to allow Spartan music to be performed. The strongest assertion one could make from your arguments so far is that if one is so bothered by Spartan music, they do not have to attend the performances. No one has forced them to attend. 

APÓTOMOS: And no one is forcing Hail Hades to allow them to perform. 

SOCRATES: That is beside the point. They can allow them to perform if people want to see Spartan music. Ah! Maybe that is the point you have been trying to get at. Forgive me if I’ve been obtuse. Are you saying that if someone wants to listen to a certain kind of music, for example if someone wants to listen to the sweet Athenian music about sex and murder, then you believe that the eager listener is actually a person who wants to perform those deeds? That is, the only people who could like that music are sexual deviants and murderers themselves? Is that what you are saying?

APÓTOMOS: That is not what I’m saying at all.

SOCRATES: Are you saying that you believe the musicians performing that music should not be allowed to make a living performing music that contains dark and unfavorable lyrics?

APÓTOMOS: No, I have said nothing like that. 

SOCRATES: I see. Are you saying that it should fall upon all listeners of the music to make sure they know every religious or political belief of the musicians they are watching and supporting with their money before they support an artist who, in some form or fashion, they might not agree with?

APÓTOMOS: Clearly I am not saying that. Stop playing these games, Socrates. All that matters is that Spartan musicians should not be allowed to perform here in Athens. Those lowly barbarians across Europe can listen to those artists all they wish, but Hail Hades should show the moral courage to bar them from performing.

SOCRATES: And who are some of the Spartan musicians you have in mind?

Here a large portion of the text is missing. We do not see the names of the musicians Apótomos lists, but the text picks up immediately afterward.

SOCRATES: I am familiar with a few of those musicians. Most of them are not Spartan. Half of them do not even have lyrics about Sparta. 

APÓTOMOS: That’s rubbish. Many of them have performed wearing Spartan armor or have said Spartan things on stage, between songs. 

SOCRATES: Most of them have done that out of provocation. You admitted earlier that art is sometimes about provocation, and you have sung the praises of many provocative artists whose lyrics and philosophies challenge the status quo, have you not?

APÓTOMOS: You are making excuses, Socrates. You act as though Spartan music exists on an island away from everything else and so it doesn’t matter. There is no comparison between provocative musicians stirring up the pot to challenge Athenian norms and musicians using Spartan beliefs to appear provocative or challenging. They are not the same thing.

SOCRATES: What is different about them?

APÓTOMOS: One is obeying the role of art and the other is making disgusting references to Spartan values and beliefs. Some of those “non-Spartan” musicians have used Spartan words on stage. How do you explain that? How could a non-Spartan use a Spartan word? I heard tell of a performance in which one such musician insulted another band for not being Spartan. 

SOCRATES: Your net has grown. Although you earlier said that all performance is art and entertainment and not to be taken seriously, you are now reaching beyond the music itself, beyond the performances themselves, and suggesting that any hint of reference to the Spartans is a heresy that cannot be tolerated in Athens.

APÓTOMOS: In the name of tolerance for good things I find it necessary to be intolerant of bad things. You seem guided by no principles whatsoever, Socrates. You prefer chaos and immoral music.

SOCRATES: To the contrary, Apótomos. Here I am abiding by the principle of free expression and allowing musicians to perform music, no matter whether you or I like it, no matter what we think of the lyrics or the people who perform it. This is a principle I commit to elsewhere as well. The thing about principles is that they must be held consistently, whether it is easy or difficult, whether it is convenient or not, whether it is beneficial to ourselves or not. This is because we believe the principle is more important than our immediate feelings or comfort or opinions. It is you who have not been able to, for even a moment, maintain a principled thread throughout your arguments. Instead it appears that you invent a new argument or opinion every time you open your mouth, and it comes out contradicting the one you spoke a moment earlier.

APÓTOMOS: You are senseless and convoluted. You don’t understand my basic point, which surely all Athenians understand.

SOCRATES: One would be flying toward incoherence if they took your point seriously, since they would have to believe ten contradictory ideas at once. You and I are in fact in agreement about almost everything that we have discussed, except for the ultimate point you have been trying to make.

APÓTOMOS: No we are not. What are you going on about now?

SOCRATES: Here is what we have so far established. First, we agree that music and lyrics are art, they are entertainment, and are not serious intentions that the performer wishes to impart to the world. Second, we agree that lyrics and the words in songs do not have the power to make people do things or to change society for the better or for the worse. Third, neither of us believes that a musician should not be able to make a living just because their lyrics are offensive, and neither of us believes that the audience of the musicians should have to agree with what that musician does in their private lives in order to be morally justified in paying money to enjoy that musician’s work. Fourth, we agree that Hail Hades does not have any obligation to bar other musicians from performing even if their lyrics are as socially or morally dark as the Spartan songs. Fifth, we agree that no one is forced to watch Spartan musical performances if they do not want to, just as they are not forced to watch any others. Do not bother trying to contradict me here, as you have answered each of my questions in such a way that shows you agree with the conclusions as I have presented them. You will only be doing yourself more injury to disagree now.

SOCRATES: Given that each of these premises are true, or at least that we agree with them, it does not follow that Hail Hades would be justified in barring Spartan musicians from performing in their auditorium. All of these premises point to Hail Hades being entirely justified in continuing to allow Spartan music to be performed for those who want to hear it. These premises suggest that there is nothing wrong with those who want to hear it, anymore than there is something wrong with you for wanting to hear any other music. So unless you have a magical trump card, a sixth premise on which we will suddenly disagree and which will negate all the prior five premises, and which you have not mentioned throughout this entire conversation, then I do not think you have a good reason to believe what you do. You have come to a conclusion that directly contradicts every premise that you accept as true. Your motivation therefore is likely social and political, driven more by reactionary fear than by sound reason or guiding principles. You have decided what to believe without having a sound reason to believe it. You are now scrambling to put together what looks like a logical or coherent opinion but are twisting yourself into loops and contradicting yourself at each turn. I have known you for a long time and this is how you tend to form opinions, so it is not surprising. It is just fortunate that we were able to work through all of it here for so many people to see.

APÓTOMOS: Shut up, Socrates. I’ve had enough of this. Get away from me. You are awful.

The first dialogue ends here. What might modern audiences think? Like the other dialogues by this author it might seem a more plausible conversation, one which reflects how people unaccustomed to thinking really respond to challenges to their beliefs or disagreement with their opinions. In a traditional Socratic dialogue we often see competence and intelligence in Socrates’s opponents. Despite them sometimes having negative qualities, like arrogance or egotism or dogmatism, we usually see these paired with redeeming qualities like the ability to examine their own reasoning, metacognition, or the ability to respond to challenges with fortitude. Socrates’s opponents are able to follow through with arguments that at least seem rational at first glance, and do not generally resort to childish behavior or emotional outbursts within moments of being challenged. These new dialogues do not show much depth of character or intellectual competence in Socrates’s opponents. If one didn’t know any better one might assume these recently found dialogues were written in our own time.