Socrates in space

There are those who tend to think that studying the texts of classical literature is a tedious task suited to reclusive savants and phlegmatic academics. When it comes to Socrates, Plato and Greek philosophy, the last thing that comes to the layman’s mind is hope for ‘an exciting read’. He’d much rather pick up a fantasy novel or, if his tastes and passions are excited by a desire for ‘hidden knowledge’, he’d favor a work of speculative nonfiction which, lacking evidence and proper sources, bases its fantastic hypothesis on ‘channeled information’, ‘extraterrestrial revelations’ or the crude assumption that all mythological accounts are, in fact, accurate history.

 

So, what if I told you that Socrates, the celebrated teacher of mankind, had (at some given time and under certain extraordinary circumstances) been to space – or, at least, in what we call today ‘sub-orbital space’? Poppycock, right? If it were so, we would have been taught as much in school and those learned and ponderous scholars who analyze meticulously each line of the Grecian sages’ writings would have surely pointed out this extraordinary ‘historical anomaly’ in many a paper and multi-volume work; the history of mankind would have been rewritten ten times over…

 

Well, let us examine first the evidence in favor of the ‘Socrates in space’ hypothesis and we will counter these most reasonable arguments as we go along.

 

In Plato’s dialogue entitled ‘Phaedo’ we read the literary account of Socrates’ last moments before his execution. The aged philosopher is incarcerated in an Athenian prison under the charge of ‘corrupting the minds of youth’ and ‘introducing new daemons, or gods, to the city’. For such heinous crimes the Democracy of the ‘Golden Age’ would have nothing less than the very life of Socrates to satisfy its thirst for the blood of any and all who dared opposed the political correctness of the regime. 

 

Socrates is visited by his disciples and friends who have come to bid their master a final farewell. Phaedo of Elis is there, after whom Plato named this particular dialogue, Simias of Thebes, Socrates’ wife Xanthippe and his three sons, Plato himself, possibly Xenophon and many others who are simply referred to as ‘comrades’ or ‘companions’. 

 

This illustrious congregation begins, in the most unlikely of places, a serene and profound conversation on the immortality of the soul and the nature of the cosmos. Seemingly out of the blue, Socrates asks his companions if they’d like to hear a story.

 

“We’d like that very much!” Simias exclaimed, probably to take his mind off the imminent death sentence of his beloved master.

 

The ensuing narrative of Socrates is as bizarre as it is astounding, seemingly coming out of the blue. I will attempt to present here an approximate translation from the original ancient Greek text but you, dear reader, feel free to look it up for yourself (Plato’s ‘Phaedo’, 110, c) :

 

“It is said, comrade, that when someone observes Earth from above he will see that it has a spherical shape, just like the shape of those balls we make out of twelve layers of leather. Earth is infused with colors; colors such as exist here and we see all around us and painters employ in their art. From high up there, these colors appear far brighter and clearer than those we see here, around us; and some parts of the Earth have a porphyry hue, some appear golden and others gleam white, whiter than plaster or snow… it is a most magnificent sight to behold! […]”

 

First off, it is interesting to note the comparison of the Earth to a leather ball. A leather ball, especially one constructed in the 5th century BC, would have the appearance of perfect roundness and yet, in absolute geometrical truth, would be an oblate spheroid. 

Could these ‘golden’ parts of the globe be the vast deserts of Africa or Asia? Could the ‘whiter than plaster or snow’ areas be the poles or the frozen lands of the North, Iceland and Greenland or perhaps the masses of clouds swirling over the Earth?

 

“The Earth was absolutely round. I never knew what the word round meant until I saw the Earth from space” Aleksei A. Leonov, Voskhod 2, Soyuz 19. 

 

We are astounded to see Socrates’ account of a spehrical Earth, related 25 centuries before the age of space flight and in an era where, supposedly, the reigning model for the world was that of a ‘flat Earth’, coincide with the account of a Soviet cosmonaut. But what of the sage’s claims of striking beauty and shimmering colors? Surely these are literary exaggerations to render his account all the more miraculous and captivating to the minds of his audience…

 

“Truly there is no more beautiful sight than to see the Earth from space beyond. This planet is an exquisite oasis.” Ronald E. McNair, USA, STS 41-B (he died in the Challenger accident).

 

“I think that the minute I saw the view for the first time was really one of the most memorable moments of my entire life. It’s beyond description. I think it has changed my insight into life.” Sultan Bin Salman al-Saud, Saudi Arabia STS 51-G.

 

And the narrative of Socrates goes on:

 

“The curvatures of the Earth are filled with water and air and they shimmer amidst the multitude of other colors assuming a hue which makes the Earth appear uniformly colored with the same tone.[…]”

 

In the less eloquent, yet confirming remark of Aleksei A. Leonov: 

 

“The Earth was small, light blue, and so touchingly alone…” 

 

Then the narrative of Socrates make a very cryptic mention about people and animals, entire ecosystems of lands, ‘who live around the air, just as we live around the sea’. He says that ‘as the sea is necessary to us for our survival so is the air to them’. In truth, we cannot offer a rational explanation for this passage (Phaedo, 111, b) with our current level of technological knowledge and understanding of the cosmos. If I were to say that he’s talking about ‘floating isles’, mother ships, just like the ones scientists envision building today for the purposes of interstellar colonization, with the ability to support entire ecosystems onboard, I would be just indulging the fantasy-loving side of my mind and making an unsupported claim. 

 

However, Socrates goes on and describes the topography of the Earth with astounding accuracy from a 3D or, let’s say, satellite’s perspective (Phaedo, 111, d):

 

“There exist within the Earth and all across its circumference and in its curvatures many lands; some lay deeper than others while some are raised higher than others and higher still than the place which we inhabit; and some lands are lower than our own and others broader. And all these lands are interconnected under the Earth in many places, some narrower and some broader and there are fissures which serve as exits […]”

 

Socrates could apparently identify the topography of Greece from his point of observation and compare it to that of foreign lands.

 

He continues by relating the flow of waters, comparing the flow of oceans and rivers into their natural basins to the ‘flowing of water into a large cup’, saying that there are colder and warmer currents intermingling with each other and forming rivers across the land, some clearer and other more murky and full of clay. 

 

Then he proceeds to make an absolutely stunning observation (Phaedo, 111, e & 112, a):

 

“All these forces at work move the Earth up and down as if there exists a force of levitation; and the cause of this levitation (of the planet) is this – between the chasms of the Earth there exists a singular hollow which runs through the Earth from pole to pole; and Homer speaks of this very same prodigious chasm when he says ‘far away, where under the Earth exists a most deep pit’. This place is what he and other poets called ‘Tartarus’. […]”

 

Here we see the notion of an ‘axis mundi’. The fact that the Earth has an axis in order to balance in the void of space is clearly and beyond any doubt described, be it with more or less of a poetic license. 

 

The sage’s extraordinary account concludes with an account of how waters on the globe move to form oceans, rivers, lakes and streams and how these are replenished due to the ‘up and down’ movements of the Earth which create oceanic and Tellurian currents. He sums up his story by interjecting a theological account concerning the judgment of the souls of the deceased and how they are escorted by their familiar Daemon into the afterlife before a tribune of mysterious Judges who have the power to determine whether they will be cast forever into Tartarus (if they were unjust and cruel in life) or return upon the Earth (if they were just and holy) to live again. Only those purged and refined by the spirit of philosophy may hope to ascend to ‘lands more beautiful still, of which we have neither the time nor the right words to speak of right now’. 

 

This particular passage in ‘Phaedo’ might have appeared bizarre and slightly amusing to the classical scholar of previous centuries. To the modern man, who has witnessed the achievements of the Space Age and has almost unlimited access to pictures and data concerning the cutting edge of the Astronomical sciences, it must raise some serious questions.

 

Since Socrates did not leave a single written work behind, we are obliged to his disciple, Plato, for penning down this marvelous testimony. One could argue that it is not Socrates’ own experience related therein but Plato’s. It makes little difference either way.

 

Since the reasoning of the Socratic mind is beyond reproach and unanimously acclaimed for its keenness, can we easily dismiss such an account as the fancy of credulous Pagan parroting the myths he was taught by some sacerdotal order? 

 

Seeing how modern science, 25 centuries later, concurs on many aspects with the cryptic observations of Socrates about the form of our Planet seen from space (or from a sub-orbital flight perspective) can we so easily dismiss the implications of such a potential reality?

 

Surely there are those far more qualified than I to look into the matter with impartiality and scientific constancy; and it is to them that I would like to address the following simple questions:

 

Assuming that Socrates did see planet Earth ‘from above’, how did he get there? Was he transported by someone on a craft of sorts? The philosopher makes absolutely no mention of such an occurrence or any accomplishes, divine or extraterrestrial. 

 

Mystics would suggest that Socrates achieved such a ‘view from above’ via a process of meditation which allowed him to leave his physical body (Astral Projection and voluntary Out Of Body Experiences) or that he was able to shift his perspective via the discipline of what today is called ‘Remote Viewing’. However, these practices have not been adequately documented (as far as non-classified and mainstream, peer-reviewed research papers are concerned) from a scientific perspective and, therefore, cannot be accepted as factual abilities of the human being. 

 

The only other alternative explanation to this extraordinary controversy remaining, in my mind, is that Socrates (or Plato) did not visit space physically or mentally / mystically but, rather, repeated information and knowledge which he had read in an ancient manuscript no longer in existence. Still, if that were the case, how did the author of that supposed manuscript obtain his acute astronomical knowledge in the first place? And if indeed there existed such a fabled source, why did not others, philosophers or priests of the mysteries, make use of its information in their teachings and world-models? 

 

Plato’s dialogue ‘Phaedo’ is available from a variety of sources, easily accessible by all: that is the beauty of living in the era of the information and in the age of the internet. You, dear reader, may chose to believe or disbelieve my claims and assumptions in the analysis of the aforementioned passage. Whatever the case I would urge you to research the matter for yourself. The source material is there; and has been there for many a century.

 

Sometimes, the most amazing journey of discovery is only a book away…