Rationale[edit]

This statement relates to Socrates' understanding and attitude towards death and his commitment to fulfill his goal of
investigating and understanding the statement of the Pythia. Socrates understood the Pythia's response to Chaerephon's
question as a communication from the god Apollo and this became Socrates's prime directive, his raison d'etre. For
Socrates, to be separated from elenchus by exile (preventing him from investigating the statement) was therefore a fate
worse than death. Since Socrates was religious and trusted his religious experiences, such as his guiding daimonic voice,
he accordingly preferred to continue to seek the truth to the answer to his question, in the after-life, than live a life not
identifying the answer on earth.[1]

Meaning[edit]
The words were supposedly spoken by Socrates at his trial after he chose death rather than exile. They represent (in
modern terms) the noble choice, that is, the choice of death in the face of an alternative. [2]

Interpretation[edit]
Socrates believed that philosophy - the love of wisdom - was the most important pursuit above all else. For some, he
exemplifies more than anyone else in history the pursuit of wisdom through questioning and logical argument, by
examining and by thinking. His 'examination' of life in this way spilled out into the lives of others, such that they began
their own 'examination' of life, but he knew they would all die one day, as saying that a life without philosophy - an
'unexamined' life - was not worth living.[3][4]

Socrates believed that living a life where you live under the rules of others, in a continuous routine without examining what
you actually want out of it is not worth living. This illustration of a lifestyle is what Socrates would describe an unexamined
life. Hence Socrates’ renowned statement “The unexamined life is not worth living”. Declaring that humans must scrutinize
their lives in order to live a fulfilled one isn’t agreeable to any extent.
Socrates’ statement does instigate discussion, but it doesn’t necessarily apply to everyone’s way of life and what makes
or doesn’t make their life worth living. The theory that all lives that are unexamined don’t have a purpose and should not
be lived is unreasonable and simply not true. There is a lot more that contributes to a person’s happiness and well-being
besides “examining their lives”. Factors such as life experiences, being with family, things to be thankful for, memories,
and reaching success in life. Everything that makes one happy, and a happy life should most definitely be lived whether
its examined or not.
Epicurus’ philosophy on happiness, is composed of three things; good companionship (friends), having freedom (being
self-sufficient and free from everyday life and politics) and an analysed life (meaning to have time and space to think
things through). Epicurus and Socrates have different approaches to the phrase “analysing life”. Epicurus would advise
not to spend money as temporary relief for a bad day but rather take time out and reflect and contemplate. Socrates on
the other hand has a different stance. Epicurus believes that analysing your life is one third of what it takes to have a
happy life whereas Socrates believes that if you are not constantly reviewing and examining every aspect of your life just
so you can get the best out of it, it’s not worth living in general.
De Montaigne was one of the most significant philosophers of the French Renaissance and is best known for his
scepticism. De Montaigne would’ve had an advancing degree of doubt and disagreement on Socrates’ statement that “the
unexamined life is not worth living”. Socrates said that having a mechanical life with an unthinking routine, under the rules
of others without ever examining whether or not they truly want to live with those routines or rules is basically not worth
living anymore. However, De Montaigne had a contrary belief on what bring our lives happiness and what makes them
“not worth living”. He believed that human have a tendency to over-think things and that’s mainly where our unhappiness
comes from. To be happy De Montaigne knew that we didn’t need intelligence and brain facts, we required wisdom and
life experience. De Montaigne urged us to live the best lives we possibly can by simply not worry about our appearance,
accept our own and everyone else’s culture, and always endeavour to become wiser. De Montaigne had quite the
opposite approach on how to live a happy life to Socrates. Socrates believed over analysing and examining our lives
would lead to better ones, whereas De Montaigne would advise us to spend less time over-analysing and overthinking
things as it leads to insecurities that we are all far better off without.
Socrates statement “The unexamined life is not worth living”, is an exaggeration and is predominantly false but does have
a degree of truth to it. We must occasionally question ourselves and the world, as otherwise we will act without reason,
and be unable to distinguish between good or bad actions, and without this way of thinking Socrates might argue we are
no better off than animals. But with this statement, Socrates promotes the idea that people who don’t examine their lives
should not live. Socrates seemed to overlook other factors that account to our happiness and give worth to our lives. In
disagreement with Socrates; We all must contemplate now and again but only to a certain extent, as it can be disastrous
to overthink and reconsider every aspect of our life.