Here’s a rather long quote from Plato. Pay particular attention to the part at the end I highlighted:
Socrates: I might have a rational explanation that Orithyia was playing with Pharmacia, when a northern gust carried her over the neighboring rocks; and this being the manner of her death, she was said to have been carried away by Boreas. There is a discrepancy, however, about the locality; according to another version of the story she was taken from Areopagus, and not from this place. Now I quite acknowledge that these allegories are very nice, but he is not to be envied who has to invent them; much labour and ingenuity will be required of him; and when he has once begun, he must go on and rehabilitate Hippocentaurs and chimeras dire. Gorgons and winged steeds flow in apace, and numberless other inconceivable and portentous natures. And if he is skeptical about them, and would fain reduce them one after another to the rules of probability, this sort of crude philosophy will take up a great deal of time. Now I have no leisure for such inquiries; shall I tell you why? I must first know myself, as the Delphian inscription says; to be curious about that which is not my concern, while I am still in ignorance of my own self, would be ridiculous. And therefore I bid farewell to all this; the common opinion is enough for me.
Phaedrus by Plato (Translated by Benjamin Jowett)
That last line is significant—the common opinion is enough for me—which suggests that Socrates, to put a modern spin on it, will often simply go with the flow. He will instead put most of his energy most of the time into his Big Project: understanding his self.
Is this a good idea? Should Socrates inner journey of understanding be a model for others?
One philosopher professor, Bence Nanay, doesn’t think so, and makes a strong case against it in his essay “‘Know thyself’ is not just silly advice: it’s actively dangerous.”
In broad terms he feels that because the self is in a constant state of flux, it’s a fool’s errand to attempt to understand it, especially prior to making critical decisions:
The real harm of this situation is not only that you spend much of your time doing something that you don’t particularly like (and often positively dislike). Instead, it is that the human mind does not like blatant contradictions of this kind. It does its best to hide this contradiction: a phenomenon known as cognitive dissonance.
Bence Nanay
I believe Nanay is correct if we conceive of the self in terms such as the ever-present conflict of id, ego, and superego, or in more modern terms as the dynamic relationship between the cortical structures (the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC)) with subcortical structures (the amygdala, thalamus, and cerebellum).
However, if instead, we see the self as a stable set of virtues—which is what I suspect Socrates was referring to—then this type of self-exploration may be well worth the effort. Exploring the ancients’ virtues, such as prudence, justice, courage, and temperance (and perhaps tempered by the Christian virtues of hope, faith, and charity) are in my mind worthy of a lifetime’s self-exploration.