The Examination of Life: A Discussion Among  Intellectuals

by GEOFF KOSKI	

      As the meeting began the three intellectuals seemed uneasy. They each knew why they were here, but they did not know what to expect. The three, Plato, Adrienne Rich, and Leo Tolstoy, gathered to discuss a topic that many throughout time have struggled with. They were to discuss why we, as humans, should live an examined life.
       The first order of business seemed to be a mere a formaliy, but had to be accomplished. A common ground bad to be established determining what exactly an "examined life" entailed. Rich thought this to be a cut and dry question. She said that an examined life was one for which a person takes responsibiliy. Tolstoy was in complete agreement with this. Rich added that people who live examined lives do their own "hard work." That is, they talk and think for themselves. They do not sell out to society, but live life for only one personÑ themselves. This seemed to be a point with which Tolstoy particularly agreed. He chimed in that people may seem to be living happy lives, but if they are only happy because other people like them and are not happy about themselves then their life is not examined. He contended that a person must live his or her life according to his or her own value system and not someone else's. Plato agreed with this but seemed a little perplexed. This was not exacdy his idea of an examined life. Plato claimed that an examined life meant not only examining your own life, but examining others as well. He believed that people should discuss important issues with peers and see how their values compare. To truly examine life one must test their values and merits against those around them.
       Obviously, there was a discrepancy in the definitions each intellecmal had of an examined life. They agreed that this was attributable to differences between the times in which they lived. It would be difficult, for example, for Ms. Rich to gather the views of all her fellow writers in today's worldÑmuch harder at least than it was for Plato in ancient Athens. They also agreed that the disparities in their definitions were only minute points compared to the discussion which they were undertaking. Therefore, they decided to overlook the differences and get to the crux of the matter: Why should life be examined?
       Plato began by saying that he felt it was quite obvious why life should be examined. He quoted his Apology, saying that an unexamined life is not worth living. He claimed that a person who does not examine his life will have neither direction nor purpose. Through examination s/he will know what s/he should try to improve upon during life. By the same token, comparing his/her life to those lives around him/her provides a model for contemporaries the model helps them to use their minds. This, in turn, improves the environment one lives in. Plato went so far as to say that this examination should be done at any cost, even death. For death should not be considered when doing life's chores, only that those chores are virtuous.
       With this, Tolstoy felt compdled to speak. He vehemently opposed Plato's point about death. Tolstoy felt that death is such a frightening ordeal that it should be considered in all that one does. Death, he claimed, should be the precise reason to live an examined life. Because one's time on earth is finite, we should spend that time wisely. We should live our lives as the "real thing" and not a facade put up to impress others. We should continually examine what we do to see that it truly is our life and not some preconceived idea of how our life is supposed to unfold. Tolstoy said that we should examine and re-examine our lives to ensure that when that final day does come we can reflect with confidence in that we lived our own life.
       Rich agreed with the Russian on many accounts but took exception to his point on death. She felt that life should be "lived actively," not to have satisfaction or comfort in death, but satisfaction in life. We should "feel committed to our lives" and live them in such a way that we are the masters of our fates. She felt that by examining our lives and making sure we are living them to the fullest, we will not need to make one final examination at the end because we wiltl already know that life turned out the way it should have.
       To an extent, all three seemed to agree on how to live our lives. They felt that we should examine to see that our lives are what they should be and not lived unscrupulously or under another's set of rules. Curiously, the one thing they did seem to disagree on was mortality. They talked at length about this subject. Plato gave his reasons for not fearing death, Tolstoy gave his reasons for why death should always be kept in the back of the mind, and Rich gave her reasons why death should have no bearing on how we live. This seemed to be an irreconcilable difference. A difference that the three would leave philosophers to settle. They did not leave on a weak accord, though They left with the agreement that a person must live their own examined life so that when they die, whether they feared death or not, life will have been a fulfilling and worthwhile experience.