ApostateAbe

It is certainly different, but not completely different. I only said it was the best.

jgoodguy

From the Wiki

"The Socratic problem

An accurate picture of the historical Socrates and his philosophical viewpoints is problematic, an issue known as the Socratic problem.

As Socrates did not write philosophical texts, the knowledge of the man, his life, and his philosophy is entirely based on writings by his students and contemporaries. Foremost among them is Plato; however, works by Xenophon, Aristotle, and Aristophanes also provide important insights.[4] The difficulty of finding the “real” Socrates arises because these works are often philosophical or dramatic texts rather than straightforward histories. Aside from Thucydides (who makes no mention of Socrates or philosophers in general) and Xenophon, there are in fact no straightforward histories contemporary with Socrates that dealt with his own time and place. A corollary of this is that sources that do mention Socrates do not necessarily claim to be historically accurate, and are often partisan (those who prosecuted and convicted Socrates have left no testament). Historians therefore face the challenge of reconciling the various texts that come from these men to create an accurate and consistent account of Socrates' life and work. The result of such an effort is not necessarily realistic, merely consistent."

It sounds familiar. Consistency is problematic for the HJers.

blastula

Not completely different. The major differences to me is that the writings of him are contemporaneous, independent and they're not religious.

andrewcriddle

Most of the texts about Socrates were written after his death (the earliest surviving manuscripts of those works are typically much much later.)

The independence of these sources is disputed.

The writers have clear agendas (not religious agendas but I'm not sure why that makes much difference.)

Andrew Criddle

blastula

That's right, and that's why there is uncertainty about Socrates.

gurugeorge

Just flaggin' this up again because the other day when Archibald asked for examples of someone fictional later thought to exist, Castaneda's "Don Juan" occurred to me later.

Horatio Parker

I say Jesus does. Was there anyone besides Castaneda who claimed to have met Don Juan?

Loved the Don Juan books BTW. They're entertaining even if they don't really teach you anything.

Horatio Parker

There were multiple contemporaries of Socrates who wrote about him. Can we say the same about DJ?

archibald

http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah...aimants04.html


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menahem_ben_Judah


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athronges

Toto

You have a number of people mentioned by Josephus. These messianic claimants are assumed to be historical in large part because Josephus is not considered to be a religious text. That's why there is such a focus on the mentions of Jesus in Josephus - if they were not Christian interpolations, that would sway the balance of probabilities for most people.