While in a café, sixteen-year-old Nate comes across a man who engages him in an intellectual conversation. Fascinated by the discussion, Nate befriends the man along with his other companions of philosophers in order to better understand his purpose and direction in life.
Every encounter with the philosophers explores a different topic that shapes the stepping stones of Nate's journey. This journey toward the beauty of speech, logic, and wisdom is told in the Socratic dialogue fashion through Nate's perspective.
While in a café, sixteen-year-old Nate comes across a man who engages him in an intellectual conversation. Fascinated by the discussion, Nate befriends the man along with his other companions of philosophers in order to better understand his purpose and direction in life.
Every encounter with the philosophers explores a different topic that shapes the stepping stones of Nate's journey. This journey toward the beauty of speech, logic, and wisdom is told in the Socratic dialogue fashion through Nate's perspective.
People find interest in all sorts of things. And those interests all lay on one spectrum with good on one side and bad on the other side. People say that being on the bad side is the worst thing that could happen to anyone, but that couldn’t be further from the truth—at least for me. The way I see it, being in the middle or having no interest at all, is much worse because you don’t belong to any side, you are all alone, and you are not passionate about anything. I envy people who are passionate about something and who have found their true calling, whether that thing is good or bad, for they feel a sense of belonging. This may be a sense of belonging to either a group, a hobby, or a critical issue in life.
When I started finding my own way of life, I thought that being in the middle and waiting for something good was a much better position to be in than being on the bad side. But to be honest, I would want anything—good or bad—to move me from where I’m at right now. I am only sixteen years old, but already, I feel like a lost soul with no passion in life.
These are the thoughts in my mind as I walk home from school. I am trapped in a daily routine of lostness and boredom that only goes away when I sleep. On top of this, it has started to rain.
‘Great,’ I said to myself, hurrying home along the sidewalk. ‘I better find a place to stay out of the rain otherwise I’m going to catch a cold.’
I came upon a café, entered in, and took out my phone to make a call.
‘Hi Mom, I finished my classes early today,’ I said. ‘I was walking home, but it started raining heavily all of the sudden. Can you come and pick me up?’
‘I’m sorry, honey,’ my mother replied, ‘I’m afraid I won’t be able to leave work and pick you up for an hour.’
‘It’s OK,’ I said. ‘I can wait, I’ll grab a coffee or something.’
‘Good idea,’ my mother said. ‘What’s the address?’
I spotted a barista walking past me. ‘Excuse me,’ I said, ‘what’s the name of this café and what’s the address please?’
‘It’s called Café de Sophia,’ replied the barista, ‘and it is beside the Paris Opera Granier.’
I thanked the barista and gave the address to my mother.
‘I won’t be late. Have fun!’ said my mother.
I had entered the café in a rush, so I hadn’t paid much attention to the place. But after ending the call, I took a look around to see myself standing in a crowded, classic café that was long, big, and rectangular in shape with a high ceiling. The sound of the babbling of the crowd and the tinkling of tableware filled the air. I walked forward slowly, looking around, getting lost in the atmosphere, and admiring the place for it had minute, exquisite details.
The left wall of the café had gilded panels that came in a thin, wide, rectangular pattern. The panels were embellished with French Louis XV-style, bronze candlestick sconces whilst colorful frescos adorned the entirety of the wider panels. As for the right wall, a series of tall windows and mirrors filled it. The windows, as tall as they were, didn’t extend to the base of the ceiling but rather stopped below, leaving the remaining space to be ornated with a golden garden design that stretched above their window scarfs. There were also white curtains covering the windows. In between the windows that started from the floor, there were large, gilded mirrors that started a bit higher above the floor level and stretched all the way up alongside the windows. The upper frame of the mirrors had an extended ornamentation that was floral in design.
This Rococo interior design that was the emblem of the right-side wall extended all the way up to the ceiling, adorning it with its exquisite architecture. The ceiling was curved and, instead of having frescos painted on it as most common with the Rococo style, it had soft ornamentations that outlined the bases of beautiful crystal chandeliers that spread, equally spaced, at the central line of the café. Also, sculpted moldings of golden colors filled the edges and corners of this multi-layered ceiling. As for the floor, it was made of wood laid down in an interwoven pattern making squares in between the lines, and inside each square, the same pattern was repeated but running in a different angle.
Occupying this great place, were numerous seating areas of various sizes that spread across the café in a random fashion. The seating areas were mainly of two types: the first one came in a different combination of sofas with Bergère or wingback armchairs along with coffee and side tables. The second type had upholstered oval-back chairs or armchairs along with circular, claw-footed tables. All of the furniture was of the Louis XVI design style and had floral toile fabric.
The café was built as a great hall adorned by the exquisite characteristics of the Rococo architecture which is considered highly ornamental, decorative, and theatrical in its design. The brightness of pastel colors was another key element of the Rococo design. This palette, which consisted of a few powdery hues like pearl gray, light yellows, lilacs, and pale blues, helped in bringing the colorful frescos into attention by contrast.
This interior design style of Rococo architecture and Louis XIV furniture brought royalty and class into the café. The café was its own aesthetic universe, where wall and ceiling treatment, art, and decorative elements worked together to create a high-spirited and light atmosphere that made it the perfect backdrop for high-minded aristocrats looking to entertain and impress their guests.
While walking and admiring the café, most of my attention was taken by the frescos on the left-side wall which were of many different themes. Although they were very interesting and required the attention of the viewer, that didn’t stop me from skimming past them, and so, without me noticing, I’d reached the other end of the café. On the wall of that end, there was a large fresco that almost stretched across the whole wall. It was obvious that this fresco was the masterpiece and jewel of the café and I just had to stop and examine it.
The painting showed a scenery in what seemed to be in ancient Greek or Rome based on the architecture. At the center, there were two men walking and talking to each other whilst surrounded by numerous people each doing their own thing.
While I was admiring the fresco, I heard someone say, ‘It is called “The School of Athens”.’
I turned to the direction of the voice to see a man dressed in a suit, sitting alone at a table, and I replied to him with, ‘What?’
‘The name of the painting you were admiring, “The School of Athens”,’ said the man.
‘It is really stunning,’ I said.
‘Come over here please, young man,’ requested the man.
I approached the man and got a closer look at him. He seemed to be in his early fifties and had short, black hair and a circular-style beard with traces of white strands in it. The man sat comfortably with one foot on top of the other. He had a serious look in his eyes, giving him an air of dignity and prestige.
‘Please have a seat,’ offered the man with a gentle smile.
‘No, thank you,’ I said. ‘I don’t want to disturb you.’
‘Please, I insist,’ he replied.
I felt that it would be rude to keep refusing and so I pulled out the chair in front of him and sat down.
The man smiled at me. ‘What’s your name, young man?’
‘Nate River,’ I replied.
‘You have a nice name, mister River, I like it,’ the man said. ‘As for me, I won’t tell you my real name but my friends call me, Plato.’
‘Plato?!’ I remarked.
Plato smiled gently and said, ‘It is a long story, don’t worry about it. Anyway, I was hoping to see if one of my friends were here, but I’m failing to see anyone today.’
‘“Hoping to see!”’ I said. ‘You didn’t agree to meet them beforehand?’ After I said that I noticed that I was questioning a strange man and so I immediately added apologetically, ‘I’m sorry! I didn’t mean to judge you or question or …’
‘Very perceptive, Mr. River!’ Plato said, interrupting me.
‘What?’ I said in a shock after hearing this unexpected reply.
‘You see, my friends and I come here occasionally,’ said Plato. ‘You can say that this is our usual place. Nonetheless, since I don’t think that any of them are coming today, you will have to keep me accompanied.’
‘I’m glad to sit with you, but what would a man like you want with a boy like me?’ I asked.
‘Just a simple conversation, nothing more,’ Plato answered.
‘A conversation?’ I asked.
‘Don’t worry; I promise you’ll like it,’ said Plato as he raised his hand, calling to a specific person working at the café.
A middle-aged man came to our table. ‘Good afternoon, Plato, it’s nice to see you, as usual.’
‘Likewise, Alfred, likewise,’ replied Plato. ‘How are you doing today?’
‘I’m fine, thank you,’ Alfred replied. ‘I see you have a new friend today, and a young one at that, is he one of your relatives?’
‘Actually, we’ve just met,’ Plato said.
‘So, are you going to initiate him?’ said Alfred, smiling at me and making me a little confused.
Plato laughed gently and said, ‘I hope so.’
‘So you do have a new friend!’ Alfred said with a smile. ‘I’ll bring the initiation tea cup!’
‘Thank you, Alfred!’ Plato said with a gentle smile as Alfred left.
All of this was happening while I stood confused, and a little bit worried, from the odd interaction that took place between two strangers.
‘Seeing how perceptive you were earlier,’ Plato started speaking to me, ‘I take it you noticed that Alfred and I must have known each other for quite a while, right?’
‘It is very obvious and nice too,’ I said with a smile. ‘Also, what did he mean by initiation?’
Plato smiled and said, ‘don’t mind that, let’s get to our conversation, Mr. River.’
‘Please call me, Nate,’ I requested.
‘All right, Nate,’ spoke Plato. ‘Introduce yourself to me; I’d like to know you.’
Usually, I would be introverted when talking to a stranger but something about Plato made me feel at ease. I felt comfortable and safe with him.
‘What do you want to know?’ I asked.
Plato took a comfortable sitting position and said, ‘Whatever you’d like me to know.’
‘Well … my name is Nate River. I’m 16 years old,’ I said. ‘I go to school here in Paris and I’m taking game design classes in the afternoon.’
After I finished speaking, I expected Plato to say something, but he didn’t and there was a moment of silence in which he was staring at me with eyes full of confidence and seriousness.
After a pause, Plato smiled and said, ‘Is that all?’
I replied hesitantly, not knowing what he expected. ‘Yes.’
Alfred returned and served us one teapot and two tea cups and Plato thanked him. I noticed the crockery of the café was vintage Royal Albert of floral design.
‘Let me ask you this, Nate,’ said Plato as he poured some tea for us. ‘Would you hit a dog or a cat if it annoys you?’
‘What?!’ I replied, confused from his question that came out of nowhere.
Plato then asked, ‘Or would you commit stealing?’
I replied a little seriously, ‘No, of course not! Why would you think that I would do such things?’
‘Why wouldn’t I? I don’t know you, and after all, I’m just saying it as a possibility, not as a certainty,’ said Plato.
‘I’m a little confused that you would think of me in this way, especially after what I have just told you about myself,’ I said.
‘You mean your introduction?’ asked Plato.
‘Yes,’ I answered.
Plato took a sip of his tea and said, ‘So you think that what you said about yourself shouldn’t make me think of you that way?’
‘I think it shouldn’t,’ I replied.
Plato then said, ‘I don’t blame you for thinking that since you know yourself, but for strangers, they might not necessarily come to your conclusion.’
‘I’m not sure I understand what you mean,’ I replied.
Plato smiled and asked, ‘Tell me, Nate, does going to school in Paris prevent one from committing the acts I mentioned?’
‘No, not necessarily,’ I answered.
Plato continued, ‘And what about the study of game design?’
Seeing where Plato was going with his questions made me take a moment to think and not answer him immediately. ‘The same goes to game design,’ I said.
‘Now, would you blame me for thinking that you would hit an animal or steal a thing?’ said Plato.
‘I suppose I can’t,’ I replied.
‘To be honest,’ spoke Plato, ‘you haven’t answered my original question in which I wanted to know you.’
‘I still don’t see where I failed to answer your question,’ I said, confused.
‘You told me your name and age, which is perfectly fine,’ said Plato, ‘but then you started telling me about where and what you study, and that’s where you went astray from my question.’
‘I still don’t understand,’ I replied.
Plato continued, ‘Let’s take, for example, a man who went to the top prestigious schools in his early years, and then he graduated with a bachelor’s and a master’s degree, with honors, from the best universities, and now he is the CEO of a big company. Would you say that this man is a good person or a bad person?’
I replied with, ‘Well… since he went to prestigious schools he must be from a prestigious family, which will mean that he would have had the best education, crafts, and skills taught to him. Someone like that I’d say ought to be a good person.’
‘Not necessarily,’ Plato said, as I reached for my cup of tea for a sip. ‘Putting aside the type of education this person has received and how he’s implementing it—for these things deserve their own conversation—it is true that having the best educators and tutors may help raise and make a good person, but this is not always the case. Don’t you see some of this type of people that receive a prestigious education behave like morons—acting selfish, arrogant, and without pride or honor?’
‘It is true that there are people like that, but there are also people with the same circumstances that are humble and with good manners,’ I said.
‘That is also true,’ said Plato.
‘So now, is the person good or bad?’ I asked, puzzled.
‘That’s not the point right now,’ answered Plato. ‘Tell me, if something is always the evidence of another thing and never anything else, what do you call it?’
‘A decisive proof?’ I answered uncertainly.
Plato continued, ‘Correct. And what if something can be the evidence of two or more things—can it be a decisive proof?’
‘It cannot be for it carries multiple possibilities,’ I said.
‘Exactly, and now back to our example,’ Plato continued. ‘Is going to prestigious schools a decisive proof for being a good person or a bad one? Or can it be a decisive proof in the first place?’
‘It cannot be a decisive proof since it can mean more than one thing,’ I said.
‘Correct, and following this logic,’ spoke Plato, ‘the same thing can be said about having a bachelor’s or a master’s degree, and being a CEO of a company; is this not true?’
‘It is true,’ I replied.
Plato then asked, ‘So, will such an introduction help us know this person?’
‘Knowing about him yes, but knowing him no, not in the way we discussed at least,’ I answered.
‘Well said, Nate!’ said Plato happily, making me smile. ‘This kind of introduction is not suitable for introducing oneself and can be considered kind of illusive since it can mean many things.’
‘Which kind of introduction will you say it is?’ I asked.
Plato answered, ‘The kind where someone introduces himself by stating his … study or work history, if we can call it that way.’
‘I agree with you that knowing the institute that someone studied in does not help in knowing that person,’ I said, ‘but won’t knowing the subjects that he studied be more helpful in knowing him?’
‘Let me ask you this,’ spoke Plato, ‘if someone told you that he studied creative writing, does it decisively mean that he is a creative writer?’
‘No,’ I replied.
Plato continued, ‘And if someone told you that he studied medicine, does it decisively mean that he is professionally a good doctor and not a bad one?’
‘No,’ I replied.
Plato continued, ‘And what if someone told you that he has been practicing painting for the last 15 years, does it mean that he is a good painter or a creative one?’
‘But this one is different from the previous two,’ I responded. ‘Here we have a duration of practice and experience, but at the end, I would need to see some of his work to make a judgement.’
Plato replied, ‘At the end, one’s years of experience at something are not a decisive proof of something, right?’ I agreed and then Plato continued, ‘Therefore, the “study or work history”, as we called it, does not help in knowing a person since it carries multiple meanings and possibilities, correct?’
‘I can agree with you on that, but then why do most people introduce themselves that way if it doesn’t tell anything about themselves?’ I said.
‘Because it does,’ replied Plato.
I chuckled and said, ‘I’m now confused; didn’t we just agree that stating your history of study and work doesn’t help others to know you?’
Plato smiled and said, ‘You changed the topic without noticing. It will help others to know about you, but not to know you—for these are two totally different things.’
After a moment of silence, thinking about the difference between the two and not finding it, I replied saying, ‘How do I introduce myself then?’
‘That’s not the right question at the moment,’ said Plato.
‘What is, then?’ I asked.
‘Since our main goal is to know a person, then it is only fitting that we look into what makes a person or an individual in the first place,’ said Plato. ‘So, let me ask you this, what do you think makes a person?’
‘I honestly don’t know,’ I replied.
‘Let’s get back to the example of the painter,’ said Plato. ‘Why did you say that you needed to see the painter’s paintings first, before making a judgement?’
‘Well… I need to see his work before judging his craft,’ I replied.
‘Good, and can we say that his work is the action resulted from his years of experience?’ said Plato.
‘Yes,’ I replied, getting more interested in the conversation.
Plato continued, ‘Then following the same logic, can we say that what makes a person are the actions or doings he is committing?’
‘Yes, supposedly,’ I replied.
‘Thus, if we looked into what kinds of doings are committed by an individual, are they not the physical actions he does and the words he speaks?’ asked Plato.
‘I think this is right, if you want to bring it to a basic level,’ I answered.
‘And aren’t these two basic things by a more basic name called manners?’ said Plato.
Then, thinking that I had the correct answer, I replied eagerly, ‘So manners are truly what makes a person, hence the saying “Manners maketh man”.’
Plato smiled at my enthusiasm and said, ‘I think we are on the right path, but we shouldn’t stop here. I see the causes go even deeper.’
‘What’s deeper than manners?’ I asked.
Plato replied, ‘Let us investigate what causes manners in the first place, Nate. How are they selected? Based on what? And why would a person choose one manner over another? Answering these questions is surely crucial in helping us with our main point of investigation, which is to know someone.’
‘I agree with you, but which question should we start with?’ I said.
‘Sometimes it is useful to look at things in a simpler manner,’ said Plato. ‘It is true we have many questions, but they all revolve around the root cause or causes that manners are based on. Let us start from here.’ I nodded in agreement and Plato continued, ‘Let’s take, for example, a football fan, someone who is really loyal to a team. Will he ever cheer another team against his own?’
‘No,’ I replied.
‘Would he miss a match for his team?’ said Plato.
‘No, never,’ I replied.
Plato continued, ‘Would he not defend his team during debates even if he knows the point made against his team is correct?’
‘For sure he would defend his team,’ I said.
Plato then asked, ‘Why do you think he would do all of these things?’
‘It is because he loves his team,’ I answered.
‘So, this love dictates the way this fan will behave, in other words, his manners, am I right?’ said Plato.
‘You are right,’ I replied.
‘Therefore in this situation, what do you call the thing that guides actions or is the reason behind them?’ asked Plato.
‘Something like a redline that cannot be crossed, a rule that is always kept, or maybe a principle that is always followed,’ I answered.
‘Let us go with principle,’ said Plato. ‘By knowing the principle of love of this fan towards his team, can’t we predict what actions he would commit in matters involving his team?’
‘Surely, we can,’ I replied.
‘So, principles are the main thing that drives the actions, whether verbal or physical, of people.’ Plato continued, ‘A person’s manners or actions are based on his principles and knowing those principles will help you predict what that person would do in a particular situation. Is this not what knowing a person is?’
It took a moment for Plato’s explanation to sink in and I was glad to hear his deduction, for it was the first logical argument made in the conversation and I found the way of proofing things via this method very beautiful and engaging.
‘This all makes sense!’ I said excitedly. ‘Knowing the principles of someone will make you know him. I think this is the answer to our question.’
‘Even though I see us on the right path,’ spoke Plato, ‘we shouldn’t be too quick to claim knowledge of this matter and should look at it from every angle.’
I replied saying, ‘What else is there to look into?’
‘We said that to know a person is to know the principles he holds, right?’ said Plato.
‘Yes,’ I replied.
Plato continued, ‘And we said that knowing those principles will help us know how he would behave in certain situations, right?’
‘Yes,’ I replied.
Plato continued, ‘And when two principles clash with each other, what happens? What will a person do? Do you know?’
‘In this case, I’m not sure I know what’s going to happen,’ I said.
‘We seem to have arrived at a point following principles where we still don’t know what a person will do, and so we still can’t know a person,’ said Plato.
‘Do you think the viewpoint of principles is wrong and we should look into other ways of knowing a person?’ I said.
‘Not at all, maybe we just need to see what’s going to happen when two principles are put against each other and see how the outcome is determined,’ said Plato.
‘What do you mean?’ I asked.
‘Imagine a manager having two principles; one for always saying the truth, and another for always achieving higher positions at work.’ Plato continued, ‘Let’s say that this manager is in a situation where if he says the truth he will lose a promotion, and if he lies he will get that promotion. Now, his two principles are put against each other. What do you think the manager would do in this situation; which principle is he going to follow?’
I took a moment to think, in which I observed a barista serving dessert plates with spoons and forks to a nearby table. I noticed that the café cutlery was of classic design as well.
I replied to Plato’s question saying, ‘I guess he is going to do what he sees is more important to him.’
‘Are you speaking about the outcomes here or the principles themselves?’ asked Plato.
‘The principles of course, since they dictate the actions themselves,’ I answered.
‘Therefore, he’s going to weigh the two principles and the one with more value to him will outweigh the other, correct?’ said Plato.
‘Yes, that is correct,’ I replied.
‘We could state then that knowing the principles of a person makes the first half of knowing that person,’ spoke Plato, ‘and knowing the values of those principles makes the other half; do you agree with this statement?’
‘I totally agree with you,’ I said, amazed by what we had reached so far.
Plato said, ‘Well then, I think we have arrived to a satisfying answer to our question of what makes a person. His principles and values, and by knowing these things you know a person.’ I nodded in agreement and Plato continued, ‘Let us now get back to the original question I asked you at the beginning of our delightful conversation; would you like to answer it now?’
After a few seconds of thinking, I said, somewhat embarrassed, ‘What was the question again?’
Plato smiled gently. ‘I asked you to introduce yourself. I wanted to know you and not to know about you.’
‘OK, that,’ I responded. ‘So you want to know my principles and values?’
‘Principles don’t have to be big things like loyalty, humbleness, or generosity; instead, they can be anything,’ said Plato. ‘For example, one of the principles of mine is that I would never smoke a cigarette, but I could never say no to a cigar.’
I laughed at his statement and said, ‘Why is that?’
Plato answered with a smile, ‘I find them too tiny for my hand and they leave a disgusting smell in the mouth and breath.’
I then said, ‘What other principles do you have? Introduce yourself to me for I’d like to know you; you seem interesting.’
‘I will go first, but don’t think for a second that you’re off the hook; you’re still answering my question.’ I smiled and Plato continued, ‘I love speech and talking with other people either in discourses, debates, or in simple conversations. I would never say no to a conversation and I love to hear new perspectives and opinions, especially those who go against mine. I see the mind as the most valuable thing a human has and only through speech, along with writing, is it ever translated and known.’
Plato’s introduction delighted me and made me like him even more. It was the first time that I’d met someone who considered talking—a thing that I’ve never paid attention to— so passionately. Having the chance to speak and having someone who showed interest in what I had to say, regardless if it was right or wrong, gave me a comfortable, nice feeling.
‘So, Nate,’ said Plato interrupting my thoughts, ‘how about you? Tell me a principle of yours.’
I was about to answer Plato, but nothing came to my mind. I took a few seconds to think, but still nothing, and that’s when it hit me: I didn’t really know myself. I didn’t know what my principles and values were or if I even had some to begin with.
‘Honestly, Plato,’ I said, shocked by my revelation, ‘I don’t know. I don’t know what my principles are. Is that fine or is there something wrong with me?’
Plato laughed from the bottom of his heart and said, whilst removing traces of tears with a napkin, ‘I haven’t laughed like this for a long time; thank you, Nate!’
I didn’t respond, but I was happy to see him laugh like this.
‘It is totally fine,’ spoke Plato. ‘Don’t expect to know yourself at this age. You are still young and there are lots of experiences you have yet to face that will shape you as a person and define your principles and values.’
‘But I couldn’t come up with a single principle and that saddens me,’ I said.
‘It is totally fine,’ said Plato. ‘At this age, I don’t totally know myself yet. Knowing one’s self is a life journey. You only have to choose carefully and mindfully the principles you want to obtain and the ones you want to neglect. Principles can be both good and bad, so choose wisely.’
Then, all of a sudden, my phone rang and after looking at the caller ID I said sadly, ‘It’s my mother. She is outside the café right now, ready to pick me up.’
‘Well, Nate, talking to you has been a real pleasure,’ said Plato. ‘Thank you for the wonderful conversation.’
At that moment, I felt that I needed the company of someone like Plato in my life. I never thought that a well-spoken conversation would impact me this way. Before, I was searching for a purpose in life and, after having conversed with Plato, I felt like he could help me with that quest. I didn’t know how and why, but what I was sure of was that I wasn’t ready to let go of such a man yet. I wanted to have more conversations with him, to know what it was that affected me this much.
‘It was really pleasant talking to you too, Plato,’ I said, ‘but I feel that I really want to meet you once more. I don’t want to leave today and never see you again.’
Plato smiled and said, ‘I’m really glad that you liked our conversation and even more glad that you want to have more. Tell you what, why don’t you come next Friday night at 8pm here. My friends and I are having a conversation that I think you would like.’
I responded with happiness saying, ‘Thank you very much; I’d really love to meet your friends and hear more of your conversations.’
We exchanged phone numbers and exited the café together. As I entered my mother’s car, I felt lucky to meet such a person and couldn’t wait for the next time I’d meet Plato and his friends. I was so eager for the conversation that would take place. At last, I felt a changing moment had happened in my life, and a beautiful one at that.
By chance of a rainy afternoon in Paris, Nate, a 16-year-old boy meets Plato at a café while waiting for his mother to pick him up. With this encounter, Nate’s world shifts as he is immersed in philosophical discussions with a different people at the very same café each week. Every meeting entails a new discussion, from defining Knowledge to determining things such as Justice versus Equality and Right versus Wrong. The narrative is set almost solely in this café, and with each visit Nate leaves having learnt something new from each person. And about himself too. Coming back to the café he points out how the discussions have impacted his everyday life in some way. And without a doubt the same can be said for us as readers.
I appreciate the book’s structure. The unity of place offers a warm familiarity as well as an intrigue as to what conversation will take place next, who will be sitting at the table? And what will I learn today? There are many things that I’ve taken a way from this book: the admission of not knowing; the fruit borne from having an inquisitive mind; understanding that intellect and wisdom are two different things; a simple explanation demonstrates a clear understanding, and the more experience the more wisdom. The book serves as a kind of student-of-the-world philosophy textbook as it begins with basic foundations of understanding philosophy i.e.-What is Knowledge? And then building on this with other topics that needed this foundation. With the aid of simple examples for each thought and theory a person posits, the language is written in a clear, unintimidating style that makes it easy absorb the complex or circular conversations. The Socratic dialogue offers a riveting prose that feels like an intense tennis match. Almost every chapter concludes with a simple summary of what was discussed, and man, this is so helpful.
I enjoyed seeing Nate’s character development. As the novel progresses, he realizes and accepts that failure is inevitable. Not knowing is inevitable. And for growth-- all of this is essential. Through Nate, Plato and his companions, we learn the humility of listening; reflecting instead of being quick to answer; admitting the flaw in one’s own logic and being willing to receive and work on new ideas and theories. This books shows how the mind can always go further.
I loved that the discussion table had no reserved seats. This little corner in Café de Sofia became to me, a microcosm of what the world should be: people coming together no matter the age, social or cultural background and being embraced for their different thoughts, opinions, and perspectives:
‘Even though they had different beliefs, they worked together in pursuit of the truth and that is exactly what a philosopher should do.’
Listening is one of the hardest things a person can do. People often listen to respond or fight to be heard. Plato, in his wisdom explains this with simple poignance as he describes the School of Pythagoras. As mentioned above, learning the foundations of Western philosophy through the eyes of this ordinary teenage boy has left an impressionable impact that I don’t think many philosophy books would. Relatable feelings such as insecurity of one’s own intellect and intimidation by those more knowledgeable is explored and settles the ease of similarly insecure knowledge seekers such as myself.
A few shortfalls would be the lack of more descriptive language. I understand the intention for this book to reduce things to its fundamental states so as not to take away from the philosophical elements. However, there is a want for more lucid imagery or varied vocabulary:
“She was playing Beethoven’s moonlight sonata and she was good at it.” I think it is a very astute observation for Nate to point out that the pianist was playing Beethoven but the adjective ‘good’ makes it fall flat. The flat diction often jars the elevated surroundings and discussions. Grammar isn’t too bad but there are some prepositions that need to be relooked.
All in all, an insightful, mind-expanding, and intellectually stimulating read. I plan to bank this intellect so it will one day translate into wisdom. For now, I am grateful for this book as it has set me on the path to delve more into philosophical discussions and literature.