Mediocrites - Socrates' more-successful brother

Some scholars claim this is an image of Mediocrites

Socrates's older brother, Mediocrites (c 485 BC-?), is regarded by most modern Westerners as the most successful and (therefore) most emulation-worthy of all philosophers; although we know nothing specific about him; and he never said, did or wrote anything interesting, honest, or of any value.

While Socrates was condemned to death by poison, having published nothing; Mediocrites success was objective and permanent - he was (it is supposed) given the highest honours of the Athenian democracy, paid a lavish salary, put in charge of all political and social institutions, and granted power of veto over all major public projects.

Mediocrites's curriculum vitae was lengthy and consisted attendance at prestigious institutions, examination results, awards, grants, tax breaks, subsidies.

We have detailed descriptions of Socrates' appearances, and manners; he attracted eminent followers; his words were transcribed; and he was parodied by the great playwrights of that era. 

But despite his brother's much greater success, Mediocrites remains a mystery wrapped in an enigma. We know he did a lot of things but not what any of these things actually were...   

From contemporary accounts it seems that Mediocrites had his name upon numerous essays and books, and often spoke at large public gatherings. But, sadly, it seems that nobody remembered anything Mediocrites said, and nobody bothered to preserve any of his writings... 

Indeed nobody can remember anything about him!

Whereas Socrates is all-but unknown, despised; and his model of religiousness, truthfulness and integrity have become the most hated and persecuted of values; Modern Britain, and indeed the Modern World itself, is run entirely by the disciples of Mediocrites.

Wherever we look, and the more so the higher we look; we see Mediocrities in charge, Mediocrities making all the important decisions, Mediocrities garnering all the highest plaudits.

Plato (and Xenophon) both recorded the Apology of Socrates, the defence argument at his trial: the justification of his life and work. However; despite its philosophical and literary greatness, Socrates' statement cut-no-ice then, and was indeed counter-productive.

But success was the Apology of Mediocrites - the justification for his life. 

Against success - there is no argument. 

Socrates was a loser, Mediocrites was a winner; and that is all that needs to be said.

Note: Adapted from an earlier post.