Well yes, they have touched me deeper, but Socrates has also touched my life pretty deeply (well... Plato I suppose is the real one behind it). What I am doing is questioning conformist reverence towards classics. Just because it's classic doesn't mean it's good. I look at the works of the legendary philosophers purely for their intellect and worth as it stands right here and now, and I don't feel like anything they are saying is more profound than things that rock musicians say. I do think that the philosophers have expressed themselves better, but I don't think that they are mammoth geniuses.
Also take into account that I don't believe in wisdom. All the long discussions with wise people I've had, and all the famous philosophers I've read, it all leaves me pretty empty. Many very intelligent things have been said, but I'm of the opinion that their brilliance (Socrates, Locke, Morrison, Young, and everyone's) is just skin deep. Anything is only worth anything if someone takes it, uses it, and succeeds by it. What specifically makes these outstanding works of literature so untouchable and superior? Whatever it is I clearly need it to be explained to me, because all that I've read has been extremely intelligent thinking, but as there is only really one level of intelligence (because there is no universal truth, in my opinion) it doesn't go onto any higher levels than what Jim Morrison has said.