Analysis Of Virtue In Meno By Plato

In Plato’s Meno, Socrates and Meno attempt to answer the question, ‘What is virtue?’ Through this discussion, Meno is lead to question whether they are even able to arrive at an answer, presenting us with the paradox of inquiry, ‘And how will you enquire, Socrates, into that which you do not know? What will you put forth as a subject of enquiry? And if you find what you want, how will you ever know that this is the thing which you did not know?’ (Meno 80d). Meno’s paradox states that one cannot gain knowledge through enquiry.

Virtue is a particular moral excellence, a beneficial quality, or power of a thing, and masculine strength or courage. At the end of the Meno, Socrates states that the hypothesis, "if knowledge is virtue, it can be taught." 1 The

In this essay I will show that Socrates answer to Meno 's paradox was unsuccessful. First, I will explain what Meno 's paradox is and how the question of what virtue is was raised. Second, I will explain Socrates attempt to answer the paradox with his theory of recollection and how he believes the soul is immortal. Third, I will provide an argument for why his response was unsuccessful. This will involve looking at empirical questions, rather than non-empirical questions and how Socrates theory of recollection fails in this case. Next, I will provide an argument for why his response was successful. This will involve his interview with the slave boy and how the slave boy is able to provide the correct answers to Socrates questions. Lastly, I will explain why Socrates ' interview with the slave boy does not actually successfully prove his theory of recollection by examining how Socrates phrases his questions.

The central theme of one of Plato’s Five Dialogues, Meno, is to find an answer to the question, “can virtue be taught?” Before answering this question for Meno, Socrates first wants to define virtue because he does not know how one can decide if something can be taught, when one does not technically know what that thing is. Throughout their discussion, they decide on various definitions of virtue, but never decide on one that actually makes sense. The dialogue concludes with Socrates revealing that he believes that virtue cannot be taught because it is not knowledge. Therefore, it is a gift from the gods.

In the Socratic dialogues of Plato, Socrates often argues against the pretence of knowledge in his interlocutors. In the case of the Laches, Meno, and Protagoras dialogues, the pretence is the knowledge of virtue, among other things. The Laches seeks a definition of arête (virtue), the Meno examines the teaching of virtue, and the Protagoras offers a known expert the chance to defend that virtue can, indeed, be taught. Using these dialogues as a backdrop, I will provide an analysis of the arguments and comment on the acquisition of virtue in Platonic dialogue.

Socrates ponders this thought and explains that, “His soul must have always possessed this knowledge, for he either was or was not a man” (The Philosophical Journey 89). This explains that it is an innate notion, where the soul always has the knowledge and can be obtained through remembering said knowledge. Therefore, Socrates believes that since the truth is always inside the soul, then it must be immortal. The soul has all knowledge, and through the process of recollection, one can recover this information.

Therefore, if these things are not exchanged with the help of wisdom then Socrates believes that the aspect of virtue is “…a mere illusion.” (Phaedo 69b). In conclusion, Socrates view on morality is based upon justice, examining how to live, and expanding one’s wisdom.

In the Republic of Plato, the philosopher Socrates lays out his notion of the good, and draws the conclusion that virtue must be attained before one can be good. For Socrates there are two kinds of virtue; collective and individual. Collective virtue is virtue as whole, or the virtues of the city. Individual virtue pertains to the individual himself, and concerns the acts that the individual does, and concerns the individual’s soul. For Socrates, the relationship between individual and collective virtue is that they are the same, as the virtues of the collective parallel those of the Individual. This conclusion can be reached as both the city and the soul deal with the four main virtues of wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice.

In Chapter 2 of Republic, Glaucon uses the Myth of the Lydian Shepherd to portray a pessimistic view of human nature. Plato, the author of Republic, uses his brother Glaucon to tell the Myth of the Lydian Shepherd. We are led to believe that Plato takes the myth and its implications on human nature very seriously by use of a personal character. The argument, originally given by Thrasymachus, contends that at the root of our human nature we all yearn for the most profit possible. It also contends that any man will act immorally if given free reign. The theory proves unplausible due to circularity in the argument and implications that prove untrue.

In the Meno, Socrates and Meno discuss the nature of virtue, the process of acquiring knowledge, and also the concept of the teachability of virtue. Throughout the text, Meno suggests many varying definitions for virtue, all of which Socrates is able to dismantle. The point is also raised that it may be impossible to know about something that was not previously understood, because the searcher would have no idea what to be looking for. To dispute this, Socrates makes a point that all knowledge is innate, and the process of “learning” is really just recollecting knowledge that is buried deeply within the human mind. The issue of the teachability of virtue is an important theme in this dialogue because it raises points about whether virtue is knowledge, which then leads to the issue of knowledge in general.

Meno wants to know whether virtues can be learned or simply known.  Can they be

Meno was one of Plato’s earliest of dialogues, written in depth the book is founded around a central question: If virtue can be taught, then how? And if not, then how does virtue come to man, either by nature or some other way? Socrates addresses this inquiry by questioning a person who claims to understand the term’s meaning (Plato's Meno). The purpose of this essay is to relate the Socratic method performed by Socrates in Plato’s dialogue The Apology, to Meno, by illustrating its effect on the character Meno himself.

“Socrates’ positive influence touches us even today” (May 6) and we can learn a great deal about him from one of his students, Plato. It is in Plato’s report of Socrates’ trial a work entitled, Apology, and a friend’s visit to his jail cell while he is awaiting his death in Crito, that we discover a man like no other. Socrates was a man following a path he felt that the gods had wanted him to follow and made no excuses for his life and they way he lived it.

workers, so that they do not desire to be in the ruler's position. It is seen

When I read Meno and how Plato talks about virtue being different for different people. I agree with his statement to a certain degree, according to Oxford Dictionaries virtue means “a quality considered morally good or desirable in a person.” I can see why Plato would say that virtue is different based on a person’s quality to be taught. But for him to say that it is different for a man and a woman I do not agree with this statement. Plato is making virtue being different due to gender. But either person, male or a female have a biological state or disposition obtaining virtue. I think that virtue is different for some people due to learned behavior in their upbringing. A person can acquire virtue by the values and morals being taught or a sense of behavior, and habits are being formed whether they are good, bad, right or wrong as children. Many of us have formulated our views based on what we have heard, seen, or were taught to believe. I feel that Social class and culture has a great deal to do with some of the displaced morals and values such as ethical subjectivism according to Jean Jacques Rousseau “what a person feels is right is right, and what a person feel is wrong is wrong” (rousseau p.223). In the article on Ethical Subjectivism written by Jean Jacques Rousseau stating that each person determines what is morally right. She gives an example of Emily and Jorge; Jorge steals Emily’s lap top and he feel as though it is okay due to the fact that his lap top