Can virtue be taught? Essay

Socrates was a Greek philosopher who stood for knowledge and virtue. He believed that in order for people to live their best lives, it is necessary for them to do what is right. “It is wicked and shameful to do wrong, to disobey ones superior, be he god or man (Cooper, 29b).” Socrates represents self-knowledge which is evident through his quest for finding someone who was wiser than he was. After his run ins with the likes of the local politicians, craftsmen and poets, Socrates comes to the realization that although these individuals had mastered their craft and were knowledgeable in their field of work, they were clueless in many other important aspects of life. Through this awareness, he accepts the fact that

Many of Socrates’ statements suggest that the moral education offered to each class is substantially different. For example, Socrates asks Glaucon, ‘In the city we’re establishing, who do you think will prove to be better men, the guardians, who receive the education we’ve described, or the cobblers, who are educated in cobblery?’ (456d). Socrates suggests that his city will be harmonized through persuasion (431e-432a) and he claims that the city will run smoothly with relatively few laws (427a). No one will ever find the need to think, speak, or behave in an unacceptable manner because they will not have the mental capability of even thinking to do such a

"Socrates, can virtue be taught?"1 The dialogue begins with Meno asking Socrates whether virtue can be taught. At the end of the Meno (86d-100b), Socrates attempts to answer the question. This question is prior to the division between opinion and knowledge and provides to unsettle both. Anytus participated in Socrates and Meno conversation about virtue. Socrates claims that if virtue is a kind of knowledge, then it can be learned. If it is something besides a kind of knowledge, it perceptibly cannot be taught.

Socrates put one’s quest for wisdom and the instruction of others above everything else in life. A simple man both in the way he talked and the wealth he owned, he believed that simplicity in whatever one did was the best way of acquiring knowledge and passing it unto others. He is famous for saying that “the unexplained life is not worth living.” He endeavored therefore to break down the arguments of those who talked with a flowery language and boasted of being experts in given subjects (Rhees 30). His aim was to show that the person making a claim on wisdom and knowledge was in fact a confused one whose clarity about a given subject was far from what they claimed. Socrates, in all his simplicity never advanced any theories of his own

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.

What arguments do Socrates and his interlocutors provide in these dialogues and what does their discussion suggest about the way in which virtue is in fact acquired? Socrates initiates the inquiries into this problem in each dialogue the same way, that is, to admit no knowledge of the subject at hand. He further admits that he could not possibly teach virtue without knowing what virtue is, “if I do not know what a thing is, how could I know what to teach?” (ho de me oida ti estin,

In order to do this, he goes about Athens questioning those he believes to be wiser than him, including politicians, poets, and craftsmen. Upon this questioning, he discovers that even those perceived as the wisest actually know far less than one would expect. Even the craftsmen, who have much practical wisdom in their respective fields, see their success as merely a tribute to their vast knowledge of many subjects. This, Socrates claims, is not true wisdom. Human wisdom can be described as the acknowledgement and acceptance that one does not know everything, nor is one capable of knowing everything. This, however, does not mean that people should sit idly by, never pursuing wisdom, for it is still vital to the attainment of a good life, which should be the ultimate goal of mankind.

Throughout the text we see Socrates and Meno exercise different ways of explaining what virtue is and they finally come to an agreement in the end that neither of them truly know what virtue is. Socrates says, “Virtue appears to be present in those of us who may possess it as a gift from the gods” (100b). They come to this conclusion for many reasons but one of them that stuck out to me was because they decided it was unteachable. Part of their evidence that virtue could not be taught was based on the fact that they could not find any teachers of virtue. They decided this because they knew good men who had sons who were not as good as them. Socrates says, “Did he not want to make them [his sons] good men? I think he did, but this could not be taught” (94b). Which does make sense to me. Why wouldn’t someone who is good and virtuous want their children to be virtuous as well? Only if they did not know how to teach it or it

If we apply this to the question of virtue, which is being considered in the Meno, neither Socrates nor Meno can define virtue, and so they do not know what virtue is, therefore they can not inquire about virtue.

In Euthyphro, he shows that he is a teacher by teaching Euthyphro what is holy. Euthyphro thought he knew what holy is, but Socrates proves that he is wrong and teaches him what really is holy. Socrates teaches Crito what just really is in Crito. This is another case of somebody thinking they know what something is and Socrates ends up teaching them that they didn’t actually know what they were talking about. Meno is a bit different than the first two. In Meno, Meno asks Socrates a question about virtue whereas in the other two Socrates was teaching something that Euthyphro and Crito thought they knew. Meno is taught that you can’t know if virtue can be taught until you have some understanding of what virtue itself is. Meno had no understanding of what virtue was or if it could be taught, but Socrates gave him a basic understanding of what virtue is and that it can’t be taught. Socrates told people things things they didn’t know, and he showed them things they never saw. Socrates was definitely a

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 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.

According to Socrates’ purpose, he sought out the wisest of people, taught the principle of virtue, and shared his divine beliefs; which had ultimately caused him to create some enemies. Through elenchus and refutation, Socrates’ proved that the wisest of people really weren’t that wise, and this examination was a highly attended event by wealthy young adults.

Socrates does well in applying his Socratic method to his conversation with Meno as well. It seems evident from the text that Meno is rather ignorant. For, a great sum of his responses to Socrates consisted mostly of impertinent questioning and meek agreements. However, Socrates did not seem to mind, as he continued to fathom the nature virtue. He explores the relationship between virtue and knowledge, more specifically whether virtue is a kind of knowledge and may therefore be taught (though he concluded to be uncertain of this case). Socrates also goes on to invalidate Meno’s paradoxical question, “... how will you enquire, Socrates, into that which you do not know?” Socrates concludes with the argument that “...there is no teaching, but only recollection.” He goes on to prove his argument to Meno by questioning one of his slaves. This supports Socrates’ claim

It becomes apparent that Socrates believes that nature triumphs over nurture when he proclaims to Meno, "...it turns out that being good is not something that can be taught; instead, it seems it arises by gift of god, and without understanding, in the people who have it" (Plato 133). Socrates attests to Meno that while it is certainly possible for men to be good, it is impossible for a man to learn to be good from a fellow peer or so-called "teacher." As Meno is unsatisfied with Socrates' argument, Socrates attempts to aid him in understanding by providing him with an explanation on the distinction between knowledge and opinion. Marthe Chandler, a professor of philosophy at DePauw university, describes this when she remarks, "Right opinion and knowledge are both as useful as the statues are lifelike, but just as the statues fly away if they are not tied down, right opinion leaves us--is forgotten--if it is not "tied down" by the logical reasoning