The paradox “learning is impossible” presented by Socrates in 80e consists of two situations about knowledge—either you know something or you don't. If you know something, you don’t have to learn it because you already know it. And if you don’t know a certain thing at all, you still cannot learn it because either it's impossible “to aim to search” for it or you don’t even recognize this is the kind of knowledge that you are seeking when coming across it. The “recollection” is a “recalling ” or a “searching ” process which allows a human to realize things and knowledge that they already knew before. Socrates claims that all human souls are “immortal” and they have seen “all things” and learned about “all things” in the “underworld” (81c) but they just don’t realize it. The “recollection” rules out the whole part of the second situation—“ you don’t know—“ by saying that humans have all kinds of knowledge already. Therefore, the premise “if you don’t know” is false. Also, the “recollection” is necessary to recall what they knew already. For Meno, this is also called “learning.” Therefore “recollection” attacks the conclusion of the first situation—“you don’t have to learn”. …show more content…
Socrates uses three facts to defend his claim about "recollection". Those three facts are: 1. Before the “recollection”, the slave didn’t know or knew little about
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.
Before addressing the fundamental issues of the Theory of Recollection, it is worth noting that Socrates never addresses the second half of Meno’s Paradox- assuming one has found what it is they are looking for, how is one to know they have found it if they do not know what they are looking for? There seems to lack a method for verifying one’s answer and if you cannot confirm that what you have found is in fact what you were looking for then inquiry seems to be never-ending. Although this is a discussion for another time, it does highlight an issue, which Socrates faces in the first part of the paradox, the part he addresses, which is the problem of circularity. Ironically, Socrates’ Theory of Recollection, which is used to overcome
Jeremy Jones Professor Edwards Philosophy 102 4 December 2015 The Euthyphro Paradox Socrates is said to be one of the wisest man who ever lived. Even in the book, The Trial and Death of Socrates, the Oracle of Delphi even said that no man is wiser than Socrates. Although that statement in itself can be dissected and analyzed, the main focus at hand is that of line 10a of the Euthyphro. In this passage, Socrates presents to Euthyphro what is known even to this day as the “Euthyphro Paradox”.
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.
In the reading of “Innate Knowledge,” Socrates ponders around the idea that there is such a thing as an afterlife and that when one wishes to learn a certain subject, they are all recollecting what they already knew from their previous life, meaning that one's soul is immortal. Furthermore Socrates argues that a man cannot learn what he already knows, or about that which he does not know because if he knew what he wanted to learn, then he would not have the slightest clue as to what he was looking for in that particular subject (4). In other words, one does not learn, but recollect their memories and knowledge from their past life. This was observed when one of Meno’s servants who had never been educated demonstrated his capacity of knowledge
Socrates attempts to solve this paradox with his theory of recollection. He begins by speaking of the soul of man as being immortal - that it dies and is reborn, again and again. He goes on to say `seeing that the soul is immortal and has been born many times, and has beheld all things both in this world and in the nether realms, she has acquired knowledge of all and everything; so that it is no wonder that she should be able to recollect all that she knew about other things. For as all nature is akin, and the soul has learned all things, there is no reason why we should not, by remembering but one single thing - an act which men call learning - discover everything else.'
Meno 's paradox is a very prevalent paradox in the area of philosophy. It arises during a conversation between Socrates and Meno in the book Five Dialogues. Meno and Socrates are speaking about what virtue is when Meno raises an interesting point, “How will you look for it, Socrates, when you do not know at all what it is? How will you aim to search for something you do not know at all? If you should meet with it, how will you know that this is the thing that you did not know?” (p. 70). In simple terms, Meno is asking Socrates how he will
Socrates then introduces the discussion of “what is completely,” “what is and what is not,” and “what is not completely,” (Republic 477a, 478a-478c). Knowledge is to know something that exists (i.e. object of knowledge). While objects of belief consists of what does exist and does not exist. This shows how knowledge is infallible and true belief is fallible. Knowledge is eternal and does not change or go anywhere, and true belief is the opposite.
Socrates tells a story in an attempt to explain this. It starts with a man named Chaerephon, a well respected citizen of Athens, who had died recently. Chaerephon goes to the Oracle at Delphi and "he asked if there was anyone wiser than" Socrates. (Apology, Plato, Philosophic Classics, page 23) The Oracle, of course, says that there is no man wiser than Socrates. When Socrates heard of what the Oracle said, he begins to wonder what riddle is hidden in those words. He knows that he is not a wise man, so he knows that he cannot be the wisest of men. Not knowing what then Oracle truly meant, he goes out to investigate this. He went to a man who was reputed to be very wise. He thought that he would find a man who is wiser than himself, and thus point out to the Oracle its mistake. Socrates finds that this man actually knows nothing that is worth knowing. When Socrates tries to point this out to the man, he and the bystanders become angry. Socrates says that he is wiser than this man because, while they both know nothing, Socrates realizes this. The other man thinks he knows things that he does not, while Socrates knows that he knows nothing. Socrates claims that he has done this with many men, and that each time, he came to the same result: the man knows nothing and thinks he knows everything, and Socrates has made the man angry. In continuing to do this, Socrates made many men angry, and that anger turned into
Towards the end of Meno, Socrates states that knowledge differs from true opinion in its ability to last over long periods of time. Socrates acknowledges that in many ways, knowledge and true opinion are equal; since both are certainly true, they lead to correct action without distinction. For example, in the passage Socrates compares a man who knows the way to Larisa to one who has a right opinion about the directions but has never actually been there, concluding that both would be equally competent guides. However, knowledge is, he argues, “fastened by the tie of the cause,” meaning one who has knowledge of a certain statement has grounded that truth in explanations and reasoning. Earlier in Meno, Socrates
Socrates spent his time questioning people about things like virtue, justice, piety and truth. The people Socrates questioned are the people that condemned him to death. Socrates was sentenced to death because people did not like him and they wanted to shut him up for good. There was not any real evidence against Socrates to prove the accusations against him. Socrates was condemned for three major reasons: he told important people exactly what he thought of them, he questioned ideas that had long been the norm, the youth copied his style of questioning for fun, making Athenians think Socrates was teaching the youth to be rebellious. But these reasons were not the charges against him, he was charged with being an atheist and
Socrates is believed to be one of the greatest philosophers of all time and he is credited as being the founder of western philosophy. This paper will explain some of his views to the most fundamental questions of today’s age. These questions will include topics about morality, the human condition, solution, and death. After Socrates’ views on these topics are explained, a critique will be done on his answers. I will start out by explaining exactly who Socrates is, and the time that he lived in. To start out, we will first examine Socrates’ view on morality.
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.
This is a clearer example of what Plato wrote about. Socrates said that virtue is knowledge which is to know what is right is to do what is right. All wrong doing is the result of ignorance, nobody chooses to do wrong purposely. Therefore, to be honest you must have true knowledge. Plato was trying to find a solution to the problem that although there is fundamental steadiness in the world (sun comes up every morning), it is constantly changing (you never step into the same river twice). An old theory about this problem is that we gain all knowledge from our senses. Plato disagreed with this. He said that because the world is constantly changing, our senses cannot be trusted. Socrates sets up a mathematical problem for a slave boy. The slave boy knows the answer, yet he has not been taught arithmetic. Plato suggests that the slave boy remembers the answer to the problem, which has been in
In the dialogue of Meno, Socrates explains the idea of recollection with the question and answer period between himself and the boy. Meno asks Socrates, “What do you mean by saying that we do not learn, and