Plato 's Meno And Nietzsche On Truth And Lie

What is a lie? And when is it appropriate to tell a lie? Are two questions to think about after reading Plato's Republic translated by G.M.A Grube. A lie by definition is a false statement intended to deceive. Most people would agree this is not a "just" thing to do to your friends. In American society today, lying has always been a "bad" thing to do. Trust is very important, parents always tell their kids never to lie or they will loose their trust. Plato disagrees, with what most parents say to their children. He states there are two different kinds of lies, ones that are always improper to tell (True falsehoods). And ones that are suitable to tell against enemies, to prevent something bad happening to a

In the Meno, Plato believes that true beliefs becomes knowledge by the grounding true belief. As mentioned before, if virtue is x, then it can be taught (because knowledge can be taught), therefore virtue (x) is equal to knowledge. Plato's expositions of elements of his own theory of knowledge, yet, the investigation of knowledge is indirect. I believe Socrates states that everyone was born with a knowledge of right and wrong, he / she needed to experience situations where he / she needed to recall this knowledge. He makes reference to the initial knowledge being in the soul.

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

Meno was a student of Gorgias, and he has a long discussion with Socrates about what virtue is. Socrates and Meno wonder if virtue can be taught, Meno proposes that it may be a result of practice or an inherent trait, but before they can answer that question they first need to agree on what virtue is. Meno makes multiple attempts at a description of virtue and Socrates points out potential problems. A definition of virtue is not settled, which leads to the discussion about the problem of learning. If neither or them know what virtue is then how will they know if they find it. Plato describes this ongoing discussion between Socrates and Meno.

In his book, Twilight of the Idols, Friedrich Nietzsche aggressively challenges conventional schools of thought dating back to the ancients. Philosophy, as we know it, began over two-thousand years ago in Athens with the birth of Socrates. Socrates introduced the practice of reasoning and dialectics—the art of discourse hoping to bring individuals closer to some universal truth—to an Athenian society that previously held aesthetics, not logic, as indicative of goodness. Socrates revolutionized life in Athens, and by extension, the Western tradition. His beliefs are found in works written centuries after his death. He is heralded as the “father of philosophy.”

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.

Philosophy can be defined as the pursuit of wisdom or the love of knowledge. Socrates, as one of the most well-known of the early philosophers, epitomizes the idea of a pursuer of wisdom as he travels about Athens searching for the true meaning of the word. Throughout Plato’s early writings, he and Socrates search for meanings of previously undefined concepts, such as truth, wisdom, and beauty. As Socrates is often used as a mouthpiece for Plato’s ideas about the world, one cannot be sure that they had the same agenda, but it seems as though they would both agree that dialogue was the best way to go about obtaining the definitions they sought. If two people begin on common ground in a conversation, as Socrates often tries to do, they are

However, Petruzzi explains that Plato's dialogical strategy leads to an assumption of the indeterminate nature of truth and a “philosophical rhetor who "knows" that she is not able to know with any certainty” (Petruzzi 16). He insists that the primary quality of Plato's texts is “that dialogue and dialectic express neither a technical skill nor a method, but rather a mode of being-in-the-world: Dialectic is not so much a techne-that is, an ability and knowledge-as a way of being" (Petruzzi 17). For Plato, rhetoric is is agreement between participants where its success is reliant upon them presenting opposing sides or bringing a problem under consideration. Petruzzi explains that Plato searched for a stable definition that would anchor a concept in “"one" unified and temporary intellectual position.” However, he struggled because the disclosure of truth, through dialogue and dialectic, “explicitly contains the perspectival and relational quality of aletheia, or unconcealment” (Petruzzi 17). As we see, Plato strove for truth, but his error with in thinking that there were absolute truths that don’t change. William Benoit said that Plato’s views stand in sharp relief against those of the Sophists because he believed in certain knowledge, for he declares rather bluntly in the Gorgias that "truth, you see, can never be refuted." In the Phaedrus, he

The story of two sisters, Melissa and Melinda, is one of deep philosophical analysis. The harsh scenario is of the two sisters’ brother, Matthew, who is involved in a horrific accident that essentially leaves him brain dead and only alive through a complex network of life support systems. According to Matthew’s last will and testament, he states specifically that if something of this sort ever happens to him, both sisters must mutually agree upon the ultimate decision of whether or not to proverbially “pull the plug.” This is a massive decision that will take great deliberation upon both parties to inevitably come to common terms with one another. Essentially, both sisters have their own aspect of what they should do regarding

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.

Even though they were separated by thousands of years, hundreds of miles, and different cultures, the philosophical views of Friedrich Nietzsche and Plato can be examined and weighed against each other in many different ways. Friedrich Nietzsche, born in 1844, was a German philosopher whose main goal was to erect a new image for the people and to create a free spirit in them. Plato, born in 427 B.C., was a Greek philosopher whose main goal was to create a new way of thinking about the world itself, knowledge itself, philosophy itself, and the individual. Both philosophers have obvious similarities; their literary style of writing is perhaps the most apparent, but also their desire

The discussion of true belief and knowledge in the Meno develops in the analogy of the traveling men; one who knows the correct path to Larissa and the other who has a true belief of the correct path to Larissa (Meno 97a-c). Socrates tells Meno that if both men led to the same result, then true belief is no more useful than knowledge and both beneficial (Meno 97c). This comparison changes in book five of the Republic when Socrates says an ideal state must have a philosopher-king as a ruler (Republic 473d-e).

question.  Meno states that, "it is easy to say that a man's virtue consists of

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

The physical world only has one constant - change. The human senses give an idea of the present reality. However, seeing is not believing. The perception we develop through the senses (seeing, smelling, tasting, touching, and hearing) does not consist of real truth. Real truth is not what is in front of us, but of absolute concepts and unchanging truths. Plato encouraged looking past what is directly visible in order to find truths that exist independent of the physical world. The understanding of the idea of reality through the discussion of the Divided Line and the allegory of the cave directly contributes and proves his theory of Forms and lie at the heart of his philosophy, which I think is convincing because of the extent of his discussions through experimental-based and direct evidence.