The Meno Dialogue By Socrates

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.

Socrates declares that there is no one to teach people about wisdom and virtues. His conversation with Callias explains that no one can teach wisdom and virtue as there is no one that has mastered wisdom and virtue. Human beings are fallible creatures, morality, ethics and virtues are not always primarily considered in the multitude of decisions and actions that are performed every day. Humans are imperfect individuals, bound by no definitive moral code that is enforceable under any circumstance. Humans are creatures of free will and with free will comes evil and righteousness simultaneously. No one can teach a human being to always be righteous, kind, caring and generous. Socrates declares that there is no one capable of teaching all of these virtues because humans are all imperfect individuals but through inner evaluation humans can constantly strive to get closer to perfection.

"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.

The portrayal of Socrates, through the book “the trial and death of Socrates” is one that has created a fairly controversial character in Western history. In many ways, Socrates changed the idea of common philosophy in ancient Greece; he transformed their view on philosophy from a study of why the way things are, into a consideration man. Specifically, he analyzed the virtue and health of the human soul. Along side commending Socrates for his strong beliefs, and having the courage to stand by those convictions, Socrates can be commended for many other desirable characteristics. Some of those can include being the first martyr to die for his philosophical beliefs and having the courage to challenge indoctrinated cultural norms is part of

The problem with Socrates concerns the problem with the role of value and reason. Nietzsche believes that the bulk of philosophers claim that life is a corrupt grievance for mankind. Nietzsche reasoned that these life deniers were decadents of Hellenism, as a symptom of some underlying melancholy. For someone to paint life in such a negative light they must have suffered a great deal through the course of their own life. Furthermore, these no-sayers agreed in various physiological ways and thus adopted the same pessimistic attitudes towards life. Socrates was ugly, alike decadent criminals and by ways of these similarities was decadent as well. Nietzsche also claims ugliness as a physiological symptom of life in its decline supported by studies in phenology.

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.

Meno questions Scorates about how he will search for virtue and know what it is –

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,

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

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

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.

The use of Socrates’ inquiry in the Meno is a perfect example to show how Socrates pushed his listeners to question their own knowledge. Socrates never told Meno his definitions were wrong and his own were right, rather continued to question Meno’s conclusions to show him that he did not know the true meaning of virtue. The people of Athens were unable to accept the fact that many of them were ignorant on topics such as the definition of virtue, whereas Socrates himself was able to admit it. The Athenians disguised Socrates’ true desire to teach people for corruption and impiety because they believed he was trying to humiliate them. Although the people of Athens were blind of Socrates’ true intentions, his method of inquiry did in fact benefit the city of Athens. Socrates’ methods eliminated ignorance and increased proper knowledge on important things such as virtue and knowledge within the city of Athens, which is what he meant when he said he was “a gift of the gods to the city of Athens.”

In correspondence with Socrates' hypothesis, the virtue fits into it in this way: if virtue is knowledge then it can be taught, but if it is not knowledge then it cannot be taught. It is then concluded that virtue is not knowledge, so it cannot be taught. Since men are not virtuous by nature, the conclusion is reached that people are virtuous only if they have received virtue as a gift from the gods. By using this hypothesis, not only has Socrates answered Meno's original question, he has answered all