The Scrutiny of Virtue

Aristotle and Plato both said that there are four "natural virtues": Justice, Prudence, Temperance, and Fortitude. These values are all necessary to achieve human flourishing. Another key part of Aristotle’s ethic is what he referred to as ‘The Golden Mean’. He believed that a virtue can not necessarily be viewed as a virtue when it is used in excess. For example, courage is a virtue, but in excess it becomes rashness, a vice rather than a virtue. Moreover, when there is a lack of a certain virtue, this is also considered a vice. Aristotle's ethic is based primarily on balance. There cannot be too much excess or too little of the virtue. Thus, he said: "The mean [i.e. the balance] is successful and commendable. Virtue then is a state of deliberate moral purpose consisting in a mean that is relative to ourselves, the mean being determined by reason, or as a prudent man would determine it.”

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

For centuries in literature, philosophers studied the idea of virtue to demonstrate the uphold of moral excellence and righteousness within characters. Eventually becoming a staple in Western literature, virtue can be described as the balance and imbalance of qualities specified by the philosopher Plato. He thought much of virtue, and eventually defined it according to the four criteria: courage, prudence, temperance, and justice. Plato portrayed courage as the showing of bravery in the midst of danger, prudence is one’s ability to show good judgment and to put other’s needs before their own; temperance is a person’s knowledge of when to show restraint and justice is when one gives to others what is owed to them. These characteristics not

Virtue ethics is a normative theory whose foundations were laid by Aristotle. This theory approaches normative ethics in substantially different ways than consequentialist and deontological theories. In this essay, I will contrast and compare virtue ethics to utilitarianism, ethical egoism, and Kantianism to demonstrate these differences. There is one fundamental aspect of virtue ethics that sets it apart from the other theories I will discuss. For the sake of brevity and to avoid redundancy, I will address it separately. This is the fundamental difference between acting ethically within utilitarianism, egoism, and Kantianism. And being ethical within virtue ethics. The other theories seek to define the ethics of actions while virtue ethics does not judge actions in any way. The other theories deal with how we should act, while virtue ethics determines how we should be.

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.

     When talking about happiness and goodness, there must be an important quality present. According to Aristotle, people need to practice balance and moderation in their every day lives. Achieving this middle ground, or mean, translates into being virtuous in Aristotle’s mind. If virtue is present, so is its opposite vise. For every virtue, there are two vices. One vice is excessive while the other is deficiency. Courage works as a great example because it is virtuous. The excessive vise is recklessness and the

Socrates interaction with Meno started a chain reaction of arguments, claims, and theories. Socrates is known for exposing the ignorance of ethical claims and definitions. In Plato Socrates justifies his actions by stating how he is essentially providing society a service by teaching proper moral values. He believes that living a good life is knowing one’s limitation on their intelligence and seeking knowledge that could help them morally and intellectually. On this basis, Socrates enlists an argument with Meno of what is virtue in terms of the form and characteristics. Socrates, himself, confessed he did not know what virtue is, and in the hope of doing so, presses Meno on his interpretations of virtue. In Plato's, Meno Socrates deducts a claim that “no one desires bad things’’ and gives a valid argument that considers human values and human reasoning.

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.

Meno states that virtue is when a man can manage public affairs while benefiting his friends and harming his enemies. The virtue of a woman is to be submissive to her husband and manage the household. There is a virtue for everyone, their actions, their tasks, and in every age. Socrates response is that even though there are many various types of virtues, there is still a predominant virtue out there that makes and forms all

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

definition of virtue says it is a point between a deficiency and an excess of trait, and the point of

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.

Plato’s dialogue Meno begins with Meno asking Socrates whether virtue can be taught. Socrates responds by saying that he does not have an answer to such question because he does not even have knowledge of what virtue is. This claim prompts Meno to provide Socrates with a definition of virtue. He explains that there are different virtues for different people dependent on their gender, age, and social class (Plato 872). Socrates, however, rejects this definition because it fails to provide a single form common to all kinds of virtue. Meno gives another attempt by defining virtue as the ability to rule over people (Plato 873). Socrates swiftly refutes this claim by pointing out how it fails to explain virtue in the case of a child or slave. In his third attempt, Meno defines virtue as justice, but Socrates again explains how justice is merely a virtue and not a common feature of virtue. In his final attempt, Meno defines virtue as a poet says, “to find joy in beautiful things and have power” (Plato 877). The argument breaks down when Socrates explains how everybody desires good things and that acquiring power is not necessarily a good thing if not accompanied by justice or piety. Thus, Meno has repeated his earlier mistake by using different types of virtues in order to define virtue. In the end, Socrates is left nowhere closer to an answer as Meno realizes that he does not know what virtue is.

After questioning Meno about virtue, Socrates comes to the conclusion that neither he nor Meno truly know the meaning of the word; he then notes that finding a thorough definition for the term is first necessary in order

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