The, Virtue, By Socrates And Meno

The Crito and the Republic were both works of Plato. Plato’s works were divided into early, middle and late dialogues. The Crito falls into the category of the formal while the Republic falls into the category of the latter. In his early dialogues, Plato was influenced by Socratic philosophy but as he ages, he starts to develop his distinct and independent philosophy. Justice is the fundamental concept that will be discussed in this paper. The scope of discussion will mainly revolve around the Crito, the Apology and the Republic. In Socrates’ submission and acceptance of his sentence lies the implication that Socrates agrees with democracy as a political system. Plato, on the other hand,

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.

The Republic by Plato examines many aspects of the human condition. In this piece of writing Plato reveals the sentiments of Socrates as they define how humans function and interact with one another. He even more closely Socrates looks at morality and the values individuals hold most important. One value looked at by Socrates and his colleagues is the principle of justice. Multiple definitions of justice are given and Socrates analyzes the merit of each. As the group defines justice they show how self-interest shapes the progression of their arguments and contributes to the definition of justice.

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.

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

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

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 Plato’s The Republic and The Apology, the topic of justice is examined from multiple angles in an attempt to discover what justice is, as well as why living a just life is desirable. Plato, writing through Socrates, identifies in The Republic what he thought justice was through the creation of an ideal city and an ideal soul. Both the ideal city and the ideal soul have three components which, when all are acting harmoniously, create what Socrates considers to be justice. Before he outlines this city and soul, he listens to the arguments of three men who hold popular ideas of the period. These men act to legitimize Socrates’ arguments because he finds logical errors in all of their opinions. In The Apology, a different, more down-to-Earth, Socrates is presented who, through his self-defense in court, reveals a different, even contradictory, view of the justice presented in The Republic. In this paper, the full argument of justice from The Republic will be examined, as well as the possible inconsistencies between The Republic and The Apology.

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.

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.

In order to explain the fundamentals of Aristotle's Virtue Ethics, one must acknowledge his primary motive in this study, which is to understand what it means to live well. Unlike

Many philosophers through history have dealt with happiness, pleasure, justice, and virtues. In this essay there will given facts on virtues between two philosophers who have different views on the topic. Aristotle and Kant have two totally different views on virtue, one being based on the soul and how you character depicts you virtue and the other which is based of the fact that anyone has a chance of being morally good, even bad people. There is a lot of disagreement between Aristotle and Kant, which has examples to back the disagreements. Aristotle takes virtue as an excellence, while Kant takes it more to being a person doing something morally good in the society and for them as a person. One similarity between these two philosophers though, is that these two descriptions of virtue lead back to happiness in the individual. At the end of this essay, the reader should be capable of understanding that Aristotle’s theory is more supported than Kant’s theory. Of course, explanations for both sides will be given thoroughly throughout this comparison.

Meno was one of Plato’s earliest of dialogues, written in depth the book is founded around a central question: If virtue can be taught, then how? And if not, then how does virtue come to man, either by nature or some other way? Socrates addresses this inquiry by questioning a person who claims to understand the term’s meaning (Plato's Meno). The purpose of this essay is to relate the Socratic method performed by Socrates in Plato’s dialogue The Apology, to Meno, by illustrating its effect on the character Meno himself.