Outline and assess Socrates’ argument in the Meno for the claim that virtue is knowledge PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Outline and assess Socrates’ argument in the Meno for the claim that virtue is knowledge PDF

Description

Outline and assess Socrates’ argument in the Meno for the claim that virtue is knowledge The Meno, written by Plato and based off the ideas discussed between Meno and Socrates, discusses the definition and meaning of virtue, particularly between (70-79) and (86-99) – the argument for hypothetical reasoning and knowledge & true belief as a justification for virtue being knowledge. In these discussions, Socrates remains sceptical and admits his ignorance to the definition and meaning behind virtue, whereas meno proposes four arguments for the basis of virtue, trying to persuade Socrates that there is a definition. In this essay I will be discussing the progression of the idea and meaning of virtue through the meno, and will argue for the claim of knowledge. Socrates argues that if virtue is knowledge, then a vice is ignorance. He believes that no one does wrong willingly and the weakness of the will is impossible. He insists that with enough knowledge, you will always do the right thing. This is comprised of two arguments: the arguments for opposites, showing the existence of the soul: and the argument for knowledge – that wisdom is, or makes up part of virtue. This conclusion arrives from the debate between Meno and Socrates. Meno begins from the initial standpoint that there are different virtues for men, women and children. For example; men have the virtue of helping others, and women to be submissive. Socrates disregards this idea as he believes that virtue must be defined by a single entity rather than a list of virtues from different people. He explains this error with an example of a swarm of bees; each bee differs in size and shape, like men and women, but “they do not differ from one another in being bees.” – meaning we should seek to define virtue which encapsulates humans as a whole rather than this, a list as meno is forming not a single definition, but a set of. As written in the republic, Socrates is after the form of virtue – a single form which contains qualities we all possess, some more than others. This forms the basis of the argument for opposites as the existence of the soul, leading to the claim that virtue is knowledge by possessing a part of the form of virtue in their soul, once Socrates can show that the soul exists through the argument for opposites, he can show how virtue is gained and realised through the accumulation of knowledge through the form of virtue within the soul. Rather than Meno’s first definition of virtue, Socrates responds by proposing that qualities such as health and strength are all qualities the form of virtue would posses, and are qualities shown in both men and women. Meno takes a second attempt at defining virtue; the “desire of beautiful things”, as meno believes that these aspects such as health and strength are equally as vague as his first definition. Socrates however, dismisses this statement as some men desire bad things, because they lack the knowledge that these things they desire are bad, or even if they are aware, they lack the knowledge as to how they can overcome these bad desires. This premise is justified by Socrates’ belief that no one desires bad things. However, the problem with the assumption of knowledge being virtue is called the ‘Socratic paradox’ and is an argument against the claim that virtue is knowledge: If we are seeking the nature of something we do not know, how will we know when we have found it? Socrates answers this through the process of recollection of the soul, and the forms – in this case the form of virtue as discussed in the Republic. He believes that we are not learning new knowledge, but are simply remembering, or recollecting the truth we are not yet aware of. This argument is backed upon the belief that the soul exists, earlier explained Socrates’ argument for opposites. Because the soul is immortal, the process of recollection begins, gaining knowledge and therefore virtue. The mind cannot know to seek knowledge, but rather can recollect virtue from experience. This process of recollection, and therefore justification that virtue is knowledge, is shown to the Meno in the slave boy analogy, where a slave, during the dialogue between Socrates and the Meno is asked a mathematical question, clearly one a slave boy without prior teaching is unable to answer. This is clear, but after a few attempts, the slave boy begins to understand (or as Socrates demonstrates, begins to recollect knowledge from the soul) without teaching. Even though he still cannot answer the problem, he has still progressed. This analogy shows that “we will be better men if we believe that one must search for the things one does not know” – and therefore concludes that you cannot be virtuous without knowledge, the knowledge of what is or how to obtain virtue. Still, though, this is not a definition of virtue.

Socrates persists that we must not seek to find how virtue is obtained, but rather try to define it. He suggests that we can form a definition of virtue without describing a list of virtuous attributes we know exist in the world by forming a hypothesis. This is his second answer to the Socratic paradox problem earlier proposed. As

with the slave, you can approach a hypothesis without yet knowing the answer or how to find the answer – a common approach in science. His hypothesis; if virtue is a kind of knowledge, then it can be taught. Is there anything which is good and not knowledge? If yes, then virtue cannot be knowledge – as virtue only encompass’ what is good. Good things can only be used badly without knowledge. Knowledge is wisdom and understanding. Socrates argued that no one can be virtuous by nature because this would mean that they are also wise by nature and therefore they would not be influenced by anything bad in the world – which we know empirically does not happen. When you fully understand what is bad, then you gain wisdom, therefore virtue is only virtue if it has the context of wisdom because you cannot have a virtue which is bad. Without wisdom, you cannot have virtue, and since there is nothing which has both wisdom and is bad, anything beneficial in the soul is directed by wisdom. Therefore, Socrates argues that virtue is defined as, in whole or part, wisdom. He adds: “if soul is directed by wisdom, it must end in happiness.” Therefore, Socrates concludes his second argument in the meno, the argument for knowledge, suggesting that virtue is knowledge in part or whole. The only question that remains is whether virtue is simply identical with wisdom, or whether virtue just has a part which is wisdom, or the understanding of knowledge. Meno asks whether applied virtue is taught, learned through practice or is inherent from nature. Knowledge of virtue can be obtained, so surely it can be taught? The problem here is that if virtue can be taught, then there must be those who teach virtue and those who learn it., and Socrates argues at the beginning of the meno that he has not found anyone who can teach virtue, so therefore it cannot be taught. However, some have tried to teach virtue such as Themistocles trying to teach his son Pericles how to be a good horseman, however the son never became virtuous through teaching, showing he failed to teach virtue. This leads to the thought that; if someone can’t be virtuous by nature (if they have no wisdom by nature they can’t be virtuous by nature), and they cannot be taught virtue, then how can someone become virtuous? Socrates answers this by believing that in order to become virtuous, we must have “correct opinion”, which is then justified by “an account of the reason why” gained through recollection. The capacity for correct opinion therefore can only be obtained from a “gift of the gods” – as it cannot be taught and cannot come naturally. While this criticism questions the acquisition of wisdom, it does not question whether virtue is knowledge in itself, just the ability to obtain the understanding of knowledge in order to gain virtue. Oliver Daniels...