Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
can we teach virtue?
can we teach virtue?
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: can we teach virtue?
In this paper, I will exam Plato’s idea of “virtue is knowledge” to understand “can virtue be taught”. In my opinion, Plato does not strictly proves “virtue is knowledge”; instead, he believes that “virtue is the gift of God”.
“Can virtue be taught?” This is question Plato is trying to answer in Meno. This problem is important and serious, because its answer directly concerns a question about how we understand and position education. The reason for Plato making this question is related to his opposition to the wise men. It is well known in the times of Socrates and Plato, some wise men advocate “virtue can be taught” to recruit a large number of young customers. They pull out money from pocket; hope the wise men can teach them virtue However, from Plato’s and Socrates’s viewpoint, this kind of behavior ruins people’s virtue. Therefore, to criticism theses wise men, they must refute “virtue can be taught”.
Before Meno, Plato reflects “can virtue be taught” in Protagoras. In this dialogue, Plato selects Protagoras as Socrates’s opponent, the intention is obvious, if the wise men like Protagoras cannot provide sufficient and strong argument for “virtue can be taught”, then it is doubtful for the wise men to advocate “virtue can be taught”. That is only for questioning “virtue can be taught”, Protagoras cannot be considered as fail. Because in this dialogue, except in one or two places the requirements Socrates proposes to Protagoras seem quite unreasonable, even a little inconsiderate (Plato, Protagoras, 2002, pp. 27-31, 334c-338e),most of the time, Protagoras does not succeed in persuading Socrates. But the problem is that, although the argument “virtue can be taught" seems doubtful, but in the dialogue Socrates was not able to pre...
... middle of paper ...
...f his way of thinking; almost all of Plato's dialogues are not transcend this limitation. Confined on the way of thinking, Plato always trying to find a common definition of the concept and according to the definition starts analyzing and discussing. Although he stressed the overall concept, also pay attention to the semantics of the language, but he did not realize that the language system itself is whole organic and inseparable from human practice, the concept of universal knowledge and understanding cannot be separated from holding a special section. So, in Meno, he rejects virtue of a special category from discussing the issue is inappropriate.
Works Cited
Plato. (2002). Meno. In G. Grube., Five Dialogues (pp. 58-92). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.
Plato. (2002, November 3). Protagoras. (C.c.W.Taylor, Ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press Inc.
Right after Socrates comments how they can both look for virtue, Meno gives him these questions: “How will you look for it, Socrates, when you do not know at all what it is? How will you aim to search for something you do not know at all? If you should meet with it, how will you know that this is the thing you did not know (80d)?” This is Meno’s paradox which explains the discovery of knowledge is impossible and if you do not know what you are learning, and that you cannot discover it either. Meno states in his first premise that you either know what knowledge is or you don’t, and whether you do know it or not, you cannot discover what that piece of knowledge is. This,
ABSTRACT: Plato’s best-known distinction between knowledge and opinion occurs in the Meno. The distinction rests on an analogy that compares the acquisition and retention of knowledge to the acquisition and retention of valuable material goods. But Plato saw the limitations of the analogy and took pains to warn against learning the wrong lessons from it. In this paper, I will revisit this familiar analogy with a view to seeing how Plato both uses and distances himself from it.
Plato. Menexenus. The Rhetorical Tradition: Readings from Classical Times to the Present. 2nd ed. Trans. Benjamin Jowett. Ed. Patricia Bizzell & Bruce Herzberg. New York: Bedford/St. Martins, 2001. 60A-63B. Print.
The critical argument, known as Meno's Paradox, as presented in Plato's “Meno”, questions the very basis of Socrates method of arriving at knowledge of unknown things through inquiry. If Socrates truly wants to gain knowledge of what no one else knows, then the content of that “unknown” thing will produce absolutely nothing. The paradox bases itself in stating that humans can never learn anything that they don't already obtain knowledge of. As identified by Meno, the paradox is this: "And how are you going to inquire about it, Socrates, when you do not at all know what it is? For what sort of thing, from among the ones you do not know, will you take as the object of your inquiry? And even if you do happen to bump right into it, how are you going to know that It is the thing you did not know?” By saying this, Meno proposes that since Socrates does not really know what virtue is, he cannot find it because he would not recognize it even if he did. Each time Meno offers an explanation of the term, Socrates rejects them immediately because they are, in his eyes, inadequate. Socrates delivers an excellent theory, along with an example, to criticize this paradox and provide for the opportunity of humans achieving knowledge.
In The Republic Plato argues that some women have the ability to become philosopher-Guardians. This idea during that time wasn’t viewed as a normal idea to spring upon, therefor Plato argues this statement through questionings and contradictions to justify this radical idea. He does so by summing up his ideas and thoughts through his theory of virtue.
Socrates also brings up a key distinction between true opinion and knowledge, relating to the paradox, which will too be examined. Socrates then gives basis for more argument regarding the paradox, and why he does this will also be examined. The initial argument takes place when Socrates challenges Meno to define virtue. Meno does not realize here what he has started. Meno has before inquired whether virtue is a quality that can be taught or if it is a natural trait, that men are born with.
Aristotle claims that there are two types of virtue: intellectual and moral. Intellectual virtues must be taught, so it requires experience and time. On the other hand, “none of the moral virtues arises in us by nature; for nothing that exists by nature can form a habit contrary to its nature.” (Aristotle 23) He says that when we are born, we all have the potential to be morally virtuous; it just depends on our upbringing and habits that determine who actually becomes virtuous. He confirms this with a metaphor to government, when he says, “legislators make the citizens good by forming habits in them.” (23) This is showing that on all levels, virtue is something that needs to be taught.
Plato believes the conversation to search for what virtue really is should continue despite achieving no success in their first efforts to form a satisfactory definition. Meno becomes very aggravated with Plato and proposes a valid argument to him. Meno exclaims,
The Meno is another story written by Plato in which Socrates uses his method of inquiry on the youth of Athens. The story illustrates how successful the Socratic method is in terms of helping the city of Athens by creating a more educated and ethical community. The story’s dialogue begins with Meno asking Socrates if virtue can be taught, and Socrates responds by saying “I myself, Meno, am as poor as my fellow citizens in this matter, and I blame myself for my complete ignorance about virtue” implying that he does not know the true definition of virtue, nor does anyone else, making it impossible to teach. Meno claims that virtue is different for different people based on things such as sex or age, and Socrates rejects this idea. Meno then proposes that virtue is the desire for good ...
Plato, and G. M. A. Grube. "Phaedo." Five Dialogues. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Pub., 2002. 93-
In the Meno, Plato addresses the question of virtue, what it is, how to obtain and if virtue can be taught. Meno came to conclusion after a long discussion with Socrates that it is impossible to know what virtue is. The Meno’x paradox states, “if one knows what virtue is, he does not need to search for it. However, if one does not know what virtue is, how can he search for it? He may not know he has it even when he gets it.” Seeing how hopeless Meno is, Socrates propose the theory of recollection as a way to obtain virtue. This paper will argue against this theory.
...e process, Socrates illustrated the fallacy in particular proofs. Socrates deliberately determines excellence is unlike knowledge. This failure furthers Socrates’ argument that a consistent proof must be used correctly. Socrates methods are intended to force Meno’s review of the argument and develop a personal definition of excellence. Meno must determine that a consistent argument develops the same conclusion with every application. As a result, the definition of knowledge will determine that excellence is teachable and attainable. Socratic methods stimulate the development of personal resolutions. Through review, Meno, as the student, must conclude that excellence is attainable because knowledge is attainable. The divinity of the excellence is not sufficient to define excellence in relation to humans. Therefore, excellence must be a genuine characteristic.
In The Abolition of Man, Plato comes up with a question that he answers himself. Can virtue be taught? In his writings, he answers this question with eleven simple words. “No justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous”. This is simply implying that virtue can’t be taught because being virtuous is something you are born with. A twist to this question that could possibly give us a positive answer would be asking if virtue could be learned. The only difference between these questions is that when you ask if virtue can be learned, you’re inferring that there is a teacher and a pupil. Asking if something can be learned simply suggests that there is a student and he teaches himself virtue by experiencing life lessons. To give an example, asking if a person was taught how to play soccer means that there was someone to teach that person; while asking whether a person learned to play soccer has certain inclination towards that person learning from life experiences or by watching soccer being played.
In The Republic, a truly just state contains four cardinal virtues, which can also be found in a just individual. Justice is the fourth cardinal virtue, but can only be reached once three other virtues are achieved. The first cardinal virtue necessary for justice is wisdom. In an individual, wisdom stems from the prevalence of reason in one’s rational mind, which in turn leads to knowledge and a good sense of judgment. When extended to the just state, the members of Socrates’ utopian society who embody wisdom are the ruling class of philosopher kings (Plato, Republic, 428e). In fact, wisdom is so important to Socrates that he believes in a extremely rigid and structured education for these members of society, so as to develop the rational part of their brain (Plato, Republic, 428e). Courage is another virtue necessary for justice, and occurs when an individual’s wisdom is “backed up” by his or her spirit, unflinching in the face of “fears and desires”(Plato, Republic, 429d). Without courage, wisdom and reason will not be the dominant forces is one’s mind. This reasoning certainly applies to the importance of auxiliaries in a perfect society, where the values and beliefs integral to its well being are constantly imparted on public servants through education and training (Plato, Republic,
Plato, Complete Works ed. By John M Cooper and D.S. Hutchinson, Hackett (1997 p. 15)