Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Plato's argument of recollection
Plato's theory of recollection
Plato vs socrates essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Plato's argument of recollection
Recollection in Plato's Phaedo and Meno
As the earliest philosopher from whom we have written texts, Plato is often misrepresented as merely reproducing Socratic rhetoric. In Meno, one of the first Platonic dialogues, Plato offers his own unique philosophical theory, infused with his mentor's brilliant sophistry.
Amidst discussing whether or not virtue can be taught, Meno poses a difficult paradox: How can one be virtuous, or seek virtue, when one cannot know what it is? "How will you aim to search for something you do not know at all?" (Plato, Meno, 80d). From this question, Plato purposes a solution, that knowledge must be recollected from the soul. When the soul enters the world of space and time, Plato suggests, it carries some prior knowledge of forms; that is to say, the soul "remembers" its knowledge of unchangeable truths. (Meno, 81c-d).
Thus follows the conclusion that education cannot teach knowledge, but rather aids a student to recall what the soul already knows. Plato notes, however, that although the body is capable of recollecting knowledge (of forms), it is...
Hemingway’s narrative technique, then, is characterized by a curt style that emphasizes objectivity through highly selected details, flat and neutral diction, and simple declarative sentences capable of ironic understatements; by naturalistic presentation of actions and facts, with no attempt of any kind by the author to influence the reader; by heavy reliance on dramatic dialogue of clipped, scrappy forms for building plot and character; and by a sense of connection between some different stories so that a general understanding of all is indispensable to a better understanding of each. He thus makes the surface details suggest rather than tell everything they have to tell, hence the strength of his “iceberg.” His short stories, accordingly, deserve the reader’s second or even third reading.
ABSTRACT: Antisthenes of Athens was an older student of Socrates who had previously studied under the Sophists. His philosophical legacy also influenced Cynic and early Stoic thought. Consequently, he has left us an interesting theory of paideia (reading, writing, and the arts) followed by an even more brief one in divine paideia, the latter consisting of learning how to grasp the tenets of reason in order to complete virtue. Once properly grasped, the pupil will never lose it since it is embedded in the heart with true belief. However, there is a danger of being confused by human learning, which may delay or obviate completing divine paideia. Nonetheless, with the help of a teacher who gives a personal example, like Socrates or the mythical Centaur Chiron, the pupil has a chance of reaching his or her goal. Through a series of myths, Antisthenes gives us the foundations of his logical and ethical theory together. Reasoning is both a way to grasp virtue and also to fortify it. Although he would have chaffed under a modern university educational system, we may learn from him to value concise philosophical studies as a necessary adjunct to basic lessons in liberal arts.
It is thought that Meno's paradox is of critical importance both within Plato's thought and within the whole history of ideas. It's major importance is that for the first time on record, the possibility of achieving knowledge from the mind's own resources rather than from experience is articulated, demonstrated and seen as raising important philosophical questions.
Since the Forms are stable and perfect, knowledge of the Forms is infallible and certain. Plato differentiates between true knowledge - knowledge of the Forms, and true opinion - claims about particulars, which can be based on empirical testing of our world as well as on our implicit knowledge of the Forms. We might claim that the sun will rise tomorrow, but do not have true knowledge of this event, since nothing in our world is fixed. The sun, for example, is continuously changing temperature and size. Similarly, while a true opinion of the Form of Virtue might lead us to act virtuously in many situations, knowledge of Virtue would lead us to act with Virtue in every situation.
When a writer picks up their pen and paper, begins one of the most personal and cathartic experiences in their lives, and forms this creation, this seemingly incoherent sets of words and phrases that, read without any critical thinking, any form of analysis or reflexion, can be easily misconstrued as worthless or empty. When one reads an author’s work, in any shape or form, what floats off of the ink of the paper and implants itself in our minds is the author’s personality, their style. Reading any of the greats, many would be able to spot the minute details that separates each author from another; whether it be their use of dialogue, their complex descriptions, their syntax, or their tone. When reading an excerpt of Hemingway’s A Moveable Feast one could easily dissect the work, pick apart each significant moment from Hemingway’s life and analyze it in order to form their own idea of the author’s voice, of his identity. Ernest Hemingway’s writing immediately comes across as rather familiar in one sense. His vocabulary is not all that complicated, his layout is rather straightforward, and it is presented in a simplistic form. While he may meander into seemingly unnecessary detail, his work can be easily read. It is when one looks deeper into the work, examines the techniques Hemingway uses to create this comfortable aura surrounding his body of work, that one begins to lift much more complex thoughts and ideas. Hemingway’s tone is stark, unsympathetic, his details are precise and explored in depth, and he organizes his thoughts with clarity and focus. All of this is presented in A Moveable Feast with expertise every writer dreams to achieve. While Hemingway’s style may seem simplistic on the surface, what lies below is a layered...
Tis theory consists of the following theses: (1) the soul is immortal (2) there is nothing which the soul has not learned; and (3) what humans call learning is actually recollecting. For Socrates, there is no difference between “learning” and recollecting. “As the whole of nature is akin, and the soul has learned everything, nothing prevents a man, after recalling one thing only – a process men call learning…” In more common words, knowledge is simply forgotten memories and learning is the process of remembering these ideas, by this man is able to recognize the true from the
Therefore, through the soul, that has been born before being placed into a physical human body, the human has knowledge. As a result of the soul being immortal and knowing everything, Socrates ties that idea of immortality with the theory of recollection, which claims that our knowledge is inside of us because of the soul and it never learns anything new, only remembers, consequently, serving as an evidence that the soul is pre- existent. Socrates uses the knowledge of the soul to explain that there is no such thing as learning but instead there is discovery of the knowledge that one has and does, by himself, without receiving new information. However, most knowledge is forgotten at birth since we are born without knowing, for example, how to add, subtract,talk, etc. Nonetheless, the knowledge we have, has to be recollected with the help of a teacher. Socrates is able to prove this argument to a degree by using Meno’s slave, who had no prior knowledge of geometry before, as an example of how humans have the knowledge inside of them, through the soul, and they know everything but all they need are a sort of guidance to be able to “free” the knowledge they didn’t know they had inside them all this time. (Plato,
Hemingway has a very simple and straightforward writing style however his story lacks emotion. He makes the reader figure out the characters’ feelings by using dialogue. “...
Socrates' theory of recollection argues that all learning is recollection of prior knowledge acquired in a previous existence that we have simply forgotten. The theory maintains that the soul exists before birth and since our experiences began with our birth, we had to have this awareness before birth. Socrates states that since we can be reminded of one thing by another thing, we must have previous knowledge of the form and its qualities and since we begin to see and hear only at birth, our knowledge preexists that birth. Socrates is in essence arguing that the soul is immortal and lives on after the death of the body.
Born in the 5th century BCE, Plato was a rationalist, idealist philosopher, believing that we are born with concepts within us, and that these concepts are the same for everyone (Solomon, Higgins, & Martin, 2012). Through his beliefs, Plato developed a theory which he believed answered the question of ‘What is reality?’, that he called the theory of Forms (Solomon, et al., 2012). According to Plato, the Forms are a perfect ideal of an object or a concept, which is unchanging and innate within us (Solomon, et al., 2012). It is because of the Forms, according to Plato, that we have the ability to know what something is even though we may not have seen that exact thing before (Solomon, et al., 2012).
Secondly, Plato and Aristotle contrast in their view of what knowledge we possess at birth. Plato supports the doctrine of Innatism, which claims that we enter this world with prior knowledge. All people possess immortal souls; therefore, the knowledge acquired in one life can be transferred into the next reincarnation. However, we forget the knowledge at the shock of birth and we then spend the rest of our lives trying to retrieve the lost knowledge. In contrast, Aristotle's doctrine of Tabula Rasa, or blank slate, states that we are born without any knowledge. Aristotle also claimed we possess souls, but he disagreed with Plato on the soul's status of immortality. Aristotle felt souls do not return to the world, so knowledge cannot be returned to the world either.
In his dialogues The Phaedo and Meno, Plato, through the form of Socrates, puts forth the idea that all learning is recollection. In The Phaedo, to prove that the soul is immortal, Socrates asserts the view that all learning is recollection and we simply need to be reminded of facts that our immortal souls are aware of. In Meno, Socrates attempts to show the truth of this belief by doing complex geometry with a nearby slave boy. Socrates leads the boy through a series of questions, and he answers correctly lending to Socrates’ idea about learning. His brightest pupil, Aristotle, disagreed with this view and put forth a differing view in his work The Metaphysics.
ABSTRACT: Plato’s Socrates exemplies the progress of the dialectical method of inquiry. Such a method is capable of actualizing an interlocutor’s latent potential for philosophizing dialectically. The dianoetic practice of Plato’s Socrates is a mixture of dialectical assertions and questions arising out of his ethical concern for the interlocutor. The Dialogues act as educational models exhibiting how one inquires and learns as well as how one must teach in order that others learn to be participants in (or practitioners of) the dialectic. This is the maieutic art of Plato’s Socrates with which he draws his interlocutors into stating and reflecting upon the implications of their uncritically held opinions. We could say that the real subject-matter of many of the Dialogues is at least as much education in the dialectical process while still respecting the literary form of the Dialogues as exhibitive construction. The lack of philosophical closure that often characterizes many of the Dialogues lends additional credence to this position. The subject-matter of many of the dialogues is, therefore, reflexive: it is about itself in the sense that the tacit lesson (practicing the dialectic) will be remembered after its ostensible subject (some philosophical problem) has ceased to be debated. Dialectic is, then, renewable and replicable as an educational method, using "psychagogy"—an instrument of maieutic—to determine first each student’s individual needs for guiding him toward understanding.
In this paper I’ll discuss Plato’s theory of recollection in a close reading of the Phaedo. The theory of recollection (ToR) accepts the following premises:
Philosophy can be defined as the pursuit of wisdom or the love of knowledge. Socrates, as one of the most well-known of the early philosophers, epitomizes the idea of a pursuer of wisdom as he travels about Athens searching for the true meaning of the word. Throughout Plato’s early writings, he and Socrates search for meanings of previously undefined concepts, such as truth, wisdom, and beauty. As Socrates is often used as a mouthpiece for Plato’s ideas about the world, one cannot be sure that they had the same agenda, but it seems as though they would both agree that dialogue was the best way to go about obtaining the definitions they sought. If two people begin on common ground in a conversation, as Socrates often tries to do, they are far more likely to be able to civilly come to a conclusion about a particular topic, or at least further their original concept.