The dialogue opens up with Meno asking what virtue is and whether it could be taught. Socrates asks Meno for a general definition of virtue, since as Socrates points out, we cannot figure out if virtue can be taught if we do not have a clear idea what it is. Socrates is looking for a general, or formal definition of virtue, not just examples or instances of it. Socrates wants to know what all the examples of virtue have in common. He wants to know the essence of virtue. Meno initially offers a list of virtues, but Socrates rejects this as a sufficient account. Meno also states that there are different virtues for everyone. The virtue of a man is to order a state and the virtue of a woman is to order a household. I believe that virtue can be found in everything, good, bad, or ugly.
Meno makes an interesting point. How will one know when they find virtue if they do not know virtue? The Socratic paradox is Socrates’ visible claim that virtue is a kind of knowledge, and vice a kind of ignorance. It is a paradox because people usually think a person can know the good and still fail to do it. That is, people usually think that virtue is more than a matter of knowing, it is also a matter of willing. Socrates says that if virtue were knowledge, then anybody who really knew the good would automatically be good. Indeed if Socrates is right that virtue is knowledge, it would be impossible to know the good and not to be good. For example, Christians know s...
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,
When discussing specific knowledge, it is often hard to pin down an exact definition of what it is you are discussing. Often a concept or word will get thrown around so often that it will begin to be taken for granted and when pressed, a person may struggle to pin down specifically what it is they mean. Realizing this, Socrates often went out and attempted to fix these kinds of problems and find out what people actually knew, compared to what they just thought they knew. In the dialogues Euthyphro and Meno, Socrates attempts to pin down definitions for piety and virtue, respectively. In doing so, we are shown that the thinkers in question struggle to define these terms, and attempt to do so in vague terms that may vary heavily under different circumstances. What Socrates is attempting to find is one definitive definition of piety and virtue, what is called his One Form Requirement. Rather than defining something by classifying different parts that make it up, Socrates maintains the belief that piety and virtue both can be simplified into one specific form that describes exactly what makes all F actions F.
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.
As Socrates and Meno were trying to find out the essence of virtues, Socrates said: “The soul, then, as being immortal, and having been born again many times, and having seen all things that exist, whether in this world or in the world below, has knowledge of them all; and it is no wonder that she should be able to call to remembrance all that she ever knew about virtue, and about everything; for as all nature is akin, and the soul has learned all things1.” As he suggested, the soul has already known everything, and thus the acquisition of all knowledge is the process of remembrance, the process of the recalling what we have already known with the help of some hints.
Socrates, in method true to form, twists the question and re-poses it to Meno to see if Meno can answer it all on his own. Meno lists what he thinks are virtuous qualities, and is content at that simple definition. Socrates then says: "I seem to be in luck, Meno, while I am looking for one virtue, I have found you to have a whole swarm of them."Meno's frustration begins to set in. He tries theatrical metaphor to define virtue, as well as relating to physical philosophy and philosophers such as Empedocles.Meno at this point gives up and hands the philosophy to Socrates. Socrates presents Meno with a paradox:"....He cannot search for what (a debater) knows- since he knows it, there is no need to search- nor for what he does not know, for he does not know what to look for.
Aristotle’s theories on virtue vary vastly from those of his predecessors. As opposed to the views of someone such as Plato, who believed that goodness came from knowledge, Aristotle argued that goodness, was achieved by building virtuous habits. Aristotle stated “The virtue of man will also be the state of character, which makes a man good, and which makes him do his own work well” (qtd. In Great Traditions of Ethics page 29). This means that being virtuous was a personality trait, which would help to do whatever he had to good. Aristotle believed that a morally virtuous person lives his life by choosing his actions according to a “golden mean”. This golden mean is used as the standard to avoid excess and defect; it is an intermediary o...
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 ...
Virtue is very tough to define, as evidenced in the difficulty that Socrates, Nicias, and Laches have with trying to define both courage and virtue. In Socrates’ arguments with Nicias, he does seem to indicate that Nicias stumbled into a possible definition of virtue. Socrates says in regards to what Nicias thought was that, “Courage is the knowledge not just of the fearful and the hopeful, but in your [Nicias’] opinion, it would be the knowledge of practically all goods and evils put together” (Laches and Charmides, 199D). However, after Nicias agrees that this is not the definition of courage that Socrates and Nicias are searching for, Socrates asks if “[Does] a man with this kind of knowledge seem to depart from virtue in any respect” (Laches and Charmides, 199D)? The simple answer to this question is no. The definition that was suggested by Socrates for the definition of courage has become the definition of virtue. “Then the thing you are now talking about, Nicias, would seem not be a part of virtue but rather virtue entire” (Laches and Charmides, 199E). To summarize, for a person to be virtuous, he or she must have knowledge of all goods and evils...
He talks about virtue like it is the result of living “The Good Life.” He says, “For I do nothing but go about persuading you all, old and young alike, not to take thought for your persons and your properties, but first and chiefly to care about the greatest improvement of the soul” (Slayer). In brief, Socrates is saying that in order to have true “virtue” one needs to be consider where they are in the standards of morality, rather than the standards of material gain (Slayer). Additionally, Socrates also argues, “I tell you that virtue is not given by money, but that from virtue come money and every other good of man, public as well as private.” He is basically saying that anything worth obtaining in the world is only worth obtaining justly because without “virtue” one will have nothing of value
Aristotle, argued that he could not judge a person on the basis of one example and wanted to look at the whole over time. Additionally he argued virtue was found between the extremes of each characteristic. Balance between the extremes of emotion was his main concern (Manning and Stroud 59). Virtue ethics requires one to strive for excellence, a process that happens over a long period of time. It includes learning about ethics, struggling with them, and eventually living ethically (Class
Aristotle then shifts to asking the question that we might feel we are already good people because we are already acting in a just manner. Aristotle disagrees with this. He brings up an example of an artist and shows that the skill of the artist is in what he creates. It is over once the art has been made. Virtue is different. The end does not fully matter, but also needs to be in a good state of mind. We should always want to act in a virtuous way. We can only make it to this by creating habits in living a virtuous life. He also brings up that speeches could make people think they are becoming more virtuous, but it will not do anything. Aristotle then discusses what virtue is. It must be in passions, capacities, or characteristics within the soul. Passions have to do with pleasures and pain, capacities are what helps us understand our
In this essay I will critically discuss Aristotle’s concept of virtue. I will illustrate how he was influenced by his predecessors and how he disagreed with them and developed his own philosophy. I will also describe how he defined the concept of virtue – what virtuous traits are and also how to be a virtuous person.