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. To draw a conclusion from Meno's paradox is that learning is impossible.
Socrates and Properties By Characterizing himself –Socrates- as both ignorant and wise, he presents us with one of the most striking paradoxes. Like so many of the other philosophers, is provocative in that its apparent self-contradiction hides an important idea for us readers to discover. Though out this text Socrates ignorance results from his belief that he has no knowledge of moral idea, or moral properties, such as justice, virtue, piety, and beauty. He asserts that, if only he knew the relevant definitions, he would be a moral expert who could answer philosophical questions about moral properties- questions such as is a certain action just? Or is it truly good for a man to be virtuous?
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.
Both, Socrates and Benotman question and do the things that they believe to be noble. In Plato's Euthyphro, piety and impiety is discussed along side with justice and injustice. According to Benotman, there is no true purpose for their fighting. Around 37b - 38b of the Apology, Socrates discusses what would be an appropriate punishment, as he had been found guilty by a majority. He comes up with multiple correct solutions to this particular problem and then weeds each one out until he finds the best solution (Apology, 37c - 38b).
Do we know, or do we not know? That is the question. First Paper: Socrates and Teaching Socrates’ Teaching Method: Euthyphro In Euthyphro, Socrates and Euthyphro are discussing the topic of piety. Namely what is in fact piety, and once one knows that, how he can regard himself to be 'pious'. According to Euthyphro, there are three definitions of piety: doing what Euthyphro is currently doing; but this needs an essence, which is basically a refutation agreement between the gods.
Socrates was a man who believed that the Oracle’s message, “There was no one wiser than Socrates.”, was misguided and tried to prove it wrong. He went about doing that by questioning people. Socrates realized that he truly know nothing, of importance. So he tried to seek the truth. To be able to do this he ahd an open mind, and told his followers they should also have open minds.
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.
Late in the text, a third character, Anytus, a politician, who would eventually be an accuser of Socrates, joins in the dialogue. In the text, Meno in trying to define virtue accidentally slips in to a paradox or contradictory statement, which Socrates immediately refutes. It is the purpose of this paper to recognize the paradox, examine how Socrates disproves the paradox through argument and evidence. 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.
Socrates has been summoned by Meletus for corrupting the youth, “He says he knows how our young men are corrupted and who corrupts them” (Plato’s 5 Dialogues, Euthyphro pg. 3, 2c). Then Socrates also explains that he is accused of teaching the youth not to believe in the gods of the city, but to believe in a new divinity. Euthyphro tells Socrates that he has come to prosecute his father for murdering a murderer. Socrates encourages Euthyphro to teach him the meaning of holiness.
Strepsiades goes to Socrates in order to learn how to pursuade his son by "making the weaker speech the stronger" (Aristophanes, 112). Why does Socrates remind the assembly about the old accusers? It appears improper for a man on trial to bring about his other 'crimes'. Aristophanes, in particular, is implicated by Socrates as an old accuser. "For you yourselves used to see these things in the comedy of Aristophanes" (Plato, 19c).