What Is The Paradox Of Inquiry In Plato

1640 Words4 Pages

The section 80d-86c of the Meno, which will be the focus of this paper, features the characters Socrates, Meno, and Meno’s unnamed slave. In this section, Plato uses these characters to discuss the paradox of inquiry and propose a possible solution to it. Modern philosophers refer to the proposed three-part solution to the paradox as the ‘theory of recollection’. During Plato’s time, the theory of recollection was a successful solution to the paradox of inquiry, but with modern science there has surfaced a better way to solve the paradox of inquiry. The paradox of inquiry is stated in 80d of the Meno. Meno is frustrated with Socrates because they can’t agree with an accurate definition for ‘virtue.’ He states the paradox in his frustration.
(81c-d)
Because the soul is immortal, Plato is suggesting that the soul learns when it is not bound by a body and that the soul knows everything there is to know. Furthermore, he is suggesting that while in a body, the soul is merely recollecting things it already knows. Relating this to the paradox of inquiry, not only can we not learn but we don’t need to learn because we already know everything. From this point on, whenever Socrates mentions ‘knowledge,’ he is referring to the theory of recollection. The theory of recollection is the second part of his 3-step solution to the paradox of inquiry. Meno’s immediate response is that he would like for Socrates to prove this theory of recollection. To prove the theory, Socrates questions Meno’s slave about geometry problems in 82c-85c. Socrates asks questions about a problem, to which the slave answers ‘yes’ or ‘no,’ or does a simple calculation such as four times two (85d). The slave, whom prior to the conversation knew nothing about geometry, was able to know a few things at the conclusion of the
In order for an argument to be sound, it must have validity and true premises. I believe that Plato’s reasoning is good based on the structure of his argument. As for soundness, his argument is based on the premises that the gods exist and that the soul is immortal and can be sent back to Earth from the underworld. If I were a philosopher during that time and heard this argument, I would believe it to be the truth because to believe otherwise would be to blaspheme Persephone and the gods of the state’s religion. Then the argument is sound, and therefore a very strong and successful argument by their

More about What Is The Paradox Of Inquiry In Plato

Open Document