What alternative does Aristotle offer to Plato’s claim that learning is recollection? Where would Aristotle locate the mistake in Plato’s argument in The Phaedo?
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.
In The Metaphysics, Aristotle puts forth the view that universal information is gained through experience and not recollection as Plato had said. Man connects a series of events into a causal chain through experience. For instance, gathering the fact that a certain remedy has helped two different sick people get better is simply a matter of experience. In his view, art is even greater and closer to wisdom than experience. Experience belies art, in that art is created by the formulation of universals from many individual experiences. Extracting the universal idea that the remedy given to those two people will help all people afflicted with the same sickness ...
After admitting that he does not know what virtue is almost halfway through Plato’s Meno, Meno states a few premises involving the acquisition of knowledge, which coined the term Meno’s paradox. In this paradox Meno says that virtue or knowledge is impossible to learn because of it. Meno then questions Socrates on how they can find what virtue is if they can’t discover it which I believe Socrates resolves by stating the theory of recollection and how the theory of recollection shows one part of the premise false by conversing with the slave boy.
The purpose of this study is to identify an unknown bacterium from a mixed culture, by conducting different biochemical tests. Bacteria are an integral part of our ecosystem. They can be found anywhere and identifying them becomes crucial to understanding their characteristics and their effects on other living things, especially humans. Biochemical testing helps us identify the microorganism present with great accuracy. The tests used in this experiment are rudimentary but are fundamental starting points for tests used in medical labs and helps students attain a better understanding of how tests are conducted in a real lab setting. The first step in this process is to use gram-staining technique to narrow down the unknown bacteria into one of the two big domains; gram-negative and gram-positive. Once the gram type is identified, biochemical tests are conducted to narrow down the specific bacterial species. These biochemical tests are process of elimination that relies on the bacteria’s ability to breakdown certain kinds of food sources, their respiratory abilities and other biochemical conditions found in nature.
What do bacteria need to grow? For bacteria to grow the most typical thing that they like ate a warm and moist environment, but that is not all that they like. Bacteria also like and environment with a PH that is normal or close to a human PH and bacteria also like an oxygen rich environment. The places that could be common to find bacteria in a building are a keyboard, a water fountain, and restrooms. A keyboard is a common place for bacteria because it is being touched constantly with hands when people type and hands are warm, so bacteria like them. The water fountain is another place that is common for bacteria to grow because people's warm hands are touching it and also it has water, which causes it to be moist. The last place that bacteria will we commonly found in buildings are restrooms. The bacteria like restrooms because many people are in then and also there is a lot of water in them.
Before addressing the fundamental issues of the Theory of Recollection, it is worth noting that Socrates never addresses the second half of Meno’s Paradox- assuming one has found what it is they are looking for, how is one to know they have found it if they do not know what they are looking for? There seems to lack a method for verifying one’s answer and if you cannot confirm that what you have found is in fact what you were looking for then inquiry seems to be never-ending. Although this is a discussion for another time, it does highlight an issue, which Socrates faces in the first part of the paradox, the part he addresses, which is the problem of circularity. Ironically, Socrates’ Theory of Recollection, which is used to overcome Meno’s Paradox, is subject to the criticism of being paradoxical. The claim that the soul is immortal and all knowing is necessary for his Theory of Recollection to be true, thus it is vital that Socrates be able prove the immortality of the soul. The issue of circularity arises when Socrates attempts to prove the immortality through the use of the slave boy. According to Socrates, if the slave boy can recall knowledge about geometry, a subject which he appears to know nothing about, then he has successfully proven the existence of an immortal and all knowing soul. Socrates seems to suggest that the knowledge the slave boy is able to recall is evidence of the immortality and all knowing nature of the soul, while also stating that the immortality and all knowing nature of the soul is the reason why learning is just recollection (Fraser). Therefore, his ability to recollect past information is based on the existence of the all knowing and immortal soul and the existence of this soul is based in the slav...
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.
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
In Plato’s Meno, Socrates claims that all learning is actually recollection (80d – 86c). What prompts Socrates to make this claim, and what does he mean by it?
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.
Montresor is filled with regret that he took revenge so cruelly, “My heart grew sick,” (Poe 548). He was manipulated by his own pride and became the fool in the end, rather than Fortunato. Poe displays the Fortunato as a proud man at first, however Montresor’s pride is shown when he feels the first pangs of guilt but refuses to release Fortunato. He regretted his decision to kill Fortunato, however Montresor’s pride wouldn’t allow him to stop. Poe used these moments to subtly reveal Montresor’s
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,
1)Plato argues that "what we call learning is recollection"(Plato, 73b, P.138). He explains further that recollection is the process of remembering and bringing previously known things that we actually have forgotten out of our memory.
One of Socrates’ favorite students was Plato. Cross agrees, saying, “Plato (437-347) was Socrates’ prized student.” The thing Plato did was magnificent, he was always questioning Socrates in his teaching because he knew that’s what was expected of him. If we fast forward to modern day teachers, or professors, they are always assumed to be correct and have the highest level of knowledge and wisdom (all the while teaching about Socrates.) This is completely obscene because their teaching method is to not have students question their ideas, but that their ideas are solid, correct, and unwavering. Socrates would highly disagree with this idea. The amazing philosopher so many people refer to, Plato and Socrates both are advocates of students questioning what they learn so they do not become daft robots. Yet in modern day society, many are taught to accept what their professors and teachers say as the cold hard truth that shan’t be
Aristotle was taught by Plato (who was taught by and heavily influenced by Socrates). Socrates and Plato had argued that no person knowingly does evil. If a person knows what the right thing to do is and who can distinguish between actions that are virtuous or that are not virtuous, then they will do the right thing because they know it is the right thing to do. They said that the person who does an evil action does it simply out of ignorance or they are mistaken about the virtuous or right thing to do. Plato thought there was “the good” which is a property that all good things have in common. This “good” is not part of physical reality but is internal and unchanging. It will always be the same and will always be good in Plato’s day an...
Both Plato and Aristotle based their theories on four widely accepted beliefs of the time; “knowledge must be of what is real, the world experienced via the senses is what is real, knowledge must be of what is fixed and unchanging, the world experienced via the senses is not fixed and unchanging.” Both Plato and Aristotle make use of their own definition of “form” to solve the problems with knowledge. Both the philosophers agreed that form classifies everything, for example a chair is a chair because it projects and reflects the form of a chair. However their exact definitions do vary. Plato claims that “Particulars (objects) are only crude representations of their Form”, whereas Aristotle argues that a “form is through the objects purpose which has been given to it by its designer / creator.” Secondly both Plato and Aristotle
The immediate starting-point of Plato's philosophical speculation was the Socratic teaching. In his attempt to define the conditions of knowledge so as to refute sophistic skepticism, Socrates had taught that the only true knowledge is a knowledge by means of