1. Introduction
Meno is one of the most important works of Plato. This book is written is the form of a dialogue. The dialogue is between Socrates and Meno. Meno is asking questions and Socrates is answering them. In the course of discussion, two other people appear, namely, a boy (Meno’s slave) and Anytus, a member of a prominent Athenian family. The book attempts to determine the definition of virtue or arête, meaning in this case virtue in general rather than particular virtues (e.g. justice, temperance, etc.). The goal is to infer a definition that applies equally to all particular virtues and to find out whether virtues can be taught. In this book we can also find how Socrates is making distinction between skill and virtue. He does so to refute the belief that virtuous people are those who can perform some action with excellence like ruling a state or doing a excellent horse ridding, etc. this book also give an account of Socrates’ famous ‘theory of recollection’ according which learning is possible only through recollection. There is more than one theme discussed within Meno.
2. What is Virtue?
Meno asks to Socrates what virtue is and where does it come form. Socrates admits that he does not know what it is and therefore he cannot say where it comes from. He explains, for example, that it is difficult to say about a person whether he is fair or not fair, rich or poor, noble or opposite of noble, without knowing him. Therefore, in the same way, he cannot say anything about virtue unless he knows about it. Meno then defines virtue as the power of governing mankind. But Socrates disagrees with Meno. Socrates believes that virtue (arête) is not a form of knowledge and furthermore that true virtue can not be defined. In the course of discussion, Socrates cites true opinion as a major attribute of virtue and also that virtue is the gift from God to the virtuous people. Unlike the skills (horse ridding, swimming, wrestling, etc.) virtues cannot be acquired. It is also not natural. Virtues are the same for all.
3. Nature of Virtue
According to Meno's virtue is different for men and women, children, elders and so forth. For men it is found in managing public affairs so that they benefit his friends and harm his enemies; for women it is found in managing the home. Socrates directs Meno so that he understands that the virtue must be same (the sameness that all virtuous people share, its essence) for all and explains this concept by asking Meno about health. Health is the same in all. In doing this Socrates is trying to show Meno that the nature of virtue will be the same in all things. The only change is the way in which we perceive it from individual to individual. Meno then offers a reformed definition that virtue is the ability to rule over people since that is what all of his examples had in common. Socrates quickly reforms this definition saying, "Shall we not add to this justly and not justly?" Meno affirms this suggestion and says that justice is virtue. He also thinks that courage, moderation, wisdom, and munificence among other things are virtues. This is obviously the same problem that they had before by implicating too many virtues instead of the single nature of virtue that all of these things have. Socrates continues in his patience with Meno and they discuss about who and how the right definition will be supplied until Meno attempts again to define virtue as desiring the beautiful and having the power to acquire them.
4. Is Virtue the Same for All?
Socrates with the example of bees tries to explain that the virtues are the same for all irrespective of their gender, age, conditions of life, social status, etc. As bees don’t differ form each other as bees, though of many different kinds, in the same way, virtues as virtues are the same for all. No house or state or anything can be well ordered without temperance and without justice. Therefore, those who order a state or a house temperately or justly order them with temperance and justice. Then both men and women, if they want to be good, must have the same virtues of temperance and justice. Finally, we can say that all people are good in the same way and by the participation in the same virtues.
5. Theory of recollection
In this view learning is impossible. Socrates must now show how learning is possible and he does this by introducing the theory of recollection. He begins by citing a passage from a poem that claims that the soul is immortal and that there is nothing it has not learned in the underworld. If this is true, as Socrates believes, it is never impossible for man to learn because he merely needs to recall that which his soul already knows, but is not aware of knowing. Meno would like further explanation so Socrates asks him to call in a servant to demonstrate the process of recollection. His goal is to show that the slave, who knows nothing of geometry, actually can recall some knowledge of the subject and therefore is able to answer the questions that Socrates asks of him. And indeed, Meno witnesses the slave answer correctly about the geometric figures, and length of lines, and so forth. Meno is convinced of this theory and agrees that the slave, who does not appear to know, has within himself true opinions about the things which he does not know.
6. Can Virtue Be Taught?
Now Socrates says that if virtue is a kind of knowledge, then it can be learned. If it is something other than a kind of knowledge, it obviously cannot be taught. They both believe that virtue is at least something good, and beneficial to those who encounter it. Socrates later makes an argument that all things in the soul found to be beneficial must be a kind of wisdom. But he does not yet say that it is teachable for if it was then it would make sense only if there were teachers for it, and as far as Socrates can tell, there are no teachers of virtue. He calls Anytusa, member of a prominent Athenian family, into the conversation to explore the question of whether virtue can be found among the politicians. Anytus expresses contempt for teachers like the Sophists and he debates with Socrates about the failure of fathers to teach their sons to be virtuous, and the failure of public officials to exhibit virtue for their citizens. Socrates concludes that virtue cannot be taught as evidenced by his previous examples and Anytus accuses Socrates of being too harsh on people, speaking ill of them too easily at which time he excuses himself from the conversation.
7. Conclusion
The discussion ends with the view that the virtue is neither natural nor acquired. It is an instinct given by God to the virtuous people. This instinct is not accompanied by the reason. The virtue comes to the virtuous as a gift from God. But how virtue is given, cannot be known unless there is an enquiry into the actual nature of virtue. It cannot be taught by anybody. Socrates rejects the idea that human virtue depends on a person’s gender or age. He proposes the idea that the virtues are common to all people that temperance and justice are virtues even in children and old men. He also affirms that the virtue is not the ‘capacity to govern men’ (as was proposed by Meno). Socrates points out to the slaveholder that ‘governing well’ cannot be a virtue of a slave, because then he would not be a slave.
Reference: Plato. Meno, trans. Benjamin Jowett.http://classics.mit.edu//Plato/meno.html
No comments:
Post a Comment