Plato’s extensively insightful work, titled Meno, delves into the topic of virtue and attempts to define what is undefinable (Plato 45). Virtue is the context of this essay is referencing is aretê, or virtue in general (Plato 47). Throughout this essay, the writer will compare and contrast the main characters, Socrates and Meno, based on how they are presented throughout Meno and their opinion on virtue.
To begin with, the character Meno can be described as an arrogant, simple-minded, and throughout a majority of the dialogue, inconsistent with his own views on virtue. He believes he was lucky enough to be born with virtue, but when asked to define it, he simply lists the traits of virtue, rather than giving a singular definition. For example, his first response is that virtue is dependent upon a person’s age and gender (Plato 3). However, Socrates refutes this by explaining that people could have conflicting virtues and who is to say which virtue is more appropriate than the other (Plato 3).
In Meno’s second attempt, he states that the ruling over other men was virtue (Plato 5). Socrates objects by reminding him that virtue must be available to all humans, no matter their social status (Plato 5). Meno tries again, listing off nouns such as “wisdom, magnificence, and courage”, but this still does not please
…show more content…
On that note, Socrates believes that virtue is a general form (eidos), meaning that there is a pattern (Plato 50). Although the two characters are both from esteemed backgrounds, unlike Meno, Socrates claims to know nothing and therefore is aware of his own ignorance. However, Socrates does know that virtue is like a recollection (anamnesis) of knowledge (Plato 49). In other words, virtue cannot come from instructions (as we learned that there are no teachers of virtue), but from an innate understanding of the soul (Plato
Thanks Christine! Yes, I believe virtue shouldn't be placed if one did good to other. And you must understand every good act comes in various ways. Just like Odysseus in the Odyssey, he showed a sign of virtue when he had the strength and courage leading his men into a dangerous journey. This does show he's virtue for exhibiting such strength and wisdom in his quest.
This quote found on the page 25b conveys moral characteristics from Socrates. As convicted guilty that he
What do we learn about courage in Plato’s Laches? As well as illustrating your answer with reference to the dialogue, critically evaluate what you take Plato to teach us about this virtue in this dialogue. While progress is made on defining courage in Platos Laches, the virtue as a whole is not understood by the interlocutors. Laches and Nicias are able to give examples and situations of courage, however when asked to find a common universal definition they are unable to do so.
Aristotle describes virtue theory as an ethical theory that emphasizes an individual 's character rather than following a set of rules. Breaking it down even further to specify knowing right from wrong, being able to read an atmosphere by knowing what is right, and it is the midpoint between two extremes. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. display to be a virtue ethicists through his letter oppose to being a deontologist or utilitarian. Laws define a set of rules that the people should follow; however, there are unjust laws that are meant to be challenged.
Virtue is defined in many ways. Some say that it comes from the Latin word ‘virtus’, meaning virtue or courage, which comes from the other Latin word ‘vir’, which means man, meaning that virtue is the qualities of a man, such as courage. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines virtue as, “conformity to a standard of right [and/or] a particular moral excellence” (Merriam-Webster 899). With all these definitions floating around, it is hard to determine what virtues really is and what it really means to have virtue. In Plato’s Meno, Socrates and Meno discuss the definition of virtue and whether it can be taught.
It is under the same ‘socio-political’ context for determining whether a virtue is considered cognitive or pragmatic that Longino believes that the Kuhnian virtues are not entirely
It became clearer for Socrates when Euthyphro replied “What is dear to God is pious, what is not is impious.” It was showing that for Euthyphro piousness is related to the
How Socrates (2000) mention above that wealth does not create a wise person, but a wisdom creates the good deeds for people. (p.10). Consequently, his meaning about excellence and wealth is correct because excellence is wisdom, justice, and virtue and these things can not be bought for money. Firstly, one of the different types of excellence is a wisdom.
Another thing Socrates is famous for is his twisting of nature in a paradoxical way to serve his own desire to persuade: to Socrates, virtue, wisdom, and eudaemonia are directly linked, a recurring idea in many of his dialogues. His definition of happiness and morality is far different from anyone else’s, especially from Callicles’ and Nietzsche who believes that the law of nature takes over (also perceived this way by Nietzsche). E.R. Dodds mentions the idea that Nietzsche finds a reflexion of himself in Callicles, ascetic Socrates’ most interesting interlocutor in the “Gorgias”. Interesting in the fact that Callicles appears to be a purely hedonistic personage, whose definition of a good life is one where all pleasures of the body are maximised,
Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics begins by exploring ‘the good’. Book I argues that, unlike other goods, “happiness appears to be something complete and self-sufficient, and is, therefore, the end of actions” (10:1097b20-21). In other words, happiness is the ultimate good. But how does one achieve happiness? Aristotle formulates this in the context of work, since for all things, from artists to horses, “the good and the doing it well seem to be in the work” (10:1097b27-28).
Part A- Socrates In thinking of Socrates we must recognize that what we have is four secondhand sources depicting him. That of Plato, Xenophanes, Aristophanes, and Aristotle. All having radically different accounts on Socrates and his views. Out of all them we consider Plato’s to be the most possible account, even though we face a problem of different versions of Socrates.
The relativist’s objection Aristotle’s writings are the best prototype of virtue ethics. Contemporary virtue theories do not grasp nor represents the Aristotelian theory, because they think that it is impossible to escape the charge of relativism in virtue ethics. According to the relativist approach, ethical goodness is relative to each society depending on its traditions and practices. It is thought that virtue can only be outlined locally with reference to a single locale. Relativists reject the idea that there is a general rule, based on specific virtuous actions, that leads to the good life i.e. they reject that there is a single virtue (or norm of flourishing life) that is able to flourish the life of all human beings.
Virtue in his term is one that can meet the highest point of happiness; rich, fame, power, etc. In today’s society, it is kindness, intelligence, friendlessness, courage, etc. He would consider a celebrity to be at the highest peak of virtue and gain happiness, however, the happiness is normally attained even at that height. Someone who is poor and is sacrificing their food and money to help another poor family is someone to be considered as a true virtuous person. Aristotle didn’t think of how differently society would be then and now.
The ultimate goal of human life for Plato is to know and understand the truth or the “eidos” of the “good”. The only way for us to see this truth is through our minds. The truth is not accessible in the physical world but in the intellectual realm. For us to be happy or for use to know the truth is only when we are beyond our physical sense it is a totally different level. So according to Plato, “knowledge” and “virtue” are corollary meaning that as long as one exists the other will follow.
The two philosophers believed strongly in the concept of eudaimonia, which is basic human well-being and goodness (Mastin, 2008). Much of Socrates’ ethics was built around this concept, which led to his ethical code becoming basically objective. Socrates’ ethics were based on something of a knowledge/ignorance dichotomy. He believed that people act immorally but they do not act this way intentionally. Like all animals, Socrates believed that we act in and seek out what is in our best interests.