Please read "Meno" for next Tuesday. You can find online editions at either of the links below:Meno at Digital Classics
Meno at Free Library
Can virtue be taught? The apparent answer in this dialogue is no. But does reading the dialogue help at all in understanding/achieving virtue? If so, how?
I don't think I can say that this dialogue has helped me understand virtue. If anything it has just clouded my mind and made the concept of virtue a very confusing subject.
ReplyDeleteI can understand what Plato is saying by implying that virtue is a gift given by God, but I believe that this thinking is flawed. If virtue is given by God, then who is it that gets this gift? In the last paragraph of Meno, Socrates says that "virtue comes to the virtuous by the gift of God". This is a very perplexing sentence. If God is giving the gift of virtue to the virtuous, then how have these people obtained virtue in the first place.
It just seems to me like a big riddle, very similar to the question "what came first: the chicken or the egg?"
I hate to go against a great thinker like Plato but I just can't wrap my head around his thinking on this subject.
Annie Merkel
ReplyDeleteI think that this dialogue has confused me even more. Socrates truly has a talent in questioning everything in order to make sure what is true, is actually true. Parts of the dialogue help me in discovering what virtue is. But the overall discussion confuses me, and now I too feel like I don't know what virtue is.
The only thing that I think I can take from this dialogue, is that virtue is a "gift of God."
Brian Johnson
ReplyDeleteI am not sure this helped me understand virtue. I think it confused me more than anything.
For one thing, how can virtue be "an instinct given by God to the virtuous?" If they are already virtuous, then how can God give it to them, and why would they need it?
Secondly, if virtue is merely a gift given to some but not others, and can't be taught or learned, then why should anyone care? You either have it or you don't and you can't acquire it; so there is no use trying to acquire it or helping those who don't have it to get it.
Laura McCowan
ReplyDeleteAll I can say is confusing. It all sounded so strange. I suppose when me and my friend had discussions like this they are just as confusing, but at the same time they make sense. Maybe this just is had to understand unless you were there, and truely had these questions to ask.
It's the random questions, and going back and forth that make this so hard.
To read something like this fast is really confusing, but i get that he is always questioning what virtue is, and by asking all these questions they can find the answer. In my opioin virture can't be taught fully to a person, but they are born with certain characteristics, like honesty and things, and you can teach them to use it more or help it grow but you can't be taught to be some way if the ability or trait isn't there.
ReplyDeleteSam Merkel
ReplyDeleteJust like what everyone else has been saying about it, I too find it confusing and hard to follow. I never really knew what virtue meant in the first place, and after reading this I still have no idea of what it means and I am just as confused as I was before.
I think that virtue can be taught, personally. It is something that you learn as a child; learning what is wrong and what is considered "right" or "just." To say that it is a gift given by God seems to give up on the question you've asked in the first place; and I think that this dialogue did a good job of doing just that -- and I am not saying that this is not interesting, I just think that they could have done what they did in much fewer words. That said, I am going to have to agree with everyone else that this just confused the idea of what virtue is in my mind.
ReplyDeleteI found this definition of virtue in the dialog to be the most helpful: "Virtue is the desire of things honourable and the power of attaining them."
ReplyDeleteI don't think this helped me understand virtue more, but I do believe that it can be taught. This seems to be a debate over what it is, and by the above definition, it could be taught. However, later on he says it is inherited from god, and cannot be taught. The entire debate seems to suggest that ones lot in life, and how they are raised virtue can be attained, but I agree with the rest of the class that it is confusing.
Zach Anderson
Terry Kenny
ReplyDeleteI must say that I thoroughly enjoyed reading this. Did it help with answering Art's questions? Yes and No. It did make me use one of my two remaining brain cells. Which may be the whole point of the debate. To think.
What is virtue and can it be taught? Socrates made a pointed effort to say that virtue can't be defined because there are many characteristics that can be considered virtuous i.e. wisdom,knowledge, justice etc. What one needs to consider is that virtue is the sum of its parts. When describing what is the human body one would have to include all the parts of the body in the description because it is the whole of its parts. Virtue is much the same way.
Virtue can be taught but there is a danger in this. If everything is relative or subjective the core principles of "virtue" can be corrupted and turned into something evil. The principles of virtue that american students are taught are far different from those being taught to the students in the madrasas of Saudi Arabia. Does this mean my definition of virtue is incorrect? Not at all. It's in the way that it is being taught that changes the definition. The definition of the core principles of virtue, such as justice, and courage, can be turned into an entirely different thing. One culture could say that courage, part of virtue, lies in the willingness to kill the "american infedel." Virtue itself has not changed but an important part of its "body" has been corrupted to change the meaning of virtue.
"..knowledge can't be our guide in political life." Socrates
I love that line.
To be virtuous is to sacrifice. If one would sacrifice themselves for another person or many people, we would call them virtuous. If we were to think logically and weigh our sacrifice to be worth the good of others, then we would see in all instances that our call is to sacrifice ourselves to others in every instance. This seemingly works if we assume that we all are created equal and no one’s life holds precedence over another. But if we take all biases away and only leave ourselves with numbers, can we say that it isn’t virtuous if we don’t sacrifice ourselves for one person? I think you could argue that there really is no virtue, but only lesser degrees of wickedness.
ReplyDelete-Matthew Peterson-
I agree that virtue cannot be taught. But by Socrates' method of questioning everything, you begin to get a sense of what virtue is. It is an idea and unteachable, but through this reading you begin to realize that it has something to do with being honorable and good person. But at the same time you realize that there is much more to it than that. I think that Socrates' method is a good way of learning about these tough ideas. It makes us think about what we believe the answer is and then forces us to analyze these beliefs and ideas and see their flaws. Then we come up with another answer and analyze it again. By doing this we gradually narrow our ideas down so we can get closer and closer to a definite answer. For some ideas, such as virtue, it is almost impossible to come up with one set definition, but we can get a good idea of what virtue is.
ReplyDeleteJohn Rawerts
After reading the pasage i feel that the question of virtue should just remain a question because it was way to confusing trying to read this. You get the feeling that they know what they are talking about but i had no idea what they were trying to say. I don't think that virtue can be taught easily if at all. You would need a lot of time and patitence to try and show someone. So for the most part i don't think it could be taught but im sure the right person could possible grasp some of the concepts.
ReplyDeleteJon Evenson
It does indeed help explain virtue, by showing that it is inexplicable. I am reminded while reading this of a scene in the new Jackie Chan/Jet Li film, "The Forbidden Kingdom". In it Jackie Chan is describing Kung Fu and saying that it applies to all walks of life. It is formless and as powerful as water. I believe that virtue is very much like kung fu, in explicable in human terms. In the end, all we can do is try to grasp at straws to form the best explanation we can.
ReplyDeleteKevin Nakajima
I personally think that virtue must be taught and saying that it is merely a gift from god isn't possible. There are many people who don't believe in a god and have been raised by parents who don't believe in a god(s) and yet can still be seen as virtous people. A god or higher power is not necessary to inject humans with virtuosity.
ReplyDeleteIn fact I believe you HAVE to learn and be taught virtue. I believe that humans in there natural state are cruel beings that would go to any means to achieve what they need to survive. They wouldn't think twice about killing another to feed their family or stealing from each other. However through society and education we have been taught what can be seen as right and wrong and a higher code of morality. If virtue were truly a gift of god we wouldn't have a need for society to tame down our inherent human instincts.
I think the dialogue does help in understanding virtue, but sort of in a round about way. By mentioning parts of virtue while trying to define it as a whole, Menos and Socrates eventually go down a list of what virtue isn't. The more one knows something isn't, the closer one gets to knowing what something is. This dialogue may not teach virtue, like it says isn't possible, but it does point one in the right direcion.
ReplyDeleteKelsey Leddy
David Ellsworth
ReplyDeleteIt does help define Virtue. Virtue cannot be taught directly only shown by many smaller actions that give examples of such behavior and that help reveal a closer understand of it. The dialog while confusing shows how difficult it is to define many even mundane things like color clearly let alone trying to define a subject such as virtue. They are intangible concepts that one person may understand, but find it difficult or impossible to communicate the concept completely as understood to another. The only way that he was able to define the larger concept of virtue was by giving examples of it because the concept behind all virtue was elusive.
Peter Ryman
ReplyDeleteDoes reading the dialogue help at all in understanding/achieving virtue? IF so how?
I would say it helps a little.
Haha...man, I would have liked to hear this conversation in real life! Socrates is quite the witty old man. That was an extenuous reading!
In saying that it helps a little, I mean it helps in the sense that Socrates' words draw you to really seek the truth about what you believe.
It doesn't help a lot though either! Like Socrates himself said, he is a perplexed man; he's just as lost as we are about the nature of things..everyone already discussed why it doesn't help.
(I was reading through the other blogs; Excellent Second point Brian Johnson!)
So Nik, where did it start then? .... You said "A god or higher power is not necessary to inject humans with virtuosity"; then where did it come from? I'm not saying that I do/don't believe God, a god, or a higher power injected us full of virtuosity, but what I am saying is if you don't think it's necessary, then how did it begin. How and when did 'society' and 'education' start to teach us about a higher code of morality?
Truth. What is truth. said Ponchus Pilate; but Jesus had already said previously: "...I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."
i think my brain ooozed out of my ear a while ago while reading this dialogue. it realy confused me more then helped me understand virtue. but i belive it is somethign that is tought but not explained by a definition. its something we are tought slowly thruout the years. this dialogue if anything does more at trying to get us to grasp the concept of what it is but not teach it to us becouse we have already learned it.
ReplyDelete-allison rademacher
I think I am in the majority when I say that reading this was very confusing. I understand that Socrates told meno that he didn't even know what virtue is and he never saw anyone with it. Then, Socrates replies to Meno's answers with questions that seem to confuse Meno about what he thinks virtue is. So, by questions other peoples ideas about what virtue means, he is trying to understand it better himeself and come to a whole answer.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe this helped me understand virtue any more after reading it than I understood it before. I found myself typically agreeing with Meno on the virtues but I do understand what Socrates was looking for. I guess I see virtues being a list of words. Reminds me of something like in English, prepositions are a list of words.
Kirsten Saunders
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of the other blogs about virtue. It is certainly confusing,because it is something that is so hard to define. If we can't define it, it's hard to say what virtue truly is. Socrates comments that all virtues have a unifying theme, but the unifying theme is even more confusing. Are they unified because they are all virtues? Possibly by discussing virtues, people can become more virtuous. I am confused at the end of this reading, but nonetheless I found it interesting, because of the range of virute. Virtue could be standing up for a particular definition of virtue, because Meno undermines his own theories throughout the dialogue.