Virtue as knowledge in Plato's Meno

¶ … Virtue: Plato's Meno

An Introduction to Virtue in Plato's Meno

Virtue, according to Plato, is a multi-faceted knowledge of the correct or virtuous actions and the ability or power to act upon it. The question of whether virtue, as defined by Plato in his work Meno (380 BCE) can be learned or if it is something innate within the human organism is answered by Plato himself. Since Plato's writing nearly 2000 years ago, the Meno has been the focus of many sociologists, political scientists, and scholars based upon the arguments contained within it relative to the nature of human beings. For Plato, the question of what virtue is and whether or not it can be learned is of great importance. He writes the Meno as a response to this most basic, rock bottom question relative to human behavior and morality. For Socrates, who was also concerned with the idea of virtue, it was a means to happiness, but not something that a person could be handed or gifted. The person had to work to understand what virtue meant to them and their position in the world. Once a human understands how virtuous actions affect their life, they can begin to gain knowledge about virtue itself.

An Exploration of Virtue

Virtue is something that is different for every person. It is the ability to recognize good, and the power to act upon this knowledge. One of the most puzzling paradoxes related to the idea of virtue is the idea that Socrates poses. He argues that even if someone came into contact with the virtuous, they would not be able to recognize it since they are ignorant of the appearance and recognition of virtue itself (Santas, 1969, pp. 445). This paradox of recognition has troubled philosophers for centuries, and is an excellent example of how Plato asks his readers to begin to look inside themselves for answers. Inside the book, Socrates was intelligent enough to tell Meno that he did not truly know anything. He states that knowledge, like virtue, is something that is nearly indefinable and different for every person. In the Meno (380 BCE), according to Socrates, knowledge is no further than the answer to a question posed by a curious scholar (Plato, 380 BCE).

Plato's Meno (380 BCE) is a catalogue of humankind's worth and limitations presented as a conversation between Meno and Socrates. When asked what virtue is, Plato begins to offer insight into the nature of virtue and the implications for acting virtuously. The Meno begins with Plato asking Socrates, in typical Socratic form if virtue can be learned. According to Socrates', he is clueless about what virtue is and whether or not it can be learned or even taught. He also believes that all other men have no clue as to what virtue is. Socrates responds to Meno's prompts by stating that virtue is something different for different people. "When you say, Meno, that there is one virtue of a man, another of a woman, another of a child, and so on, does this apply only to virtue, or would you say the same of health, and size, and strength? Or is the nature of health always the same, whether in man or woman?" (Plato, 380 BCE) the goal of this definition is to provide a description of virtue as it applies in a general form, not in terms of a particular action as well as to argue the point that virtue is amorphous in nature. Humans that can ascribe themselves to virtuous acts have begun to understand the overarching consequences and responsibilities laid out by Meno. Plato finally puts the question of whether virtue can be taught to rest be letting Socrates come to the conclusion that it can.

Virtue and Morality

From a completely epistemological standpoint, virtue represents the highest individual potential in a human being (Nehamas, 1999). The awareness that the potential even exists is something that a person needs to learn, as they are not born with the knowledge that they have a particular potential and are able to live up to that potential through knowledge and learning. Moral knowledge however, according to Plato's Meno (380 BCE), is impossible to quantify or learn. This form of virtue is subjective, and from a completely objective ethical standpoint, it is totally impossible to understand morality as it applies to all of humanity from a knowledge-based perspective. The idea that there are inherently good and evil people in the world is also one that is brought up time and time again in Meno. Socrates states, "Is it not obvious that those who are ignorant of their nature do not desire them (evils); but they desire what they suppose to be goods although they are really evils; and if they are mistaken and suppose the evils to be good they really desire goods?" (Plato, 380 BCE). This statement suggests the Socrates believes that some people know they are doing evil, and are not acting virtuously, while others are unaware that they are perpetrating evil upon others, and think they are acting virtuously instead. Socrates does not fault this latter group of people except for their own ignorance of good and evil. He concludes then, that these people who do not know good from evil also are incapable of truly "knowing" virtue or acting virtuously.

The exploration of moral questions is spurred by the desire to know something that is impossible to know. Yet this does not deter the common person from the pursuit of knowledge. This is the point where belief and knowledge intersect, and for many people, belief satisfies the part of them that yearns for the type of knowledge that is unknowable, whether moral or technical in nature. It is impossible for a human to know something and to know virtue through the actions of a teacher or mentor. Socrates, in the Meno, states this and follows up this argument with the assertion that only through individual inquiry and growth can a person truly know what virtue is as applied to their own unique and individual situation and life (Plato, 380 BCE).

The Political Ramifications of Virtue

The universality of virtue, or as Plato referred to it "arete" or human excellence, lends credence to the idea that while there are specific forms of virtue that certain people can live up to, there is an overarching or universal form of virtue that people are born with no matter where they live in the world. In the modern sense, this idea suggests that everyone has the potential to learn about virtue as it applies to them and they also have the ability or potential to live a virtuous life. The concept of excellence and virtue does not hold up the same way in the modern world as it did in the ancient world. Plato's concepts, according to Meno and Socrates, paint virtue as an undemocratic knowledge of good and evil. In today's world, where most people feel that a democracy is the highest form of government, it is rare to see an appeal to virtue instead of to the voters.

Socrates argued that virtue, and not the vote, should be the deciding factor for leaders of all nations. Both Socrates and Plato believed in a philosopher-king, or someone who had virtue and the power to act upon it. The knowledge of good and evil, as evidenced by a personal undertaking of the exploration of virtue, was to these philosophers, man's best hope for fair and excellent governance. If virtue is the basic knowledge of good and evil, then it would only make sense to be governed by those people who could see the difference between the two and act according to everyone's best interests. This is a very difficult concept for many Americans to understand after being brought up with the assumption that the democratic American political system is the best system in the world and is the high point of political history and philosophy. Meno states, "If you want to have one definition of them all, I know not what to say, but that virtue is the power of governing mankind." (Plato, 380 BCE). Socrates' response is somewhat predictable, given his nature, but it also highlights the idea that politically as well as socially, every human being must recognize their place or role and learn to become excellent in their role. Socrates says in response, "And does this definition of virtue include all virtue? Is virtue the same in a child and in a slave, Meno? Can the child govern his father, or the slave his master; and would he who governed be any longer a slave?" (Plato, 380 BCE)

The Unity of Virtue

The unity of virtue is another piece of the conceptual puzzle concerning Plato's Meno and the discussion of the nature of arete, or excellence. The Socratic insistence that practical knowledge is akin to scientific knowledge, in that it must be explored and learned through experimentation and experience is indicative of an attitude that everyday practical problems can be solved by appeal to knowledge (Weiss, 2001). The unification of virtue under the heading of knowledge can be undertaken after understanding that Socrates' and Plato's arguments about virtue all pertain to the same act or idea, that knowledge is the only truth and through it, virtue or excellence can be obtained. In this way, virtue is unified as a particular knowledge set, and a person can become virtuous through their own studies of knowledge.

Many philosophers pose that virtue is not unified, since it cannot be quantified in a singular concept or statement relative to each individual person. To these people, virtue is something that cannot be learned, but also cannot be understood through one perspective. While these ideas are both true, virtue, according to Plato's Meno (380 BCE), is quite simply, as stated before is the ability to understand one's place in the world and to make the correct decisions based on what is known to be good for that particular person.

In Conclusion

The question, "What is virtue?" can be answered in many different ways. As a singularity, virtue is, according to Meno, "…as I take it, is when he, who desires the honorable, is able to provide it for himself; so the poet says, and I say too- Virtue is the desire of things honorable and the power of attaining them." (Plato, 380 BCE). Virtue is the desire and the power of good and the knowledge that comes from experience and learning which is really just recollection as Socrates points out. Virtue has a place in politics and society, both ancient and modern, and philosophers have debated this concept for centuries, arguing whether or not it is a singular value or something that is multifaceted. Either way, virtue is something completely different for different people. As people understand their own roles in society, they can familiarize themselves with their own virtuous path.

The concept of good and evil is also an integral part of the question of virtue and how it is attained (Nehamas, 1999). According to Socrates, there are both good and evil people in the world, acting both knowingly and unknowingly against virtue. This is something that the virtuous person recognizes and knows, since the virtuous person is able to act on their own potential for good, and has the power to do good within their own realm or role in society or politics.

The Meno (380 BCE), written in Socratic form, is a conversation with a series of open-ended questions regarding virtue and the actions of humans. It is impossible to teach virtue, just as it is impossible to know anything beyond the foundation that has already been built in one's mind relative to the singular human perspective. Plato attempts to get at the root of one of mankind's biggest questions and while philosophers and scholars have studied and debated Plato's concept of arete, or excellence, it remains as a poignant reminder that good and evil, no matter how objectively defined, are subjectively experienced individually. The capacity and power to act and the knowledge to understand what is virtuous is the responsibility of the each human being, and no two humans have the same roles and capacity for understanding that which is "wisdom" (Santas, 1969, pp. 452). Wisdom is recollected and passed down, and through this lens, virtue can begin to be understood as it applies to each and every human individually. It is only in this way that virtue can truly be learned and "known."