At this time last year, I was struggling to complete my college applications. I was was prompted to ask myself: what was I good at? What should I apply myself to? What would be my role in society? I didn’t know what to respond.
Socrates, on the other hand, has an answer these questions Continue reading
Economics Philosophy
In “Book II” of Plato’s, Republic, Socrates discusses what it means to be “just” with Adeimantus using the analogy of a city to create a powerful image of being “just.” As the analogy of the city begins to grow, Socrates discusses what it takes to create a “just” and well functioning city beginning with the jobs Continue reading
Posted in Ancient Philosophy, Education, Experience, Identity, Knowledge, Uncategorized
Tagged economics, Harry, knowledge, Philosophy, problem solving
Are people born with an inclination to do a certain job? Plato (through Socrates) believes this is the case (370b-c). He says, “one man is naturally fitted for one task, and another for another.” This means that fate determines what your profession will be before you ever set foot in school. If you don’t do this job, you are not being the best that you can be.
Posted in Ancient Philosophy, Identity
Tagged Brave New World, fate, Orli, Plato, society, Socrates
At 390 c, Socrates invokes a double standard seemingly very contrary to his prior discussion of justice, peace, and virtue. Here, he claims that the ruler of the city has the right to lie to its citizens at times of emergency, whereas the individual should never be untruthful in any situation.
I believe that this is a very ironic statement, in that it goes against much of what Socrates stands for. As a supporter of the power and importance of individualism, this claim that the collective is worth more than the individual in the long run is highly contradictory to much of what he has philosophized before.
Although this is a small point from the several selections we were instructed to read, I cannot help but say that I am very surprised by this claim and somewhat discouraged by it. Socrates has always struck me as a philosopher that encourages the individual to find his or her own path in life and then follow it based off what he or she holds dear in this life, and the value system he or she has created. I would never have expected him to say that the individual must adhere to the will of the city rulers for the greater good, especially if it goes against him or her’s beliefs, and create such a double standard between the collective and the individual.
In my opinion, both the city rulers and individual should be challenged to always be truthful. Just because the city has some control over the lives of its citizens, such as in creating policy and enforcing it, and protecting its people, it should not be given free reign to impose practices based upon deception and dishonesty, even if it is seemingly in the best interest of the people at the time. If the government is told that it is acceptable to lie in times of emergency for the sake of the “greater good,” or collective, such direction would prove disastrous, as it could assume total power, leading to corruption and tyranny in the future.
Although I found the majority of the selected reading to be very thought-provoking and beneficial, I have to say that I was concerned about Socrates’ statement concerning deception, and the city rulers’ right to it when they think it is “necessary,” as its implication degrades the liberty of the individual and allows the government the possibility of assuming total power and forming a tyranny that further damages such free will.
Posted in Ancient Philosophy, Education, Experience, Knowledge, Uncategorized
Tagged implications, individual, Socrates
After reading the dialogue from Plato’s Republic, I have found myself disagreeing with certain aspects of Socrates’ arguments. Particularly, Socrates makes claims about people that are black and white, but in reality people tend to exist in the grey area. Continue reading
In Plato’s dialogue Meno, a young, baffled Meno challenges Socrate’s logic and stance on knowledge by posing his famous paradox which describes the impracticality of searching for something you have no knowledge of as well as the issue of recognizing that you have found it when you do not even know what “it” is. Socrates simply dismisses this paradox as a quibbler’s argument, instead, offering up his theory on learning as “remembering” and something to do with our immortal souls(81d). Whether or not this is the case, Meno’s Paradox doesn’t seem to cause anyone any grief in the real-world pursuit of knowledge. Further into Plato’s Meno and Protagoras we are provided hints as to why this is.
“How silly of us not to realize that it isn’t always knowledge that’s guiding people when they do things well and succeed in their affairs”(96c).
Knowledge isn’t the be-all and end-all of education or learning, it can’t be. Knowledge, whether it is known or unknown, is just useless fact if you lack the skills to apply it. “Isn’t it clear that what we desperately need is, for a start, some kind of measuring ability?”(357b). Throughout Meno and Protagoras Plato refers to this ability to operate knowledge as “knowledge of measurement”, “opinion”, and just plain old “good sense”. What Plato describes is a discerning ability, the ability to say yes or no, to accept or question, and to piece the different components of knowledge into something functional— something similar to judgement. By exercising our judgement or “good sense” we are easily able to overcome Meno’s Paradox and fearlessly navigate the unknown.
“Even with a blindfold on, Meno, anyone could tell just from talking to you that you are beautiful.”(76b)
Even if we are just stumbling around in the dark as long as our feet remain firmly planted in what is familiar we can feel around for edges and use our judgement to piece together an outline of what we are searching for. Scientists do it all the time. They define something by defining its surroundings, where it will fit, then study it by studying its surroundings and how it fits(eg. Higgs Boson Particle). Using “good sense” and the trusty “guess and check method”(very much the same concept behind a baby’s shape sorter toy, see image below) you will often find what you were searching for, or didn’t even know you were searching for and then recognize “it”as what you were searching for because it fits.
Posted in Ancient Philosophy, Education, Knowledge
I do not believe that “Meno’s Paradox” is truly a paradox. When he says that you cannot find out about something that you know about because you already know it, he is completely wrong. One reason why this is wrong is because we are human beings, and we will never know everything about one thing. Many times, the subjects that we want to know about are too broad. For example, we can want to know everything about math, or everything about a person, but that can never happen because the information is simply too much for our brains to handle. Another reason why we will never know everything is because knowledge is relative. One person can think that knowing everything about Obama does not include knowing how many pieces of hair he has on his head, while another person thinks that knowing everything about Obama does include knowing that. Finally, we will never know everything about a specific subject or topic because knowledge is not static; it is dynamic. What is thought to be true and knowledgeable now can change in the future. New discoveries on different subjects are made everyday, some of which are proven true or false. Let’s say a person really did know everything about math. If they are on their deathbed, and five seconds before they die a new mathematical discovery is approved as being true and knowledgeable, then that person died not knowing everything about math. Another example is if you want to focus only on knowing what Bill eats for lunch every Wednesday. If Bill has eaten a chicken salad sandwich every Wednesday for the past ten years, then you will think that you know what Bill eats for lunch every Wednesday. But what if Bill decides that he wants to try the tuna salad sandwich one Wednesday and decides that since he likes it so much, he will eat that sandwich from then on instead of the chicken sandwich? Then your knowledge of what Bill likes to eat for lunch every Wednesday will have to change.
Meno also believes that you can’t find out about something that you do not know about because you do not even know what it is you are trying to find out about, and he is wrong in this case as well. For one thing, this statement is bogus, because if you are trying to find out about something, then you already know what you want to find out about. Also, you can find out about something that you previously knew nothing about. What people have to do is look at how they obtained information about something that they knew nothing about in the past. You could have asked someone who you thought was knowledgeable on the subject, or you could have gone to the library and gotten a book on what you want to know about. You would do the same when you are trying to learn about new things- either ask a person or read a book or look for answers on the internet. Of course, there are always questions that people ask that not a single person has any knowledge on. This is when I refer to my saying that knowledge is dynamic. You could do research- whether it is looking at different books on topics that relate to that subject or getting opinions from people that know some things on that subject- and come up with an answer on your own. This is what people did in the past, and it is what people will continue to do in the future. Of course, people that come behind you will test your discovery that supposedly adds new knowledge, and it will either become approved or rejected by the masses.
Philosophy Blog 1
In Plato’s Meno, Socrates holds a dialogue with Meno, a young wealthy man who will become a general. The topic of discussion is how to obtain virtue. Virtue in ancient Greece refers not to morality but rather to skills and traits necessary to satisfy a particular role in society. For example, a farmer would have virtues of knowledge about the crops he grows and marketing skills in order to be successful in farming. The dialogue begins as Meno asks Socrates about whether virtue can taught. Socrates then claims that he does not know what virtue is or how it is obtained (71b). Meno is confused by his answer and claims that Gorgias has taught him virtue. Socrates rebukes him and repeats that he cannot learn what virtue is. This leads up to Meno’s famous paradox, in which he asks Socrates how he can learn anything if he does not know what he is searching for. If he already knew what he is searching for, then he wouldn’t need to search for it because he already knows about it (80e). Socrates responds with his theory that the soul recollects memories from previous lives when exposed to experiences in this life (81d). While this theory seems strange to many people, it has sparked many philosophical arguments over the nature of teaching and learning.
Meno’s paradox questions how knowledge is obtained and how can we know if something is right if we have never experienced it. We may ask our friends to show us how they interpret it, but they might be wrong and misleading. One way to overcome this paradox is by thinking about truths in our own lives. Rene Descartes famously said “I think, therefore I am” and this means that the act of thinking means that the individual is at least sure of his own existence. From here, the individual can begin searching for virtues that arise from his reactions and experiences from his life. Also, relearning something that was taught previously in this life is also part of the education process. If I were to relearn how to play a trombone, it does not mean that I knew how to play a trombone in a previous life. Meno’s paradox does not consider the act of forgetting and so it is possible to search for something that one knows but has forgotten due to the lack of certain memories.
If true, “Meno’s paradox” is a frightening proposition. The paradox suggests that human inquiry is impossible: humans are incapable of finding truths. The paradox stems form a simple question, “how can you put before your mind a thing that you have no knowledge of, in order to try to find out about it?”(Page 100, 80e) Inquiring about something, as in trying to find a universal truth about it, requires imagination and thinking. However, if somebody is inquiring about a thing that he does not know then it is impossible for him to imagine and think about it. On the other hand, if the person knows about the subject of inquiry then the process of inquiry is futile.
After thorough inspection, “Meno’s paradox” seemed perfectly logical and valid. How then are humans able to make new discoveries every single day if the process of inquiry is either unnecessary or impossible? Socrates explains this through a bizarre idea. He asserts that discoveries of new knowledge are actually recollections of knowledge already possessed by the soul. To Socrates, humans are all born with the solutions to all of nature’s mysteries. To unleash these solutions, a person must undergo the process of “remembering”. Deep down, we all know how to compose music, write computer code, solve mathematical equations, and come up with scientific theories. Just like the slave that “remembers” what a diagonal is, we must go through the long and tedious process of “remembering” that involves hard work and making mistakes. The paradox should not be viewed as a sad limitation of human power but as motivation that everybody can “solve” the mysteries of the universe.
Posted in Ancient Philosophy, Education, Knowledge
From Meno, we encounter towards the middle of the piece a point in which Meno is angry at Socrates because they have come to an impasse as to what “being good” really is. Meno proceeds to feel baffled and makes the claim that it cannot be possible to find out what it is to “be good” because he has no idea what being good really is (80e). This is Meno’s paradox; he feels that he cannot find out “good” because he doesn’t even know what to look for.
Socrates puts things into perspective by making a claim that souls are immortal, and they cycle through life, therefore all the experiences of every person before you culminates in the soul, therefore it is possible that we have learned, in a past life, what being good is, and it is not so much a process of learning, but a process of remembering (81c).
In our own lives, this paradox is encountered. Whether it’s a student who tries to understand calculus, a musician trying to learn a song, or a sprinter who works to drop time in their events, there is a common feature among all these examples: the process of discovery. Just as Socrates put it with his example involving Meno’s slave (84a), it is not learning, because we already know what to do, in a sense. We just have to remember what to do, a process of trial-and-error, where the error makes us eager to discover how to get the task accomplished. Work problems in calculus until it sticks, find ways to move your fingers on the instrument smoothly so to make the music sound seamless, and focus on details in your races in order to grow.
We often are found in similar situations as Meno to which a solution is feasible, but it is something that requires some thought. Deep down, there’s a basic idea on how to accomplish the task, but it really requires a some failure in order to bring us to answers.