Teachibililty and Unteachability of Virtue
“Virtue, according to the Stoicism Model of Philosophy, is a single thing, and the individual virtues are its parts.” In Plato’s dialogue Protagoras, Protagoras both begins and ends on the subject of the teachability and unteachability of virtue. Socrates questions Protagoras, the sophist, on the teachability of virtue. The latter in the argument argues that virtue can in fact be passed on, as well as the former arguing the opposition. Initially, it begins with Socrates appearing skeptical as to whether virtue is teachable, but later argues that it can be taught. Whereas Protagoras 's situation is reversed, as he begins his argument by defending the teachability of virtue and ends up questioning …show more content…
Protagoras attempts to illustrate that is not the case that if a person is virtuous, they will have good children. Protagoras agrees with Socrates’ claim that a virtuous person has the ability to teach virtue, however, in order to correctly reject Socrates’ first premise, Protagoras asserts that it is possible some teachers of virtue are more well - equipped to speak on it than other virtuous humans are. Protagoras states, “it is reasonable to admit every as an adviser on this virtue, on the grounds that everyone has some share of it.” (Protagoras. 323c). This can be translated into the mode that being a virtuous person and having the ability to properly teach another person about virtue are separate concepts. A person whom is of good character and nature does not automatically know how to teach another person how to build a good character. Protagoras attempts to make his case by stating …show more content…
Socrates and Protagoras have different concepts when it comes to defining what makes a good citizen. Socrates states that Protagoras operates with an unexamined notion of virtue and one should attempt to decipher the text as a clarification and analysis, rather than an explanation. Protagoras’ defense for Socrates’ argument merely states that there are teachers of virtue with various skill sets. Protagoras’ ability to refute Socrates’ first premise enabled him to contend that just because someone is virtuous, it is not an instinctive drive to be able to teach virtue, or that they will produce virtuous children. It concludes ultimately with Socrates and Protagoras switching opinions. Socrates now defends the view that virtue is knowledgeable and in turn, teachable, whereas his latter, now denies the plausibility that virtue is knowledge and should not be teachable, even though he claims that he himself is able to do
“Virtue, according to the Stoicism Model of Philosophy, is a single thing, and the individual virtues are its parts.” In Plato’s dialogue Protagoras, Protagoras both begins and ends on the subject of the teachability and unteachability of virtue. Socrates questions Protagoras, the sophist, on the teachability of virtue. The latter in the argument argues that virtue can in fact be passed on, as well as the former arguing the opposition. Initially, it begins with Socrates appearing skeptical as to whether virtue is teachable, but later argues that it can be taught. Whereas Protagoras 's situation is reversed, as he begins his argument by defending the teachability of virtue and ends up questioning …show more content…
Protagoras attempts to illustrate that is not the case that if a person is virtuous, they will have good children. Protagoras agrees with Socrates’ claim that a virtuous person has the ability to teach virtue, however, in order to correctly reject Socrates’ first premise, Protagoras asserts that it is possible some teachers of virtue are more well - equipped to speak on it than other virtuous humans are. Protagoras states, “it is reasonable to admit every as an adviser on this virtue, on the grounds that everyone has some share of it.” (Protagoras. 323c). This can be translated into the mode that being a virtuous person and having the ability to properly teach another person about virtue are separate concepts. A person whom is of good character and nature does not automatically know how to teach another person how to build a good character. Protagoras attempts to make his case by stating …show more content…
Socrates and Protagoras have different concepts when it comes to defining what makes a good citizen. Socrates states that Protagoras operates with an unexamined notion of virtue and one should attempt to decipher the text as a clarification and analysis, rather than an explanation. Protagoras’ defense for Socrates’ argument merely states that there are teachers of virtue with various skill sets. Protagoras’ ability to refute Socrates’ first premise enabled him to contend that just because someone is virtuous, it is not an instinctive drive to be able to teach virtue, or that they will produce virtuous children. It concludes ultimately with Socrates and Protagoras switching opinions. Socrates now defends the view that virtue is knowledgeable and in turn, teachable, whereas his latter, now denies the plausibility that virtue is knowledge and should not be teachable, even though he claims that he himself is able to do