In this paper I will argue that Socrates’s claim at 96c-d of the Meno that virtue cannot be taught because there are no teachers of virtue is not valid. Specifically, I will show Socrates reasoning and claim as to why there are no teachers of virtue, which means virtue cannot be taught. Then I will demonstrate why Socrates’s reasoning is false due to a missed detail in his argument. I conclude Socrates’s reasoning behind his arguments are mostly logical and sound, however he made the mistake of forgetting to mention an important detail that is detrimental to his argument.
Socrates claims that virtue cannot be taught because there are no teachers of virtue at 96c-d due to various leaps of logic and reason. To explain these reasons, I will start …show more content…
However, I disagree with him due to minor things I think he overlooked and quickly brushed off in his argument. First off, Socrates argued that worthy people who are virtuous must want the people closest to them such as their children to be virtuous as well. Referring back to the example of Themistocles, who is a successful general in Athens. If Themistocles is truly a virtuous man, he should be concerned of his own best state of soul at all times, as mentioned in the Euthyphro. In addition, it is made clear by Socrates in the Euthyphro that every man’s priority should be his own soul. Imagine, Athens is in danger of a military attack and his best course of action and his best way to preserve his soul is to fight against neighboring nations. If this is the case, Themistocle must prioritize taking care of his own soul and sacrifice time that he uses to teach his son about the art of horse riding, instead he would fight for Athens. Socrates ignored or simply forgot about the impact of time. There is only 24 hours in a day and time is arguably the most valuable commodity for everyone. A virtuous man like Themistocle must be extremely busy, utilizing his time for the sake of Athens and himself instead of teaching his son to become a virtuous man. However, a great man such as Themistocle can hire teachers for his son, but one should consider why would …show more content…
I would like to argue that in Themistocles case, his son grew up not being as virtuous as he is and not as skilled in horse-riding as he is. However, we can consider having older, retired virtuous people to teach virtue because they will have more free time. I understand that retired, virtuous people may still not be able to teach virtue. However, Socrates’s original arguments do not stand as concretely as before, because now it is no longer certain that there is no teacher of virtue, which means it is no longer certain that virtue cannot be taught.
In conclusion, I have fully, accurately state and explain Socrates’s claim at 96c-d of the Meno that virtue cannot be taught because there are no teachers of virtue is not valid. I explained Socrates’s provided good reasons, but he fails to consider the factor of time, which can render his argument invalid due to its uncertainty. I then considered the objection that my arguments does not guarantee virtuous people being able to teach virtue, and I responded by even if that is the case, my argument has already made Socrates’s arguments invalid because I pointed out that Socrates’s claim is no longer
Socrates claims that virtue cannot be taught because there are no teachers of virtue at 96c-d due to various leaps of logic and reason. To explain these reasons, I will start …show more content…
However, I disagree with him due to minor things I think he overlooked and quickly brushed off in his argument. First off, Socrates argued that worthy people who are virtuous must want the people closest to them such as their children to be virtuous as well. Referring back to the example of Themistocles, who is a successful general in Athens. If Themistocles is truly a virtuous man, he should be concerned of his own best state of soul at all times, as mentioned in the Euthyphro. In addition, it is made clear by Socrates in the Euthyphro that every man’s priority should be his own soul. Imagine, Athens is in danger of a military attack and his best course of action and his best way to preserve his soul is to fight against neighboring nations. If this is the case, Themistocle must prioritize taking care of his own soul and sacrifice time that he uses to teach his son about the art of horse riding, instead he would fight for Athens. Socrates ignored or simply forgot about the impact of time. There is only 24 hours in a day and time is arguably the most valuable commodity for everyone. A virtuous man like Themistocle must be extremely busy, utilizing his time for the sake of Athens and himself instead of teaching his son to become a virtuous man. However, a great man such as Themistocle can hire teachers for his son, but one should consider why would …show more content…
I would like to argue that in Themistocles case, his son grew up not being as virtuous as he is and not as skilled in horse-riding as he is. However, we can consider having older, retired virtuous people to teach virtue because they will have more free time. I understand that retired, virtuous people may still not be able to teach virtue. However, Socrates’s original arguments do not stand as concretely as before, because now it is no longer certain that there is no teacher of virtue, which means it is no longer certain that virtue cannot be taught.
In conclusion, I have fully, accurately state and explain Socrates’s claim at 96c-d of the Meno that virtue cannot be taught because there are no teachers of virtue is not valid. I explained Socrates’s provided good reasons, but he fails to consider the factor of time, which can render his argument invalid due to its uncertainty. I then considered the objection that my arguments does not guarantee virtuous people being able to teach virtue, and I responded by even if that is the case, my argument has already made Socrates’s arguments invalid because I pointed out that Socrates’s claim is no longer