Attaining Virtue in The Republic of Plato

In this paper, I try to discuss the sixth chapter in the book which focuses on the definition of virtue. This passage mainly goes through dialogues between Socrates and Meno, who debated with each other in order to make a certain definition of virtue. In the passage, Socrates gave his opinion of virtue and tried to make Meno understand his ideas, while Meno held his opinion. In fact, virtue is rather difficult to be defined. Even though both Socrates and Meno had contemplated what virtue, it is still hard to give a definition of it. Also, trying to make a certain definition of virtue is also the broad aim of the whole book---Plato’s Meno. This book was written by Plato, which is filled with Socrates’ dialogues. It aims to make sure the essence of virtue. From this portion in the book, I can see that the aim of this passage could make a difference in helping reach the entire aim of the book. In this paper, I prepared to explain the content of the passage as well as some important concepts. What’s more, I aim to mark out the difficult and important ideas, thoughts I have gained in the process of reading. At the same time, I will also cite my personal experiences in order to support the ideas in the passage.

Morality is likely the most debated topic of all time, especially in regards to our moral responsibility for each other. Throughout history many writers and philosophers have taken different angles the concept of morality and have applied it in many ways. This includes: Niccolò Machiavelli with The Prince (we will be looking at The Qualities of the Prince) and Plato with The Republic (we will be looking at the section The Allegory of the Cave. The Prince (1513) essentially lays out a how-to guide of how to obtain power and how to keep it; The Qualities of the Prince contains a list of qualities that one should appear to have while in power; this work will be used to represent the case against moral responsibility for others. The Republic

In response to Thrasymachus, Glaucon, and Adeimantus, Socrates seeks to show that it is always in an individual’s interest to be just, rather than unjust. Thus, one of the most critical problems regarding the Republic is whether Socrates defends justice successfully or not. Socrates offers three arguments in favor of the just life over the unjust life: first, the just man is wise and good, and the unjust man is ignorant and bad; second, injustice produces internal disharmony which prevents effective actions; and lastly, virtue is excellence at a thing’s function and the just person lives a happier life than the unjust person, since he performs the various functions of the human soul well. Socrates is displeased with the argument because a sufficient explanation of justice is essential before reaching a conclusion as to whether or not the just life is better than the unjust life. He is asked to support justice for itself, not for the status that follows. He propositions to look for justice in the city first and then to continue by analogy to discover justice in the individual. This approach will allow for a distinct judgment on the question of whether the just person is happier than the unjust person. Socrates commences by exploring the roots of political life and constructs a hypothetical just city that gratifies only fundamental human necessities. Socrates argues

Meno’s definition of virtue that appeals most to me is explained by him wherein courage, temperance, and wisdom are virtues. First these are virtues because virtues are qualities that define good and bad behavior. Courage is a good quality because it takes courage to deal with different situations and ordeals encountered on a daily basis. Courage is needed also to stand for what is morally correct in spite of being mistreated or ostracized due to the opposing opinions from people. For example if an unauthorized copy of an exam is given to me from another classmate, instead of using it I should refuse to receive it from the student and consult the instructor, even if not to let him or her know who the violator is but to alert them to the occurrence so that the test may be revised. This could mean that I maybe frowned upon by other classmates. However, this is where courage to do what is right is being demonstrated.

In The Republic Book 3, Plato uses a fictional character named Socrates to argue that people in society must be handpicked to rule as well as also handpicking people to become ruled in order to confirm there will be no disagreements over who is leading. He essentially claims choosing what every citizen does with their life is necessary for creating a steady and working structure in society. This theory of telling people what they were destined to do in life is known as the “noble lie.” It tells everyone a “religious lie” that people all originate from the same place and are siblings of each other, an attempt to convince everyone to get along regardless of their social class. Personally I do not believe that Plato’s arguments in his book are correct and that the use of a “noble lie” would not work in society.

Socrates creates an imaginary city with a group of men and everything in this city is perfectly good and has all of the virtues. They identify these virtues as wise, courageous, moderate, and just. Socrates recommends that they should try to identify where each of these qualities lies. They identify wisdom first, which they describe as being found with the guardians because of the knowledge they have and their ability to run the city. They argue that if the guardians did not rule the city their virtue would not translate into the city, but since they are ruling the city then their virtue is translated into the city. Then they decide that the next virtue courage is located in the city’s soldiers because they are the ones that fight for the city.

The Republic by Plato is about Socrates’ ideal society, and begins with him defining the real meaning of justice. Socrates and Glaucon discuss “I expect then, to find justice in the following way. I think our city, if indeed it has been correctly founded, is completely good.’ ‘Yes, it must be.’ ‘Clearly then, it is wise, courageous, temperate, and just” (Plato, Republic, 4.427e 6-10). Socrates, the character who is building the model society, finally figures out how he is going to find the meaning of justice in Book 4. Socrates determines that the city and the soul need to incorporate the four cardinal virtues of being wise, courageous, temperate, and just to make the community function. Socrates defines what each of the virtues truly mean within the city and the soul. After defining what it means for a city and the soul to be wise, courageous, and temperate, he defines what it means for them to be just. Socrates defines a just city as, “When moneymaking, auxiliary, and guardian class each do their own work in the city-is justice, isn’t it, and makes the city?” (Plato, Republic, 4.434c 8-10). A city that acts justly according to Socrates is when every citizen does their assigned job. If an auxiliary guardian tries to be a ruler, then the city will experience conflict. If citizens stick to their assignment, then a society will act justly and according to Socrates, a city needs to be just. Functionality is an important attribute of a community because a chaotic society never

Plato 's Meno is a Socratic discussion on the definition of human virtues where the main participants are Socrates and Meno. Other speakers in the dialogue include an Athenian politician, one of Meno 's slaves, and Socrates’ prosecutor Anytus, who is a friend to Meno. Meno wants to understand the broad definition of human virtues and while visiting Athens he initiates the dialogue on virtues with Socrates. The discussion begins with Meno inquiring from Socrates whether virtues can be learned. Meno argues that, according to the Georgian’s, the attribute is defined differently by different people, and there is no common way to define it so as to apply it to all human beings. In response, Socrates argues that the Georgians do not understand the real meaning of virtue and in his opinion that some attributes are common to all human beings. Socrates also rejects the idea that virtues depend on human sexuality and age and insist that there are common attributes in humans. The conversation between the two becomes an argument on about the perfect definition of human characteristics. In essence, this paper discusses the critics in Plato 's Meno that led to a senseless conclusion on virtues as it was significantly contributed by Socrates. As well, the paper will support the argument that the agreement between Socrates and Memo was based on distinct ideas.

This paper will be examining Plato’s dialogue Protagoras. Specifically, it will provide insight into Socrates’ reasons for challenging the view that virtue can be taught. Protagoras’ reply in his great speech will also be deliberated. Finally, there will also be a discussion based on these differing perspectives.

During this week’s intro to Plato’s Meno and the idea of inputting a portion of the first few pages to improve life I stumbled across an interesting topic. This was what I call differences in species and matter or like Sacrates described it by asking, “… you think it is only in the case of virtue that there is one for a man, another for a woman and so on.” (2). There, we can see that he wants to make sure that Meno knows that “virtue” is no different for man than for a female than for a child. Therefore, this becomes the first anti-racial argument that was established. They talk about how bees have different attributes, this being my state of matter, from one another, yet because they are all bees, the same specie, we call them and categorize them as bees and nothing else. If that is the case, we are all humans. Life can be better if we avoid an everyday pre-judgment state

Likewise, the individuals who can share that knowledge are citizens of the cities. Just like in the Apology when Socrates asked Meletus about who teaches the young. The same concept is brought back into his city. Thus meaning citizens teach their young based off of stories that are to be created by poets and wisdom from their jobs. Now Socrates argues that knowledge should be censored to help promote virtues into individuals of his city. For example, poets should write about how death and the great beyond should not be greatly feared to help install the virtue of courage into soldiers. Contributing to establish the virtue of courage would allow soldiers to act and make a big decision without the fear of death (Pg. 66). Furthermore, Socrates further states that in his city there needs to be a myth that can instill a purpose into his citizens (once again using a story to impart knowledge into his citizens). This tale otherwise known as the “noble lie” consisted of individuals being given a metal at birth. The metals used in the story consist of Gold, silver, iron, and bronze. People who had Gold were apart of the ruling class while those who had silver were the auxiliaries, and those who had bronze and iron were considered part of the working class. This myth once again would be able to instill a purpose into his people so that individuals wouldn’t become wandering generalities. They could focus on

Book four of The Republic of Plato starts out with Adeimantus suggesting that being a ruler does not sound like it would be fun because they would have no wealth to themselves. Socrates says to him that their goal is not to make just one group happy but to make the whole city happy and then he brings up the example of the statue. Afterwards, Socrates says that there should be neither wealth nor poverty in the city because both make the people perform their tasks worse. He then says that the city is complete and they start to look for the four virtues within it. They decide that wisdom lies with the guardians, courage lies with the auxiliaries, and moderation and justice lie throughout the whole city.

Socrates describes virtue of the body (through gymnastics and medicine) as well as of the soul (through temperance and justice). Interestingly, Socrates's response here smacks of rhetoric and oration more than of dialogue, and his tone takes on a passion and urgency unusual even for him. This intense passion suggests the vital significance for him (and thus for Plato) of the topics in focus. The mythology of death Socrates relates at the dialogue's conclusion illustrates the importance of virtue both in this world and beyond.

Understanding Socrates idea of what virtue is may not be difficult because he distinctively believed “knowledge is virtue” hoever the type of knowledge expected from the virtuous person it determined by ones self. Socrates gives no explict evidence on being a person of virtue. While to the naked eye this concept may seem simple it is complex. There is no specific knowledge that leads to virtue, it is based off the knowledge a person develops when they live life with the intention of being a good person and try to live a good life (Solomon, Haggins 47). Experiences differ from person to person and each experience a person has can posiively or negiively affect them and eaach time they have an experience wether positive or negitive they gain

Courage differs from the other parts of virtue that are listed in the sense that courage is psychological, controllable, and it has the ability to be changed, whereas the other parts are something that you are born with. Courage can be changed and controlled because you can learn or push yourself to do things that you were once scared to do. This also bring in the fact of courage being a psychological force. Courage can be considered psychological because it is something that is going on in someone’s head that he/ she believes cannot be changed, but with effort and multiple attempts it could possibly become something that he/ she enjoys doing on a daily basis. For example, if you’re are scared of heights you could talk yourself into going to the top of a mountain and then you might find out that you enjoy going hiking. When it comes to the other four parts however, this isn’t the case. For example, with impiety if you don’t think the Gods deserve respect you’re not going to wake up one morning and respect