The aim of this essay is to present you with the answers to specific questions. The specific questions derive from the reading of four (4) specific dialogues of Plato that are included in the first volume of his dialogues. The essay is structured in such a way that each answer to each one of the questions covers the main thematic core of each question. The four (4) dialogues used as the starting point of the following questions are Ion, Menon, Apology and Crito.
- In Ion, Ion claims that his skill at reciting and explaining Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey makes him an expert in every field on which Homer touches. What does Socrates think of this?
Ion belongs to the first dialogues of Plato and it has been estimated that it has been written in around 394B.C. it is the dialogue in which Plato starts developing his thoughts on what are the differentiations between poetry and philosophy. Ion is a rhapsode who has just returned from the annual festival of Asclepius that is held at the city of Epidaurus. Ion has won the first prize in the reciting context held within this festival. So, Socrates finds the opportunity to start asking him questions on what he thinks as far as his expertize is concerned. The main question that Socrates seems to be interested in is whether Ion’s talent is something internal that is carried within him by virtue or not. Socrates appears to question the power and strength of such a gift unless it is a divine gift. He seems to challenge Ion to admit to the fact that his reciting skill is of divine nature. Unless that divine creatures of poetry, the Ancient Greek Muses, did not inspire Ion, then Ion would not have been able to recite Homer in such a way. Socrates’ thinking does not stay at that point. Socrates goes on a step forward. Since Ion appears to have been affected by the inspiration offered by Muses, then it is most possible that Ion is only able to recite Homer. This is the point when all the interest begins rising. Socrates is the person through which Plato expresses his ambiguity and his everlasting questions on the differences between a specific talent and a wider range of a knowledgeable background. In other words, Socrates criticizes Ion’s belief that his talent in reciting Homer makes him an expert on everything that Homer touches. Socrates poses the difference between a skill and a piece of knowledge. Being skillful in reciting is the result of divine intervention. This is the only logical explanation, because otherwise according to Socrates, Ion would not seem so mad or carried away by what he does. The strange, uncontrolled and unconscious behavior that conquers Ion when he recites can be rationalized only if the effect of Muses is taken into consideration. Ion seems a bit troubled by that at first and cannot easily believe it. But as the dialogue keeps on developing itself, Ion realizes that there is a major difference between being skillful or well-trained and holding strong knowledge on the other. Art cannot be a specific, solid body of knowledge. This is what Plato believes and this is what Socrates supports in terms of deciding whether Ion can consider himself an expert in other fields as well. Ion is a skillful rhapsode. But being skillful does not signify the acquisition of good, solid knowledge.
- In Apology, Socrates says that his mission as a philosopher was set for him by the oracle at Delphi. Explain this.
In the third part of Apology of Plato, 20c-24e, Socrates analyzes and describes in full detail his thoughts on what is the source of his wisdom. He has already presented and fully justified his statement that he is not a sophist and he is not a Presocratic philosopher. However, Socrates seems to be unable to realize why he has been accused by the citizens and the authorities of the ancient city of Athens that he is doing harm to the citizens. Trying to find the truth as far as his role in the society is concerned, he goes deep down to analyzing the source and the nature of his wisdom. He says that his belief regarding his wisdom derives from a prophecy that was given by an oracle at Delphi. His friend Chaerephon had gone to Delphi and asked the omniscient if there was anyone who could be considered to be wiser than Socrates. The oracle given to Chaerephon was that no man existed who was wiser than Socrates. So, Socrates decided to test the oracle by investigating three different groups of people in the city. He first addressed the politicians. He realized very soon that the politicians said that they were wise but the truth was that they knew nothing. Then, Socrates addressed the poets. He realized that the poets got carried away by their inner talent and skill to write poetry and therefore they thought that this expertize gave them the right to consider themselves as experts in every field of life. Socrates soon realized that this was not true. Poets seemed to have no knowledge or any specific knowledgeable background in any other field. On the contrary, the only thing they were good at was their talent in writing poetry. Unfortunately, this talent had been falsely interpreted on their behalf as their ticket to entering other knowledgeable fields. The truth however was that poets knew nothing else but their art. The divine source of their artistic talent was limited only within the field of their art. Last but not least, Socrates went to the craftsmen. Then he realized that these men rationalized their expertise in their craft by falsely believing that they held knowledge in other fields as well. So, Socrates reached the conclusion that no one seemed to be wise. On the contrary the acquisition of their expertize had been falsely interpreted as knowledge of a wider scale. So, Socrates realized that the oracle was true and genuine. Since Socrates himself had never considered himself to know something, then he was the wiser of all, indeed. He was the wiser because he knew that he knew nothing at all. He only knew what he knew and he never thought that he knew more than what he actually knew. So, Socrates supports the idea that since he holds a true and genuine image of what he knows, he is not carried away by any false beliefs. So, he is wise because he holds the wisdom not to pretend to be wiser than what he really is.
- In Crito, Socrates personifies the laws of Athens and imagines that they tell him why he cannot accept Crito’s offer of escape from prison. Explain the laws’ three main points.
In Crito, Plato approaches the issue of Laws and justice. Crito has offered Socrates his chance to escape prison. Socrates tells Crito that he will escape prison if it is just. But if it is unjust, Socrates will remain in prison and will face his own death, following the wish of the citizens and the imposition of the Laws. So, Socrates brings Crito face to face with the Laws of the city of Ancient Athens. The Laws of Ancient Athens speak to Socrates and tell him that it is unjust to escape prison. The Laws use three main points in order to support their basic argument. The first point of the Laws is that they exist as a whole. So, since the Laws are an entity it is not right for Socrates to break one law. If one law is broken, then the entity will be harmed as a whole. According to the Laws, citizens are obliged to follow the Laws like they are ethically obliged to respect their parents. If a citizen breaks a law, then the citizen acts with no respect towards the entity of the Laws and his city. The citizen acts as if there is no sign of respect towards his parents. Last but not least, Socrates thinks that he could himself persuade the Laws to leave him and let him free. But the Laws represent a form of a social contract. Each single citizen is bound to the society of his city thanks to the existence of Laws. Every member of a live city signs a social contract since he decides to follow specific rules and regulations, so that he can leave in peace with himself and the others. So, if Socrates decided not to obey the Laws, then this disobedience would mean that Socrates breaks his own social contract and shows no respect to the happy seventy years of his life in the city of Athens up to now. Even if Socrates escapes and remains alive, life will have no meaning for him. Socrates will be the mortal who will have violated hi social contract, so no other city or social group would like to welcome him. He would go around like an outcast. There can be no society that desires to host people and citizens who break their social contract.
- In Meno, what are Socrates’ objections to Menon’s definition of virtue as the desire of good things and the ability to provide them?
Meno is the dialogue in which two persons, Socrates and Meno discuss the issue of human virtue. The main thematic core of the dialogue is whether virtue can be taught or not and what the definition of virtue is. Meno is a student of Gorgias, one of the well-acknowledged sophists of Ancient Greece. He is well-born, handsome young man who has come to visit his best friend Anytus in Ancient Athens. When the dialogue reaches the point when they try to find the definition of virtue, it is clear that Meno’s definition is not enough for Socrates. Meno believes that virtue is the desire of good things and the ability to provide them. Meno moves on a step forward and supports that this means that virtue is different for different people. So, virtue for an adult man is to be an energetic citizen, to help his friends when they need him and to cause no harm. On the contrary, virtue for an adult woman is to be a good household keeper and obey her husband. But Socrates believes that virtue ought not to be dependent on a person’s sex or age. He thinks that virtue comes from a common characteristic that is inherent to everybody. Throughout the discussion and the questions posed by Socrates, Meno reaches the conclusion that virtue is the desire for good things and the power to get them. But then Socrates contradicts this argument by asking the definition of ‘good’. Who is able to define good so that people can be taught to desire good things? This is question that turns the discussion to the conclusion that so many people mistake good for evil and vice versa. Socrates asks Meno to think on what good may be. According to Socrates, good things ought to be acquired in a virtuous way so that they can be really good. The dialogue does not seem to manage to provide us with a satisfactory definition on what virtue is. But Socrates emphasizes on the fact that virtue ought to be seen as unitary and not as a set of different skills and capabilities that may easily be mistaken for virtue.
- In Meno what is the problem that Menon brings up on the score of finding out something we don’t know, and what is Socrates’ solution? How does Socrates illustrate his solution in conversation with one of Menon’s servants?
In Meno, the two main speakers try to approach the issue of virtue. While trying to give a definition on what virtue is, Socrates admits that he cannot give a definition unless he is not ignorant of what virtue is. So, a paradox arises. Meno wonders how people can inquire into something if they do not know what it is. Then, Socrates responds that people cannot search for something they do not know. But people cannot inquire into something they know, either. Because there is no point in inquiring into something that they already know. This paradox turns into the starting point for the most important and interesting part of this dialogue. Socrates is developing his opinion on what inborn knowledge is. According to the myth, souls are immortal and have acquired their knowledge prior to their transmigrating to their human bodies. So, Socrates believes that humans carry inside them their inborn knowledge. The problem may be that the conditions around them are not the proper ones, so that they can bring everything they carry in themselves up to the surface. But when Socrates asks people questions, he tries to help them remember what they have already learnt. In order to prove the accuracy of his statements, Socrates interrogates a slave who is ignorant of geometry. The slave finds difficulty in providing Socrates with the answers to his questions. Socrates draws designs on the ground and the slave finds it difficult to guess how the original square can be doubled. He guesses that one of the sizes must be doubled in length so that the original square can be doubled as well. So, Socrates proves that the slave has managed to bring up to the surface the knowledge he has been carrying inside him. Although the slave has never been taught, he has the ability to bring his knowledge up to the surface. So, Menon realizes what Socrates believes as far as people’s nature is concerned. People have the inner ability and potential to become braver, better and more active if they try to bring up to the surface and remember what they know. This is the prerequisite for people who wish to look for what they do not know.
Works Cited
Brickhouse, Thomas C.; Smith, Nicholas D. ‘Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Plato and the Trial of Socrates’. New York: Routledge, 2004
Day, Jane M. Plato's Meno in Focus. London, New York: Routledge, 1994.
Fagan, Patricia; Russon, John, ‘Reexamining Socrates in the Apology’. Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 2009
Plato (380) ‘Ion’, Kessinger Publishing, 2004
Plato (360), ‘Five Dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo’, Hackett Publishing Company, 2002
Stokes, Michael, ‘Dialectic in Action: An Examination of Plato's Crito’. Swansea: Classical Press of Wales, 2005
Vlastos, G. “Socrates. Ironist and Moral Philosopher,” Cornell University Press, 1991
