Five Dialogues Euthyphro Euthyphro and Meletus think that they know ...
Five Dialogues Euthyphro Euthyphro and Meletus think that they know – they have knowledge, especially about the gods Euthyphro assumes that Socrates cannot be persecuting anyone because he DOESN’T know – he is always going around asking questions and telling people he does not know Meletus is accusing Socrates of corrupting the youth and telling lies about the gods This implies that Meletus DOES know about the gods and the truth S asks E what is the definition of piety? He does not want to know the action or the people, just the definition or the ruler to measure what is pious 1. What I do and am doing 2. What is dear to the gods a. But they argue and disagree b. E says that the gods agree on one point – anyone that has done wrong should be punished i. S says that nobody says they did something wrong and should be punished. Wrong is wrong, but everyone disagrees on what is wrong 3. What is dear to ALL the gods a. Property of piety, not the definition b. This implies that E is godlike, because he knows things about the gods so must be a god or godlike himself 4. Piety is the part of justice that concerns the gods a. This is in reply to S numbers analogy – still doesn’t follow what S wants, it deals with the gods instead of just piety itself b. So justice deals with men except the little part that is piety, bc it deals with gods Euthyphro promises to show everyone something – it will dawn upon everyone what piety is when they see it Socrates says that they will understand if he shows them well and their attention will be focused. He then says that a thought came to him while Euthyphro had been speaking – shows that he was not showing him well because he had other thoughts while E was speaking Socrates says that piety keeps moving, so he wants to try to tie it to justice Justice and piety can be tied together. What if piety is a part of justice? Does piety encompass justice, or does justice encompass piety? He talks about numbers and how they are split into even and odd – in doing this, the definition of even and odd come from within number. He wants this to be done with piety
E replies that piety is the part of justice that concerns the gods. S questions “concerns” and E says that he really meant “cares” S says that no one cares for the gods, they don’t have caretakers. E changes the word to service – so it’s a luxury that pleases them – we are back to the second definition Apology Meletus, Anytus, Lycon accused Socrates “I do not know” is what Socrates claims – authentic ignorance/nescience Socrates addresses the men of Athens, the polis (city). He says he got carried away, “ecstasia” He says the young men speak so well, but hardly any of it is true – how does he know? He says he doesn’t know. How does he know the accusers are lying? He begins with surprise that his accusers warn the audience not to listen to an accomplished speaker such as himself. He says he is not an accomplished speaker, he speaks differently than the city people. He questions, they persuade He asks permission to speak as he does normally – he does not try to persuade, he just questions. He is outside the city, his accusers are natives Socrates says that he must deal with old accusations before he can address the new accusations from M, A, and L He calls his old accusations rumors – they are shadowy He says he must proceed as the god wishes although the law demands he gives a defense First instance in which what the god wants is different than the city wants Sophists: claim to have knowledge, charge to speak Socrates calls on his first witness: 1. The god at Delphi – Apollo a. A friend asks the oracle outside of the city if anyone in Athens is wiser than Socrates, oracle says “on behalf of the god” (she is speaking for the god Apollo) b. What riddle is the god giving? He speaks in riddles i. This is the beginning of philosophy and questions Once you admit you don’t know, then you can question The men of least repute are actually close to the truth – they don’t claim to know things so they are not deluded about knowing lots of things Arguments against Meletus: 1. The one and the many
a. Who improves the youth, if he corrupts them? So the many improve the youth? The one who corrupts, and the many who improve 2. Vicious circle of corruption a. You never do anything you think is bad to yourself –it will be good for you in some way i. If you do something and it is wrong, you must be ignorant of the wrong, because no one desires wrong things b. Does anyone desire harm for themselves? No. Wicked people harm those around him. Therefore, Socrates would not corrupt them, because it would harm himself 3. Reductio and absurdum a. Meletus says that Socrates believes in no gods at all, so Socrates says why would he believe in horse activity but not the horses? So how can he believe in spiritual activities like going to the oracle and trusting the god at Delphi without believing in the gods? Socrates shows that if Meletus is wrong about what he is accusing Socrates of, he thinks he knows a lot but he knows nothing, but he is far away from authentic ignorance – he does not know himself Being ignorant of your own ignorance is where corruption comes from Socrates is not duplicitous – he is the same in public and private, he is authentic Meletus relies on opinions and rumors to try to accuse Socrates
Socrates cannot fear death, because he does not know it, so he could not accept being exiled from Athens. He is on his way to arête (excellence)
Meno 1. Can virtue be taught? Acquired through words or instruction (logos) 2. Is it the result of practice/habit? Acquired through actions (ergon) 3. Is it some natural gift? (innat) Socrates responses to Meno’s question in the opposite of the way Meno is accustomed to. He says he does not even know what virtue is, then how could he answer? Responds to a question with a question – Athenian manner Meno is really smart – he remembers things 1. Ignorance 2. Memory
3. Parts/wholes Meno says that there is a swarm of virtues: virtues of men, women, children, slaves, elderly This is the becoming of virtues – virtues that come and go. They want to know the being or whole virtue Managing well – maybe this is virtue? Along with gorgias, virtue is the ability to rule over people They run into the same problem as earlier – they split virtue up into the many, the becoming (justice, moderation, courage, wisdom) Socrates makes some bullshit analogy about shapes and colors, lines and points, and says that this is how to give a definition, thus they have to do that for virtue New Definition: Virtue is to desire beautiful or good things and to have the power to acquire them Everyone really wants the good things, but some people are mistaken, they are ignorant Maybe it’s the power to acquire them justly? But they don’t know what virtue is. They are using a part of virtue to define virtue Meno’s Paradox: 1. If you don’t know, then how would you look for it? (complete ignorance) 2. If you do know, then you don’t need to look for it (complete knowledge) Assumes two states for the questioner that deny the possibility of questioning Socrates tells a myth about a guy who announces a battle and his soul leaves his body, then comes back and can tell the story of where his soul went and what he saw while his soul was wherever You have to reacquire what you already know If it is knowledge, it can be taught. If virtue is knowledge, then it can be taught. Is it knowledge? Knowledge is good, so is virtue Courage, beauty, moderation, strength, discipline – all good things, right? They are virtues sometimes, and they benefit people, but these could also be vices Good thing and knowledge = benefit (virtue)
E replies that piety is the part of justice that concerns the gods. S questions “concerns” and E says that he really meant “cares” S says that no one cares for the gods, they don’t have caretakers. E changes the word to service – so it’s a luxury that pleases them – we are back to the second definition Apology Meletus, Anytus, Lycon accused Socrates “I do not know” is what Socrates claims – authentic ignorance/nescience Socrates addresses the men of Athens, the polis (city). He says he got carried away, “ecstasia” He says the young men speak so well, but hardly any of it is true – how does he know? He says he doesn’t know. How does he know the accusers are lying? He begins with surprise that his accusers warn the audience not to listen to an accomplished speaker such as himself. He says he is not an accomplished speaker, he speaks differently than the city people. He questions, they persuade He asks permission to speak as he does normally – he does not try to persuade, he just questions. He is outside the city, his accusers are natives Socrates says that he must deal with old accusations before he can address the new accusations from M, A, and L He calls his old accusations rumors – they are shadowy He says he must proceed as the god wishes although the law demands he gives a defense First instance in which what the god wants is different than the city wants Sophists: claim to have knowledge, charge to speak Socrates calls on his first witness: 1. The god at Delphi – Apollo a. A friend asks the oracle outside of the city if anyone in Athens is wiser than Socrates, oracle says “on behalf of the god” (she is speaking for the god Apollo) b. What riddle is the god giving? He speaks in riddles i. This is the beginning of philosophy and questions Once you admit you don’t know, then you can question The men of least repute are actually close to the truth – they don’t claim to know things so they are not deluded about knowing lots of things Arguments against Meletus: 1. The one and the many
a. Who improves the youth, if he corrupts them? So the many improve the youth? The one who corrupts, and the many who improve 2. Vicious circle of corruption a. You never do anything you think is bad to yourself –it will be good for you in some way i. If you do something and it is wrong, you must be ignorant of the wrong, because no one desires wrong things b. Does anyone desire harm for themselves? No. Wicked people harm those around him. Therefore, Socrates would not corrupt them, because it would harm himself 3. Reductio and absurdum a. Meletus says that Socrates believes in no gods at all, so Socrates says why would he believe in horse activity but not the horses? So how can he believe in spiritual activities like going to the oracle and trusting the god at Delphi without believing in the gods? Socrates shows that if Meletus is wrong about what he is accusing Socrates of, he thinks he knows a lot but he knows nothing, but he is far away from authentic ignorance – he does not know himself Being ignorant of your own ignorance is where corruption comes from Socrates is not duplicitous – he is the same in public and private, he is authentic Meletus relies on opinions and rumors to try to accuse Socrates
Socrates cannot fear death, because he does not know it, so he could not accept being exiled from Athens. He is on his way to arête (excellence)
Meno 1. Can virtue be taught? Acquired through words or instruction (logos) 2. Is it the result of practice/habit? Acquired through actions (ergon) 3. Is it some natural gift? (innat) Socrates responses to Meno’s question in the opposite of the way Meno is accustomed to. He says he does not even know what virtue is, then how could he answer? Responds to a question with a question – Athenian manner Meno is really smart – he remembers things 1. Ignorance 2. Memory
3. Parts/wholes Meno says that there is a swarm of virtues: virtues of men, women, children, slaves, elderly This is the becoming of virtues – virtues that come and go. They want to know the being or whole virtue Managing well – maybe this is virtue? Along with gorgias, virtue is the ability to rule over people They run into the same problem as earlier – they split virtue up into the many, the becoming (justice, moderation, courage, wisdom) Socrates makes some bullshit analogy about shapes and colors, lines and points, and says that this is how to give a definition, thus they have to do that for virtue New Definition: Virtue is to desire beautiful or good things and to have the power to acquire them Everyone really wants the good things, but some people are mistaken, they are ignorant Maybe it’s the power to acquire them justly? But they don’t know what virtue is. They are using a part of virtue to define virtue Meno’s Paradox: 1. If you don’t know, then how would you look for it? (complete ignorance) 2. If you do know, then you don’t need to look for it (complete knowledge) Assumes two states for the questioner that deny the possibility of questioning Socrates tells a myth about a guy who announces a battle and his soul leaves his body, then comes back and can tell the story of where his soul went and what he saw while his soul was wherever You have to reacquire what you already know If it is knowledge, it can be taught. If virtue is knowledge, then it can be taught. Is it knowledge? Knowledge is good, so is virtue Courage, beauty, moderation, strength, discipline – all good things, right? They are virtues sometimes, and they benefit people, but these could also be vices Good thing and knowledge = benefit (virtue)
