Meno 88-c Socrates Summary & Analysis

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
The Statement
The Objection
The Defense
Work Cited

Introduction

In this paper, I will defend Socrates claim that the same traits of character can be beneficial if the person is wise and could lead to misery if the person is not, against the objection that an ignorant action might lead to happiness, and a wise action might end in misery.

The Statement

In Meno 88-c Socrates claims all that the soul undertakes and endures, if directed by wisdom, ends in happiness, but if directed by ignorance, it ends in the opposite. Before he comes to this conclusion he gives an example: Courage, for example, when it is not wisdom but like a kind of recklessness: when a man is reckless without understanding, he is harmed; when with understanding, he is benefited (Meno 88-b). Through this example the meaning of the statement is clarified: all of the human qualities are tied to wisdom and benefit or hinder the person depending on the understanding they possess. Socrates shows that what results the persons actions will have depends on wisdom, and as he explains later:since all the qualities of the soul are in themselves neither beneficial nor harmful, but accompanied by wisdom or folly they become harmful or beneficial (Meno 88-c). The point that Socrates makes is definitely viable and can be proved by many examples we can encounter in our everyday lives. For example, a man who hangs from the top of a skyscraper for no reason, but the thrill of it, can hardly be considered wise. His actions gain him nothing in the long term and at the same time are likely to harm him, if he falls. On the other hand, a firefighter entering a burning building well prepared and with a goal of saving somebody, can certainly only be viewed as wise as his actions will benefit both him and anybody he rescues. Both actions are similarly risky, yet only the one we can deem as wise lead to the actual beneficial results. On an ancient battlefield, the difference might have been even starker. The effect of wisdom is pretty evident when comparing a flamboyant leader rushing headlong into an obvious trap and a wise general, who risks a daring attack to secure the victory. And Socrates, who was a soldier at one point, might have seen that example personally.

The Objection

One of the most logical objections to the Socrates claim is that even ignorant actions sometimes claim beneficial results. For example, acting recklessly and without a plan in battle may bring you victory if your opponent does not foresee your actions. Being too moderate and only allowing yourself whatever food and water you need to survive might also benefit you as you would have a larger hoard of money when things become hard. Such examples show that even when acting without wisdom, people can attain beneficial results by luck and chance. On the other hand well thought-out and planned actions, which Socrates would have undoubtedly deemed wise, sometimes misfire resulting in a disaster. Such examples show that wisdom is not a sure way to achieve beneficial results. On the personal level, similar examples can be found. Sometimes a person is ill-prepared when talking in public and fails to convey his points convincingly and clearly. That can only be deemed as that persons lack of wisdom. But by stuttering and embarrassing himself that person might attain the sympathy of the public and with that reach his original goal of convincing them. On the other hand, a well planned trip might end in a disaster because a hotel you booked closes unexpectedly. You have been wise to plan the trip in advance, yet you achieved undesirable results. Poorly made plans succeeding and well thought-out campaigns failing are not a rare thing which seems to put a sizable dent into the Socrates claim.

The Defense

In Meno 88-e Socrates states Just as for the rest of the soul the direction of wisdom makes things beneficial, but harmful if directed by folly, so in these cases, if the soul uses and directs them right it makes them beneficial, but bad use makes them harmful?(Plato and Grube 81). This statement gives an idea of how the philosopher might have rebuked the aforementioned objection. It seems similar to the claim mentioned in the first paragraph, but the key difference is in the the direction of wisdom makes things beneficial quote. This implies that any beneficial result is necessarily attained by the path of wisdom. So to the objection, that folly might accidentally lead you to your goal, Socrates might answer: But was not the path you took wise in that case? It led you to your goal, so your soul has followed wisdom. The same argument applies to the opposite situation. If you have failed, you have been directed by folly, even if it seemed to be wisdom at first. Such defense offers solid protection to the original claim, and it is quite possible it might have been used by Socrates if he had ever been faced with such argument.

Work Cited

Plato., and G. M. A Grube. Five Dialogues. Indianapolis: Hackett Pub. Co., 1981. Print.

Click Here To Order Now!

Meno 88-c Socrates Summary & Analysis

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)