Essay, Research Paper

Jordan Chasnoff

November 21, 2000

Core 101

Socrates? Method of Argument and

Theories of Knowledge

The methods of statement used by Socrates in the plants of Plato

focused on true cognition. This method, known as the Socratic method is

unconventional in that it is non a agency of statement through persuasion or

sentiment, it is, instead, a agency of statement through inquiry and challenge.

The method is a consideration of cognition as being built-in to the human

psyche instead than a survey of how things are. In this essay I will analyze how

this alone method relates and operates with the alone manner of text in

Plato? s work.

Socrates? method of learning by inquiring inquiries, searched for

definitions. In his method of statement, he would dispute anyone with a

pretence to knowledge. Socrates argued his theories of how true cognition

is attained through connection in a treatment with another individual who thought

he knew what virtuousness or cognition was. Under this inquiring, it became

clear that neither Socrates nor the other individual knew the significance of such

footings. This is shown in Socrates? conversation with Meno in Plato? s Meno.

Meter: I do non [ cognize what virtuousness is ] ; but, Socrates, do you

truly non cognize what virtuousness is? Are we to describe this to the common people

back place about you?

Second: Not merely that, my friend, but besides that, as I believe, I

hold ne’er yet met anyone else who did cognize. Meno 4

Socrates so would collaborate with whomever he was speaking to on a new

thought where Socrates would do interrogative suggestions that were either

recognized or rejected by his friend.

Then Agathon said, ? It turns out, Socrates, I didn? T know what I

was speaking about in that address. ?

? It was a beautiful address, anyhow, Agathon, ? said

Socrates. ? Now take it a small further. ? Symposium 43

The efforts to happen a solution ever failed, but they could go on to

hunt for one whenever possible.

For Socrates, cognition was non simply accepting a 2nd manus

sentiment, but personal accomplishment gained through uninterrupted oppugning

and rating. Through Socrates? inquiring of himself and of others, his

statements on the attainment of true cognition, involved non larning the

replies but seeking for them. The hunt was more successful when done

by two friends, possibly one ( Socrates ) being more experient than the

other, but both in love with the end of truth, cognition and the willingness

to subject themselves candidly to the critical trial of statement entirely.

Socrates? greatest strength in his method of statement was his ability to

excite the thought of others to help him in his ain hypothesis of true

cognition. He opposed cross-examination in a set form. This is clearly

displayed in Meno, after Socrates questioned a male child with a geometrical figure.

Second: You realize, Meno, what point he has reached in his

remembrance. At first he did non cognize what the basic line of the

eight-foot square was: even now he does non yet cognize, but so

P >

he thought he knew, and answered confidently as if he did

know, and he did non believe himself at a loss, but now he does

believe himself at a loss, and as he does non cognize, neither does

he believe he knows. & # 8211 ; That is true. Meno 17

Socrates uses this statement and the testing of the male child to turn out that the male child

had no anterior cognition of the procedures of mathematics. He was able to

reply the inquiries strictly because he was able to utilize the cognition

already imbedded in his psyche. This extract from Meno is non about

mathematics. It is used by Plato to demo the reader that Socrates?

statements were non issue oriented, they were method oriented. This

construct is really of import when analysing the theories and methods of

Socrates? statements with the form and construction of the text.

Socrates? obscure manner of statement plants really good in the duologues we

hold read. This is due to the alone form and construction of the text. The

text in duologues deficiencies traditional construction and warrants small or no way

and/or flood tide to Socrates? statements. The manner of the text allows Socrates

to command the duologues and statements but restricts him from doing a

persuasive or unequivocal point. He is ne’er established as a clear victor. As

I have stated, Socrates? method of statement is non a persuasive method. It

is a method of statement through inquiry and challenge. Therefore, the

similarities of the manner of Socrates? method of statement and the manner of

duologues we have read work good together.

Socrates? method of statement besides works good with his theory of

cognition. Both, the obscure manner of statement and the broad theories

are presented in the same mode, organizing a distinguishable relationship. Socrates?

method of statement is used to present his theories of cognition. He does

this in a duologue with a topic who claims that he has cognition of some

affair that is proven in a proposition that defines an ethical term. There is a

series of inquiries from Socrates that he picks out. Then he takes a figure

of other propositions that, when put together, turn out the difference of the

original definition. The statement is examined following to each person to see

if there is false statement. At this point the constitution of theory, or more

significantly, the constitution of Socrates? specific theories of the acquisition

of cognition, is non at interest. The inquiry is non whether Socrates, through

his method of statement, has proven his theories of cognition, but instead,

has Socrates disproved the topic? s false amour propre

Socrates? method of statement of is obscure and indirect. It is non a

agencies of statement though persuasion, but instead a agency of statement

through oppugning and refute. This method works really good with the vague

and indirect form and construction of the duologues we have read. The method

besides works really good with Socrates? theories of cognition. As his theories

are besides really obscure, and are concerned more with confuting the theories of

others instead than showing Socrates? concrete theory or definition of

cognition.