The Erisitic Paradox and The slave boy Throughout history, philosophers have sought to understand the nature of true knowledge and how to achieve it. Most believe that true knowledge is acquired empirically, and not latent in our minds from birth. In Plato?s Meno, Socrates argues in favour of the pre-natal existence of knowledge, the opposite of this proposal: that knowledge is essentially latent, and is brought to light through questioning. The erisitic paradox, which stems from this view of knowledge, states that if you know what it is you are inquiring about, you need not inquire, for you already know. If, however, you do not know what it is you are inquiring about, you are unable to inquire, for you do not know what it is into which you are inquiring. One consequence of this view is Plato?s rejection of empiricism, the claim that knowledge is derived from sense experience. However, when one examines the scene in the Meno between Socrates and the slave boy in greater depth, one can see the flaws in this paradox. Plato uses Socrates? experiment, in which he draws one of Meno?s slaves out from the gathered crowd and proceeds to demonstrate the theory of recollection using geometry; however, this experiment?s purpose tests the credulity of the reader; and in some cases Socrates? questions are blatantly leading.
Socrates merely places obvious propositions in front of the boy that can be immediately recognised. Also, contrary to what Plato asserts, knowledge can be obtained by other means, and not exclusively through intellectual inquiry and questioning. It is far too difficult to dismiss, as Plato does, any and all claims or assertions about the physical or visible world, including both common-sense observations and the propositions of science, as mere opinions. Furthermore, the interpretation of the experiment with the slave boy can be expanded to suggest yet another position: that Plato is demonstrating the flawed nature of sophistry by showing that what on the surface appears to be Socratic dialectic is really Sophistic practice. In light of all of these factors, it becomes clear that the eristic paradox is, in fact, flawed. In the experiment, Socrates guides a slave through a series of geometric proofs in an effort to illustrate that the slave already possessed this knowledge and, therefore, that ?learning? is not acquisition but recollection. Plato maintains that the slave is simply recalling knowledge learned in a former incarnation. The main question that enters the reader?s mind regarding the experiment with the slave boy is the role of Socrates, and how he facilitates the slave boy?s production of the answer; that is, how he ?teaches? him.
The Essay on What Is Knowledge Slave Boy
... in this thinking. Plato uses Socrates' experiment where he asks one of Meno's slave boys to demonstrate this theory of recalling knowledge by using ... not know what you inquiring. One outcome about this view is Plato's rejection of the claim that knowledge is derived from experience. ... you know what it is you are inquiring about, you don't need to inquire, because you already know. However, if you ...
Among the myriad of different possibilities by which Socrates achieved this teaching, only four are plausible, and of these only two appear realistic enough to be considered in the scope of this essay. The first possibility is that Socrates played no role at all in helping the slave boy produce the answer. This possibility must be rejected because there is no way the series of questions and answers, both correct and incorrect, could not have been of importance in helping the boy find the correct answers. The second possibility is that Socrates merely engaged in ?mental midwifery,? bringing to light the knowledge which was latent in the boy?s mind. This is what Plato would like us to believe. However, this would also mean believing in the ante-natal existence of the human psyche, meaning the boy had already learned this information in another life. This would also mean that the erisitic paradox would have been a problem in the other life; if learning is not possible for us now, it would not have been possible in a previous life. The third possibility, however, is one that most tend to believe: that Socrates taught the boy the answers, and that the boy believed him due to Socrates? authority.
The Report on A Happy Boy
xA Happy Boy Björnstjerne Björnson The Harvard Classics Shelf of Fiction, Vol. XX, Part 2. Selected by Charles William Eliot Copyright © 2001 Bartleby.com, Inc. Bibliographic Record Contents Biographical Note Criticisms and Interpretations I. By Hjalmar Hjorth Boyesen II. By W. D. Howells Chapter I Chapter II Chapter III Chapter IV Chapter V Chapter VI Chapter VII Chapter VIII Chapter IX Chapter X ...
This possibility appears plausible because the boy seems to be inclined to accept Socrates? every word. Even though we can see that the boy does not agree simply because Socrates presents him with a proposition, the logical and visual nature of geometry allows it to be understood without prior knowledge of the subject. If, say, biology were used instead of geometry, the slave boy would have had little chance in recognising the correct answer. He also would not have been able to see why any incorrect answers were incorrect, and therefore would have been forced to rely on authority. In the case of geometry, though, this is not true: correct answers can be recognised by someone who had not previously been exposed to them. This brings us to the fourth possibility explaining Socrates? role: that Socrates placed obvious truths before the boy, which he could recognise on sight. In this case, though, one must ask how the boy, who did not have any prior familiarity with the matter, was able to recognise these geometric proofs. We must believe that the slave boy, in a way, already possessed the answers somewhere in his mind, otherwise the boy could not have confidently realised that the suggested answer is right and the others wrong.
Even though Socrates? questions are indeed blatantly leading, we must believe that the boy says yes to the correct answers not merely to please Socrates, but because he sees that it is the obvious answer. It is easier to believe this when recognising the right answers requires only ordinary intelligence, as in this case. Furthermore, what aids the boy in seeing the right answers and realising his incorrect answers are incorrect are Socrates? diagrams. As such, though not geometrically accurate, they accurately represent the ideas and concepts Socrates tries to put forth. The process of Socratic refutation or elenchus is a method of teaching that, according to Socrates, is supposed to clear away the arrogance of false knowledge and instil the urge to learn as a consequence of recognising one?s own ignorance. This method came about as the result of Socrates? belief that knowledge cannot be obtained by empirical means: that knowledge essentially comes only from logical deduction. According to Plato, ?knowledge will not come from teaching but from questioning.? (85d) Though it is Plato that discovers the existence of a priori knowledge: essentially, any knowledge that has not been acquired by experience and is latent in one?s mind.
The Essay on Term African Slave Trade
The first thing that needs to be established is just how many slaves were brought to the Americas. This has proven to be quite difficult at best. There have been many scholars debate just this subject alone. As you will see, many well known scholars have problems justifying their own estimations or guesses. A quick study of Philip D. Curtin's work: From Guesses to Calculations: Shows his writings ...
However, he makes the oversight of applying this concept to all knowledge in general. This means the dismissal of any and all propositions made concerning the physical or visible world, including both common-sense observations and scientific data, as opinions only. Science, naturally, has long since proven otherwise: the quality of life in our society rests on the application of the empirical findings made by science. If the gathering of these empirical findings cannot be called learning and the existence of these findings in our minds cannot be classified as knowledge, then what can? Drafting, for example, is a skill that one must learn in school from a teacher. In order to put these drafting skills to use, one needs to use knowledge acquired from the teacher. Another example would be the physical gathering of genetic material, a process as complex as its name suggests. The successful execution of this process is achieved under controlled laboratory conditions by technicians who need to under and follow certain steps in a certain order so as to facilitate an accurate DNA fingerprint. The very concept of DNA, let alone the process of genetic fingerprinting, is one that is the result of our accumulation of vast amounts of empirical, scientific knowledge.
Socrates may well have been able to teach a slave boy basic geometric proofs using representative drawings in the sand, but the teaching of any other subject stemming from the acquisition of empirical data would have required the passing on of knowledge that could not possibly have been ?recalled? by the boy. The boy would have had no way of recognising the answer even if Socrates had devised a method of ?mental midwifery? for such a subject. The fact is, no matter what method Socrates used, there is no way that such a topic can be taught by means of the Socratic elenchus. The traditional interpretation of the conversation between Socrates and the slave boy (81e-86c) states that the conversation expounds Plato’s belief that knowledge can be ?recollected?. The validity of this point is put into question by the suggestion of a very different position: that Socrates’ blatantly leading questions, while superficially exemplifying a Socratic dialectic, actually display an example of sophistry. The kinds of responses Socrates elicits are merely factual and come about from empirical demonstration rather than from rational means. The slave boy is only marginally perceptive; not only is he not trying to seek truth, he always responds affirmatively.
The Essay on Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle Matrix
Fill in the matrix below, denoting each philosopher’s view concerning the topics listed. Write NA if there is no record in the textbook of the philosopher’s view on the specific topic. Then, using the information you inserted into the matrix as a guide, write a 350-700 word response describing how Socrates’, Plato’s, and Aristotle’s philosophies relate to each other. | | | |Socrates |Plato | ...
These concerns overlap and are better explained by recalling the text of the experiment with the slave boy. In the scene (81e-86c), Socrates draws one of Meno’s slaves out from the gathered crowd. He then proceeds to demonstrate the Theory of Recollection (and ultimately the erisitic paradox) by showing that all nature is interconnected such that if one learns one point, it is possible to ?recover? all of the rest. Yet, if the dialectic is reread in light of sophistic procedures and the narrowly focused content, the scene offers a new point: with Socrates? part edited out, the dialectic demonstrates sophistry. If one reads all of the slave boy?s lines, one sees that the slave boy never disagrees. The answers Socrates elicits are specific, data-oriented (“eight,” “four,” “double,” etc.) and are factual. He seeks dimensions and measurements, and while the example is a theorem, Socrates reduces theorizing to a practical answer-giving exercise based on empirical drawings in the sand. As a result, Socrates demonstrates the limits of sophistry: because we now perceive the dialectic as being questionable in intent, we must also look at Plato?s belief that all knowledge can be recollected in a questioning light. Recollection is the reminiscence of prior and personal experience. When Socrates attempts to demonstrate the Theory of Recollection, he says to Meno of the slave boy, “Observe, Meno, the stage he has reached on the path of recollection. At the beginning he did not know the side of the square of eight feet. Nor indeed does he know it now, but then he thought he knew it and answered boldly, as was appropriate ? he felt no perplexity. Now however he does feel perplexed. Not only does he not know the answer; he doesn?t even think he knows.” (84a-b).
This sentence touches on the eristic paradox, but it also contains an important irony typically overlooked; this irony of the section is illustrative of sophistry. Socrates has as his subject a slave boy. The “confident answer” to which Socrates refers is the same kind of confidence a primary school student would have when he or she affirmatively responds to leading questions about geometric proofs. Not only is there no personal interest on the part of the boy, and hence no recollection, but there is such an emphasis on empirical demonstration of technical characteristics that those whom Socrates is “persuading” are too set in sophistic ways to see the problems inherent therein. It is possible that the slave boy realizes that he doesn’t know, which clears his mind of any predisposition that would hinder true learning. His state is one in which he may now be persuaded; as such, Socrates can now “lead” to questions which, when repeated, define the search for knowledge. Indeed, the mark of sophistry, as demonstrated by the experiment, is that the form is present in the material, not in the boy. A slave to Meno, the boy is also a slave to the material.
The Essay on True Knowledge – Descartes vs Plato
... between true belief and true knowledge as at one point the slave boy believed he was write, but wasn’t. Plato comes to say that ... there is a real answer. Socrates then goes on to say that inside every person’s soul and mind is knowledge they carry with ... the conversation Socrates asks the question of what virtue really is. Meno tries to answer by giving a very specific answer as to ...
Thus, the boy actually illustrates the limitation of sophistry: because sophists do not have cleared minds, they ask the kinds of questions that presuppose specific answers. Despite his ostensibly narrow views of what knowledge is and how it can be acquired, Plato must be given considerable credit for disguising Socratic dialectic as Sophistic practice, giving us yet another interpretation of the experiment with the slave boy. However, Plato still makes the mistake of discrediting any experience or empirical data as not having the form of what he defines as knowledge; he claims that ?true knowledge? can be obtained only through questioning and merely thinking. The experiment, too, tests the faith of the reader: in order to believe Socrates? assertions regarding the experiment, one must believe in the reincarnate existence of knowledge in the human mind. Socrates attempts to show that, if one masters one point, ?recalling? the remaining points is then possible. Plato?s rejection of empiricism is the result of the eristic paradox, which in essence, says that we never actually learn anything ? this, in turn, accounts for Plato?s belief in the ante-natal existence of knowledge. However, this concept of knowledge ? both the eristic paradox and the concept of pre-natal knowledge ? are disproved by simple examination of the application of acquired empirical knowledge in our society. Thus, both the eristic paradox and the concept of pre-natal knowledge are ultimately flawed.
The Term Paper on True Opinion Knowledge Plato Meno
Plato's View in Human Knowledge Plato presents three different views about knowledge in Meno, Republic, and Theaetetus. In Meno's case, Plato believes knowledge as something innate in us when we are born; in his later view, in Republic, Plato believes we perceive things and gain knowledge; and from the last view, in Theaetus, Plato believes knowledge is the combination of a true opinion and a ...
Bibliography:
Plato – Meno
