DOMINIC SCOTT PLATO MENO PDF

Virtue, Practice, and Perplexity in Plato’s m Wians – – Plato: The Internet Journal of the International Plato Society (Plato 12 ()). Dominic Scott has produced a monograph on the Meno that in its fluency and succinctness does justice to its subject and, like its subject. Buy [(Plato’s Meno)] [Author: Dominic Scott] published on (March, ) by Dominic Scott (ISBN:) from Amazon’s Book Store. Everyday low prices and free.

Author: Voodooramar Bashura
Country: Lesotho
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Life
Published (Last): 25 November 2017
Pages: 452
PDF File Size: 19.49 Mb
ePub File Size: 16.64 Mb
ISBN: 902-8-57516-224-2
Downloads: 76051
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Gojin

Labarge – – Dissertation, The University of Arizona. But here we are on tricky ground. The root of the problem is, again, Scott’s strategy of attempting to read the dialogue as operating on two levels.

Plato, on Scott’s reading, sees good reason, from a practical point of view, to make it. According to Scott, what the slave has in his sott is not the geometrical truth that is the subject of the demonstration; all he has are “his own criteria by which to accept or reject any suggestion put to him” Meno remains the same bully now as before, and Socrates in effect warns us not to be taken in by his current turn to olato and collegiality.

No keywords specified fix it.

msno In any event, the fact that Socrates makes “use of the term ‘erisitc’ to describe the dilemma” 80 does not, without begging the question of Meno’s character, imply that Meno’s own “motives for using the argument are bad” ibid. Scort the reason he resists this further application is that the only thing he regards as genuine virtue is ruling others and having power and money, and not whatever it is that women, old men, children, and slaves might have that goes by that name.

2006.10.10

I would argue, then, that of the three features that Scott sets out on pp. In the main sections of the dialogue where Scott detects Socrates being put on philosophical trial, Meno’s own character is variously “undisciplined … obtuse … resentful … and obstructive” meon quite a litany. There is every sccott to expect that he would have cooperatively followed Socrates from the start had Socrates assumed the role of teacher.

This article has no associated abstract.

Meno seems to have no objection to the assumption in the case of bees and even in the case of health and strength and he is in none of these cases too “obtuse” to understand it.

Are not all of these no less prerequisites for being taught? Scott indeed acknowledges that there can be no teaching, not even of the “maieutic” kind, unless the teacher has knowledge []. Does the demonstration not in fact suggest that, in the absence of a teacher who knows, recollection is insufficient to yield knowledge, yet that recollection is hardly needed at all if such a teacher is present? Almost exclusively, it turns out, that they are positions that the character Socrates espouses in certain of Plato’s dialogues, namely those that are often treated as “early” and as representing the spirit of the historical figure.

  BESAME CATALOGO 2011 PDF

Does not Meno declare that defining virtue is “easy,” thus making his definitions of it fair game for Socrates? Cambridge University Press, Dominic Scott has produced a monograph on the Meno that in its fluency and succinctness does justice to its subject and, like its subject, makes for a reading experience that is both pleasurable and challenging. So let us look more closely at this aspect of his interpretation.

Meno’s continued inclination to investigate the question of how virtue is acquired without first having discovered what it is motivates the introduction of the method. Given its brevity, Plato’s Meno covers an astonishingly wide array of topics: True, Socrates describes Meno as undisciplined in the speech that leads into his introduction of the method of hypothesis 86d3-e4, quoted by Scott on pp. Find it on Scholar.

Plato’s Meno // Reviews // Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews // University of Notre Dame

Only in the case of the paradox of inquiry do we have a challenge of philosophical substance, even if as Scott contends not in every respect. First, according to Aristotle, as well as to a widespread and fairly standard reading of Plato’s Theory of Forms, Plato himself subscribes to this principle.

In a new departure, this book’s exploration focuses primarily on the content and coherence of the dialogue in its own right and not merely in the context of other dialogues, making it required reading for all students of Plato, be they from the world of classics or philosophy.

With the exception of the paradox, Meno is not in the business of issuing serious philosophical challenges, though he would need to be for the nicely dramatic idea that Socrates is standing trial to carry sxott weight.

Dominic Scott – – Cambridge University Press.

Dominic Scott: Plato’s Meno.

More in line with the text is to read Socrates’ remark less as a rebuke than a caution to Meno vominic the reader alike not to be tempted down the point-scoring path. The Meno then turns out to be yet another instance in which we are shown that Socrates, no matter how hard he tries to improve his interlocutor, fails time and again.

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to plaot resources via your University’s proxy server Mrno custom proxy use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy. Scott so inflates what is involved in “following a proof” that it becomes comparable for him to how people discover domijic geometrical proofs that no one had ever taught them” Mill’s assessment of the Meno as a philosophical “gem.

  ENCYCLOPEDIA OF INDIAN WAR OF INDEPENDENCE BY M.K.SINGH PDF

As early as the Apology Socrates is aware that domimic is alienating those he questions and even pllato the possibility that he is corrupting the young, albeit unintentionally. Scott thinks Meno reverses course in part in reaction to the example of Anytus. It is not as if Socrates is unable to test virtue for teachability without considering first what it is–in the Scoth he does so by raising the question of whether there are teachers of it, and it is the answer to this question that finally settles the matter.

The assumption that we should determine what virtue is before asking whether it is teachable is not made the subject of a serious philosophical challenge either. Indeed one wonders why Meno would ask the question in the first place in his “peremptory” fashion if not because he regards it as of pressing practical importance. Meno’s tentativeness suggests — accurately, I daresay — that the unitarian assumption is no easy thing to evaluate.

Second, Socrates in the Meno seeks no more than the virtue common to all human beings–he surely would not hold that the virtue of, say, sccott knife, involves justice and temperance. With respect to 1it is unlikely that Plato would criticize Socrates for adopting the unitarian assumption. Good things, even final goods, are beneficial and profitable. Dominic Scott’s contribution to the McCabe series of commentaries on Platonic dialogues is a most welcome addition to that still short but fine list.

R. Dancy, Dominic Scott, Plato’s Meno – PhilPapers

Kerferd – – The Classical Review 13 Dancy Florida State University. One of the clearest examples of Scott’s charitable reading of the Meno is his interpretation of recollection. Moreover, the numbing effect need not be paralyzing: This inclination is attributable to Meno’s “impatience”though fortunately it dovetails with Plato’s own “pressing need to get an answer to a question of practical importance — how virtue is acquired” ibid.

None of this is tantamount to denying that the dialogue places certain Socratic assumptions, including those that Scott highlights, under critical scrutiny.