Model Answer

Question 3

Examination 1

Spring 2003

Joel Martinez

3. Explain Plato's riddle regarding discovery in the Meno and explain how that leads to his doctrine of recollection. Assume that about what is necessary and proceed under that assumption to evaluate Plato's doctrine of recollection.

In Plato’s Meno, Socrates and Meno are trying to figure out whether virtue can be taught. Since Socrates thinks that they cannot answer that question without first finding out what virtue is, Socrates and Meno end up trying to answer the question “What is virtue?” Meno tries a number of times to give a good definition, but he ends up failing. After explaining to Socrates that he feels numb and confused, he states what is called “the riddle regarding discovery” (or the “paradox of inquiry”). The paradox is a challenge to show that learning/discovery is possible. The paradox says – Learning is not possible, because either you know the thing you are looking for or you don’t. If you already know it, then it does not make sense to say you could be searching for it (or that you learn it), but if you do not already know it, then how will you know it when you see it? This is a challenge because it makes it seem as though no one could ever learn anything, but we think we learn things all the time.

Socrates solves this riddle with the theory/doctrine of recollection. According to Socrates, the soul is immortal. Not only is it immortal, but it has had previous lives. In these other lives, Socrates says, the soul has come into contact with everything that there is. This means that the soul already knows everything. When we were born in human bodies, we “forgot” the knowledge we had during the soul’s previous existence. So, learning is a matter of recollection. The doctrine of recollection solves the Meno paradox because it says that we are not in the situation that the paradox says we are. The paradox works only if gaining knowledge is like putting something new (or new information) into the soul. Socrates’ doctrine of recollection says that knowledge is already there. So, since, when we are inquiring, we are not searching for something, but instead trying to remember something, the paradox is not a problem.

This does solve the problem, but it’s not so clear that the doctrine is true. Socrates supports the doctrine by saying he will show that a common slave boy has knowledge already inside of him. He asks the slave boy a series of questions about geometry (asking the boy what the length of a side of a square double the area of an original square is). The slave boy eventually comes to give the right answer after a lot of questions and a few mistakes. Socrates thinks that his interaction with the slave boy proves his theory of recollection because Socrates never told the boy what to say. The boy answered based on his own thinking. Socrates just drew images in the sand and asked the boy what he thought about the drawings he saw.

The paradox is hard to solve, but one reason to think that Socrates has given a good response to it is that he has just shown, with the slave boy, that learning is possible. So, that should make us think that we are not stuck with the paradox. Another point in favor of Socrates’ theory is that it does not rely on the belief that the soul is immortal. He could just be saying that knowledge is innately in us. So we can believe what Socrates says without having to believe in his religion.

The problem with his theory is that it’s not completely convincing that it gives a good description of learning. The theory of recollection describes learning as remembering. A problem with that is that the slave boy example does not prove that learning is remembering. Socrates asks only questions and does not tell the slave boy how to answer, but Socrates only gives the slave boy leading questions. This makes it seem as though Socrates is almost telling the slave boy what to say.

In the end, the doctrine of recollection helps and hurts Socrates. It does solve the paradox, but it needs more support (support better than the slave boy example) if we are going to believe it.