Lilly Suwinski Philosophy Rough Draft 12/3/12

Virtues Place in Life

Weve all heard of virtue, and know we are to possess it if we wish to have a seemingly good life. But what exactly is virtue, and how do you obtain it? The answer to how to obtain virtue is by being morally excellent. I will argue that virtue is just, and that what is just is pleasant, because knowledge itself is good. Digging mainly into the text of Protagoras and Meno, virtue and its qualities are a repeated theme in not only these texts, but throughout philosophy as a whole. If someone was born with a physical or mental disorder and commits a crime society doesnt punish or get angry at them, for they did not know their actions were wrong. Society does seek punishment however, if the crime is a result of their negligence and avoidance, for they knew the actions were wrong and did them anyway. Punishment for a crime implies that there was knowledge that the action taking place was wrong, and that knowledge was being ignored and the action done anyway. If someone purposefully and without being provoked stabs a stranger walking down the street with a knife, in a country where murder is illegal, we would hold them accountable for the murder, for he knew that what he was doing was wrong. Lets imagine another example. Theres a CIA agent attempting to assassinate a foreign dictator. The plan is to secretly poison the dictators food. The food is spiked, and soon after the unknowing waiter delivers the poisoned food. The food is consumed and the dictator died hours later. But where does

society put the blame? It was in fact the waitress who delivered the poisoned food. Without her delivering it, wouldnt the dictator still be alive? The reason shes not to blame is because she has no knowledge that what she was doing at the time was in any way, shape, or form wrong. She lacked the knowledge. However, the CIA agent is obviously to blame because he knowingly committed the murder. Though both of their actions resulted in death, blame falls only on one. If you watch an episode of SVU, chances are the District Attorney will be putting up an argument similar to that. The question of can one commit an injustice if they know what is just? is also a complication that can occur while evaluating the type of situation talked about above. The first reaction most people would have is yes, people do what is wrong everyday knowing what they should be doing instead, but yet the still do it. When one thinks deeper into the question, it starts to unravel a bit. If one knows that injustices are punishable, how could one knowingly commit an injustice therefore expecting to receive that punishment? While debating on Athenian architecture, Protagoras says Architecture excellence, or the virtue proper to any other professional specialty, they think that only a few individuals have the right to advise them, and they do not accept advice from anyone besides those select few (Ancient Greek Philosophy 196). Everyone is an adviser on what is just, for we all know what is just and unjust. Only those who have achieved excellence in that given field (in this case, architecture) should be found giving advice to those below them. You wouldnt go to a professional opera singer to give advice on how to structurally

design a parking lot, for that isnt his/her given area of expertise. A citizen can be seemingly good, but that doesnt mean they are an overall vital part to a given community. Protagoras says, Since it [virtue] is something that can be taught and nurtured, is it possible that they have their sons taught everything in which there is no death penalty for not understanding it, but when their children are faced with the death penalty or exile if they fail to learn virtue and be nurtured in it- and not only death but confiscation of property and, practically speaking, complete familial catastrophe- do you think they do not have them taught this or give them all the attention possible? (Ancient Greek Philosophy 198). It is up to parents, teachers, and adults in general to implement what is right and wrong upon any given child. It is said that it takes a village to raise a child, but Protagoras would probably disagree with that, stating that it would only take one just individual to instill what is right and wrong to a child. As humans, we dont come out of the womb knowing that we should or shouldnt steal. Social standards and rules tell us that, which we learn from our environment as well as from our guardians. Socrates also asks the question of what virtue really is, saying Is virtue a single thing, with justice and temperance and piety its parts, or are the things I have just listed all names for a single entity? (Ancient Greek Philosophy 201). Virtue is a single entity from Protagorass view. Wisdom, moderation, and courage are amongst what virtue is composed of. The metaphor of the face and its parts directs well with this. Protagoras says the eye is not like the ear, nor is its power or function the same, and this applies to the other parts as well: they are not like each other in power or function or in any other way (Ancient Greek

Philisophy 201). Just because one may have one part of what composes a face, it does not mean one therefore possesses everything that overall completes a face. Socrates says A pleasant thing is good just insofar as it is pleasant, that is, if it results in nothing other than pleasure; and, on the other hand, arent painful things bad in the same way, just insofar as they are painful? (Ancient Greek Philosophy 208). Pleasant things are those in which partake of pleasure or produce pleasure. To live pleasantly is to live good, as long as one takes pleasure in pleasant things. Even if someone lives a good life as a whole, they are bound to come across some form of unpleasantness. When Meno questions Socrates about virtue, he asks the following Can virtue be taught? Or is it not teachable but the result of practice, or is it neither of these, but men possess it by nature or in some other way? (Ancient Greek Philosophy 241). When Socrates turns the question back to Meno, he says there are many virtues, so that one is not at a loss to say what virtue is. There is virtue for every action and every age, for every task of ours and every one of us (Ancient Greek Philosophy 242)Socrates explains that virtue is the same across the board, and remains the same for man/woman and young/old. Virtue is beneficial. Socrates says virtue is something in the soul and it must be beneficial, it must be knowledge, since all qualities of the soul are in themselves neither beneficial nor harmful, but accompanied by wisdom or folly they become harmful or beneficial (Ancient Greek Philosophy 256). Virtue is beneficial to the person who possesses it, and anything that the soul endures while being fixed by wisdom will end in happiness.

Meno replies to Socratess statement of good men being useful with it is not only through knowledge but also through right opinion that men are good, and beneficial to their cities when they are, and neither knowledge nor true opinion come to men by nature but are acquired (Ancient Greek Philosophy 264). Meno then asks if Socrates believes that either come by nature. While virtue is a good thing, the two argue that no one person is qualified to teach the knowledge by which it is accomplished. Rather, a statesmans right opinion is what fuels a city to be successful, because it cannot be based on anything else. They too say many true things when inspired, but they have no knowledge of that they are saying (Ancient Greek Philosophy 265). Knowledge of anything is going to include some sort of information being learned by said person. That knowledge can cause both just and unjust conclusions, but that cannot be determined just from knowledge itself. If one was to taught something unjust while thinking it was a just, they shouldnt be punished for the act committed. While society may say differently, it seems foolish to punish any citizen that didnt know the wrongdoing they did was indeed wrong.