Plato: Meno: Can virtue be taught?

Joshua Caesar O. Elegado, IV-BA Philosophy, Teaching Philosophy

Can virtue be taught? Is there a tangible rulebook where a list of virtues and pieces of knowledge are seen?

To answer these questions, we must know first the basis where such questions are rooted from. Plato suggests that there is a world of forms. That is, in the perfect world all pieces of knowledge are found. Our characterization of being human is based on the idea of Plato where man is both soul and material. Soul as part of being human refers to the immaterial, immortal, and perfect. Wherein, the soul is a part of the world of forms wherein it is perfect and knows all pieces of knowledge. The material part of man refers to the idea that we are nothing but an extension of the soul. Plato categorized man as a soul trapped in a material body. Because of this, that man has a soul who has all pieces of knowledge, we are limited due to the fact we are in a material form. In a sense where our being as material hinders the quality of us being immaterial. As a result, we humans are supposed to know all pieces of knowledge if it were not to the fact that we are material. That being said, if we are both soul and extension, then we have innate knowledge. The only thing that we can do is to actually remember those pieces of knowledge we inherently possess in the very first place.

If knowledge is innate and knowledge is virtue and virtue is knowledge, therefore virtue is innate. We long for the idea that everyone can teach, and everyone can be a guide in the process of remembering virtues. Going back to the guide questions, can virtue indeed be taught? The answer is no, virtue cannot be taught, rather virtue is given and as humans of this world, we are ought to remember such virtues and must be guided in the direction to actually remember what we originally possess in the very first place. But one may argue that virtue can be taught, it can be the case, however, the entire process of knowing virtues is not dependent on the one teaching it, rather, it is on both ends simultaneously remembering and guiding to a virtuous path of life. If one has been able to remember the virtues in a scholarly manner, one must be able to guide others in remembering the virtues, and the rest of the slippery slope will follow. As a result, we can imagine a world where everyone is living a virtuous life.

Applying the principle to education, sometimes we see something that tingles our mind, to which we seem to actually know it without even experiencing the said stimulus beforehand. As if something felt right and one knows it, but not perfected. For example, when Mr. Gerry Bajaro is teaching symbolic logic, one of his students seemed to have a grasp immediately of his lecture even if Mr. Gerry Bajaro is only starting with his lecture. As if his student knows the lesson even if such lesson was yet to be taught by Mr. Bajaro. This is a case where the process of remembering is taking place to Mr. Bajaro’s student and Mr. Bajaro is actually the one being the guiding tool for his student to actually remember/know a piece of knowledge. That being said, the principle here is simple, in education, no students are dumb, rather, students are taking part in the process of remembering and the key for them to remember relies on the hand of the teacher. That is, it is the responsibility of the teacher to guide the students in the remembering process to attain the knowledge we already possess in the very first place. The same case is to be made in virtues, that is, virtues are innate and the only we can know the said virtues is to remember them. The teacher is just a tool for the learners to learn virtues but is not dependent on the teacher itself, rather, the remembering process lies on both teachers and learners for virtues is a simultaneous learning experience. And with all that being said, everyone can indeed teach, and everyone is indeed teachable.