Ryan Chapman

Ancient Philosophy

Fall 2010 Paper

Virtue: What it is and the Many Ways it is Taught

In the Meno, virtue obtained by knowledge is debated by Socrates and Meno. If virtue is knowledge then it must be taught. If taught, then there must be a teacher. My thesis is that there are many teachers of virtue and that teaching can be through means of instruction, persuasion, individual observation, cultural tradition or if need be, by force. With that being said, all men can be taught virtue.

Two questions that will be discussed pertaining to virtue and if it can be taught are: First, is virtue teachable to at least one man? Second, if virtue can be taught to at least one man, can it be taught to any man, and how? Also, what is virtue and what does it mean to teach or to be taught will be discussed.

Virtue is the feature of man which determines what is right from wrong. Virtue is moral excellence, goodness, righteousness. It is the conformity of ones life and conduct to moral and ethical principles. Determining right from wrong initially requires having the knowledge of what is right and what is wrong, and also entails rational judgment. But knowing is not enough, for ultimately how a man acts on what he knows is most significant. A man with virtue must act in a virtuous way. Therefore, virtue is

really three things: the understanding of right and wrong, the ability to discern right from wrong, and the final right action the man takes.

Aristotle, in the Nicomachean Ethics, agreed with the notion that a man with virtue must act in a virtuous way. His chief good is happiness. His candidates (the ultimate end for someone) for the obtaining of happiness includes things such as pleasure, honor, wealth and health. The candidate with the most credibility for happiness isnt just virtue but to have a life where a person lives virtuous activity. Aristotle described how people become virtuous by performing virtuous actions, which they might not have chosen themselves when young. They must develop proper habits during childhood and this usually requires help from teachers, parents, and law-makers. A good community is normally required for the development of good people. The development of good people starts by teaching virtue at a young age. Socrates stated in the Meno that virtues are common to all people, that temperance (exercising self control) and justice (refraining from harming other people) are virtues even in children and old men (Meno 73b). Socrates, in Gorgias, gave his opinion in a conversation with Polus that it takes true goodness to make a man or a woman happy, and an immoral, wicked person is unhappy. (Gorgias 470b)

The Stoics view of virtue is that it is sufficient for happiness. Virtue is living in agreement with nature. The Stoics equate virtue with wisdom and both with a kind of determined strength within the commanding faculty of the soul.

According to the doctrine of the Peripatetics (the school that Aristotle founded), the happy life is one in which one exercises one's moral and theoretical virtues. (Nic. Eth. IV.1)

By these examples of philosophical thought, there is a connecting link between happiness and knowing what virtue is, and more specifically doing virtuous activity. Even if there is conflicting views on the importance of other means that could bring happiness, it is virtue that is of first rate importance in obtaining happiness. Since mankind desires happiness, there has to be some way to obtain it. Virtue is the way to obtain it. In many forms virtue can be taught and learned and then followed, whereby happiness can be achieved.

So by teaching virtue, there now must be clarification of what it means to be taught. Also included for clarification is who is being taught. Teaching is a compound subject, and learning does not always necessitate a teacher. Learning comes in many forms, and learning does not require a teacher in the strict sense. A person can learn from studying and following virtuous people. These virtuous people may be naive that they are being studied. The person is learning virtue, and his teachers are the virtuous people, even though teachers, as one might commonly think of a teacher, are not physically present.

Experience is subsequently a second form. Numerous people learn virtue through experience, both personal and vicarious. If there is a teacher in this example, it would be a blend of life experiences and the reflective nature of the learner. Further

on the form of learning we call experience, we realize that a man can learn, even if he cannot explain how he learned, or explain exactly what he knows. For example, say you have been through a particular struggle, you can recognize that a friend is going through the same struggle. You can detect it, but you cannot explain how you recognized it. Therefore, a man can be taught through personal experience, by studying examples, or from a teacher who is physically with him. In all these cases, teaching is being done.

Who is being taught must be discussed more in detail. There are three categories of teach-learn relationships: Some people teach themselves virtue, some people do not want to learn virtue, and some want to learn virtue but cannot teach it to themselves. Socrates explored into the third category - those who want to learn virtue but cannot teach themselves. However, the second category is also important (those who do not want to learn virtue.) Those in the first category can teach themselves and there isnt an issue if virtue can be taught because they seek it on an individual basis. Therefore, the two subjects of teaching would be to determine whether one can teach to those who want to learn virtue, and then see if one can teach virtue to those who do not want to learn virtue.

Reflect on the man who desires to learn virtue as Socrates has done. The principal goal is to educate him to act virtuously. Nobody can make a man act; each has their own ability to choose. One can, however, persuade the man to act. One can also teach him how to act. Since the man in this category desires to learn virtue, he needs no persuasion to act. Therefore by skipping the persuasion part, the one who is

teaching proceeds to teach him how to act. Religiously, in the Bible, virtue and the whole process of learning it and doing virtuous activity is discussed by Paul:

Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these thingsThose things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you. -Phillippians 4:8-9 (emphasis added)

Knowing how to act entails knowledge of standards of right and wrong. All acts are to be judged right or wrong by these standards. Judging could be off of a unifying theory of virtue (from which all acts could be correctly judged.) A unifying theory of virtue would be ideal, for we could base everything from it. However, from what has been observed throughout time, there hasnt been a concise verdict of a universal theory of virtue, and this theory cannot be taught. What has been determined through examination is that there are standards for various subsets of virtue. The standard is a broad classification of a particular subset of virtue. Most situations dealing with a persons actions are compatible with one of the standards. These standards are frequently useful, yet the standards have restrictions. When the restrictions are reached, men must judge the best they can. The knowledge of standards and their restrictions can be taught. Judgment skills can be taught and learned as well. Judgment skills are the mental insights which let a man settle on what is right and wrong in new situations. The teacher can get a man to practice their judgment skills. As with Plato in his dialogues between Socrates and a pupil, the pupil learns judgment skills.

As previously mentioned, virtue must end in the action. There are no absolutes in bringing about a good act, because situations vary. A man can learn techniques in what he judges as a good act. With an understanding of techniques, the man has built for himself a foundation from which he can act virtuously in any particular situation. Thus, knowledge, judgment skills, and techniques, can be taught to the man who desires to learn. Now consider the second group of subjects (whether if one can teach virtue to those who do not want to learn virtue). Although one cannot make a man act, one can persuade him to act. It is evident that we know that men can be persuaded. One can persuade a man to seek virtue. One could do it by using reason, or the other method is by using force.

First the persuader reasons that virtue is good in itself. If he does not respond virtuously by that means, then the persuader could reason that virtue is good as a means to other things. Reason is tried so that the man will be rewarded for virtuous acts. If the man isnt persuaded and still acts un-virtuously, the virtue is taught to him using favorable force. Seeing as the man does not change his behavior on his own, he must be forced to concentrate on his behavior and contend with it. He then restricts his alternatives of facing his behavior so that he must change his behavior. A prime example of this is modern day correctional facilities of incarcerated inmates. They have done an un-virtuous act, and are in the process of changing their behavior. If they dont, and if they continue in un-virtuous rebellion, they maintain their stay as prisoners.

With restricted options before him, the man is forced to act in restricted ways. The man is forced to act virtuously. Forced practice becomes pattern. The man starts to act virtuously on his own. Eventually, the man appreciates the benefits of acting virtuously. Combine this with his habits from forced behavior, and the man is motivated to seek virtue on his own. The process of teaching virtue for someone like this might take more time and is sometimes unconventional, yet teaching still occurs.

An argument against my claim that virtue can be taught could be that if the soul is immortal, and if one believes in recollection of knowledge, then virtue could given to mankind a time previous, and this is an innate quality. I concur that there is a possibility that virtue is innate, but in order to recollect something, one needs to rehear it or reexperience it and this mode is through a process of teaching, whether directly or indirectly in this life experience.

In conclusion, virtue is the knowledge of right from wrong, the ability to discern right from wrong, and the acts toward virtuous living. Virtue can be taught to anyone who desires to learn virtue. Men who teach themselves virtue learn through studying others, through experience, and through personal reflection. Men who want to learn but need a teacher learn through first learning the knowledge of the moral standards in common situations, then learning the techniques to help him act virtuously in a practical way. If a man does not desire to learn virtue, he can be persuaded by reason or by force. When the man is persuaded by reason, then he changes his behavior on his own desire. When he is persuaded by force, he changes his behavior by need.

One can persuade men to seek virtue. One can teach them knowledge of right and wrong. One can teach them techniques to act virtuously. Therefore, virtue can be taught, and it can be taught to any man.

Bibliography
Voices of Ancient Philosophy: An Introductory Reader (Oxford, 2000). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/ http://lds.org/scriptures/nt/philip/4?lang=eng

MenoDominic Scott, Plato's Meno, Cambridge University Press, 2006

Nicomachean EthicsBroadie, Sarah; Rowe, Christopher (2002). Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics: Translation, Introduction, and Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press

GorgiasPlato. Gorgias. Trans. Robin Waterfield. Oxford University Press, 1994.