Does Insistent Inquiry and Reasoning Awaken the Memories of Knowledge?

Personal Purpose: To reason, question, and dive into Recollection Theory as a response to the process of knowledge acquisition and learning.

Objective: Show critical thinking, independent reasoning, and understanding of the material.

In this essay, I have critically evaluated Plato’s position about the pursuit and acquisition of knowledge. I  focus on answering the following question in the fields of epistemology and metaphysics: What role does Recollection Theory play in Plato’s response in Meno’s Paradox? Plato’s answer is that knowledge is not learnt but remembered, therefore virtue cannot be taught. My criteria and position is that Plato resolves the Paradox satisfactorily alongside the Recollection Theory, as he invalidates Meno’s premises and demonstrates that knowledge is acquired through insistent inquiry and reasoning. This paradox is selected for the purpose of negating the affirmation that it is possible to acquire new knowledge.

This essay is structured in five parts. In the first  part, I  introduce (I) context and comments on Plato’s epistemology and metaphysics to better comprehend his position on the pursuit of knowledge, paired with  Aristotle’s contrasting stand. In the second part, (II) I  reconstruct and explain what I consider the appropriate version of the relevant Meno’s Paradox, alongside Socrates’ counter objections about virtue. For the third part, (III) I proportioned an analysis of the paradox and give examples in relation to Recollection Theory and Reminiscence, as fundamental pillars for Plato’s epistemology. In the fourth part, (IV) I describe two objections brought by Aristotle's empiricism and mortality of beings.  Finally, (V) I provide and identify two weaknesses in Aristotle's objections, some of the applicable problems tied to Socrates’ Apology,  and offer my original thinking and conclusions.

(I)  Plato’s Epistemology and Metaphysics

Plato’s metaphysics argues that the superior reality is the conceptual reality of ideas.  In the Allegory of the Cavern, the duality of realities is established. One is seen through our perceptions and senses, whereas the other is developed through reasoning. Conversely, Aristotle's epistemology applies the senses, taking into account reasoning (Endoxa). Aristotle's empiricist view encourages proving credible opinions from all experiences to answer objections, whilst having credible proof of such credible opinions. Through this method, new knowledge can be approached. Aristotle connects the senses and the soul; having the soul take part in logic and the senses reaffirming it. Plato negates the idea of new knowledge, however. Although the endoxic method and theory of recollection differ, they both rely on inquiry.

A. Theory of the Forms

Plato constructed his “Theory of Forms” stating the Form as the thing in itself that can be taken from other objects. In the theory of the divided line, the forms are superior and independent of objects. Plato separates the reality of the being and the reality of the becoming, consolidating the arguments of Parmenides and Heraclitus (Silverman,A. 2022 ). Heraclitus identified the soul through motion, whereas Parmenides identified it as immutable. Plato juxtaposes the nature of the human soul in the Chariot Allegory, illustrating his tripartite soul. The charioteer represents the reason, whereas the horses guide us to  rational and irrational impulses.

B. Metaphor of the Sun

Plato highlights the difference between opinion and knowledge by using the image of the Sun to define the Form of Good. He states that the Sun shines light on knowledge so that our souls may understand it and be closer to it. 

C. The Soul and Recollection Theory

According to Plato, the human soul is immortal and anterior to the body. He states that before it was adjoined with the body, it inhabited a reality of being and it stayed there presenting  all forms during eternity. Because these are bound to the body, these are forgotten from previous lives (Phaedo, 64a-68d). For Plato, we remember our soul’s knowledge when asked the correct questions. Therefore, I explain that Recollection Theory establishes a quest for inquiry, reflection, and remembrance. Reminiscence is then important to recognize ignorance, provoke continued inquiry, and begin the quest for intelligible knowledge. 

(II) Reconstruction and Explanation of Meno’s Paradox

The central theme of the platonic dialogue is that virtue cannot be taught. The dialogue is undertaken by the inconclusive search for the essence of virtue or human goodness in general. This inquiry exhibits the typical features of Socrates’ elenchus; refutation and examination. Socrates does not define what virtue is in itself as he is ignorant to it, but invites Meno to discover it together. Now that the context has been established, we are going to observe a general formulation of the paradox. In Meno, Plato takes on Socrates’ voice to converse on the question: Can knowledge be taught? Socrates answers that he does not know virtue itself and asks; what is virtue? Meno gives detailed examples of virtue, leaving Socrates unsatisfied. Here, Socrates prompts for a general definition of virtue, pointing towards the idea itself; Plato’s Form. Meno recognizes his ignorance and Plato’s theory of reminiscence begins to unravel. Meno says to be full of doubt and takes on the dialectical exchange to approach the truth. 

Meno proposes that “It is not possible for the man to inquire what he knows, nor what he does not know. He will not inquire what he knows, because he already knows it, and there is no necessity to inquire. Nor will he inquire what he does not know, because he doesn't know what he must inquire”(Meno, 80e). 

So how do we search for something that is unknown? It is not possible to acquire new knowledge. The transition takes place to acquiring virtue, since knowledge stems from it. This leads to the idea that “everything that is searched for and learned is nothing else but remembrance” (Meno, 81c-d). Recollection Theory states that knowledge is in us and through questioning, we can remember. To elucidate on this, Socrates takes Meno’s uneducated slave through the path of reminiscence and models a geometry lesson that illustrates the importance of being aware of our own ignorance and brings about the difference between knowledge, true belief, and the possibility of learning without being taught. Connecting to Plato’s idea that in the sensible world, we have the opinions shaped by imagination and beliefs, yet in the intelligible we find the knowledge involved with thinking and understanding. Inquiring about what is unknown makes us better and less idle- capable of awakening the innate memories of knowledge. Plato proposes that all humans can reach their most elevated capacities, through their own search of memory, and one cannot remember if one is not questioned. 

(III) Analysis: What One Knows and Does Not Know

  This is clearly an argument with the base of Plato’s epistemology and metaphysics since (I) We can only remember and not learn (II) The soul remembers and virtue cannot be taught. (III) When it is said that virtue cannot be taught, I refer to Plato’s Recollection Theory. The premise (III) implies that Recollection Theory is valid and true. To illustrate this point, I refer to Plato’s theory of the divided line, stating that the superior truth is that of the Forms. Those that ignore having true opinions about what they ignore, must rigorously inquire to come to a truer opinion through rational thinking rather than driven by the senses. One inquiries through reasoning and arrives at a true opinion doubting about what is known; in inquiry nothing is learned only remembered. What is knowledge and where does it stem from? The paradox affirms and sustains that one must find what the thing itself is before understanding and embracing it. With this said, we recognize the argument that Meno makes is based on inquiring to pursue the truth. 

1. If some things are already known, then they cannot be investigated.

2. Some things are already known.

C. They cannot be investigated.

Consequently,

1. If some things are not known, then they cannot be investigated.

2. Some things are not known.

C. They cannot be investigated.

(IC) There is no new knowledge as it is already stored in our soul. 

Therefore,

1. If knowledge is found in our soul, then we can remember it through inquiry.
   

2. Knowledge is found in our soul.

C. Then we can remember it through inquiry.

(IC) To learn is to remember.

A Definition to Awaken Meaning

1. If the soul has lived many times and learnet everything, then it can remember one thing and find in itself everything else.

2. The soul has lived many times and learnt everything.

3. C. It can remember one thing and find in itself everything else.

Two initial questions arise from this, 1. How do we inquire about the unknown without an empiricist approach? And 2. How can we separate the body from the soul in relation to knowledge?

(IV) Aristotelic Objections

I present two objections to the argument of recollection theory, both from Aristotle’s epistemology and metaphysics. These bring about the possibility of learning anything with themes of reasoning, the senses, immortality, and recollection.  The first objection applies to Endoxa, Aristotle’s cautious use of our senses and soul to arrive at the truth. In this frame of thinking there must be an empiric and rational element to achieve true knowledge (Reeve, C. D. C., Curd, P., Cohen, S. M. 2016). 

Senses Lead Us to Knowledge

1. If we inquire with the use of our senses and reason, one can achieve true knowledge.

2. We do not inquire with the use of our senses. (Plato’s argument)

3. C One cannot achieve true knowledge.

The second objection affirms that the soul does not separate from the body. It approximates to say that the soul is a conjunction of the capacities that a being has, and that those capacities are incapable of existing by themselves if they are capacities of a being.

Capacities of the Being

1. If the soul is the conjunction of the capacities of a being, then the soul is incapable to exist within itself.

2. The soul is a conjunction of the capacities of a being.

C The soul is incapable to exist within itself.

(IP) The soul is not immortal.

We infer that if our soul is not immortal,  we cannot remember knowledge from previous lives. Counter objectively, Plato states that the soul retains all knowledge.

The Soul Retains All Knowledge

1. If the soul has lived many times and learnt everything, then it can remember one thing and in itself everything else.

2. The soul has lived many times and learnt everything.

C. It can remember one thing and in itself everything else. 

(IV) Identification of Weaknesses of Counter Objections and Final Thoughts

I  proceed to give possible interpretations to the objections and counter objections presented.  Empirically speaking, Aristotle supports that we learn through repetition of personal experiences, yet is memory not the recollection of experiences?  I believe Plato counter objects  successfully, in that a better approach is practicing reasoning rather than practicing through our senses. I argue that there are those things we learn about firstly, which are the Forms and our souls can recognize them in the material world. Therefore, knowledge is certainly a recollection.  I argue that Plato exerts openness to inquiry, translating  into the idea that we innately have a capacity to apprehend ideas if we consider what we didn't know were misconceptions. We metaphorically reconstruct, in this way, what we didn't know we already knew. The truth was implicit to what we thought we knew, but this can only be shown through the aid of refutation and reasoning, not the senses. For the immortality question, there is no way, to this day,  of proving if the soul is a thing or another, thus we center on the consequences of epistemology. 

Nonetheless, one problem arises from  Socrates' Apology: 1. No one knows what comes at the moment of death. 2. To say that we know something when we do not is ignorance. C To say that we know what happens at the moment of death is ignorance. Plato states that the soul is immortal and carries all knowledge of all the forms. Is this ignorance? Lastly, one  possible problem to the argument of recollection is;  why would finite beings have access to eternal truths? Imperfect beings would only have imperfect ideas after all. Plato’s response is that the soul is immortal and our current state is nor fully cognizable and therefore the goal is to remember. Here however, it is ignored that an empiric element is not ignored. Plato recognizes that the senses are used but refutes the idea that they lead to knowledge. It is the questioning of not relying on the opinions that leads to the truth. To my viewing, the paradox establishes what it pretends. Plato's answer to Meno’s paradox centers in that our knowledge is innate and therefore we know what we call the unknown, we must simply awaken these memories. 

Bibliography

Patricio de A. (1871). Platón, Obras completas, tomo 4. “Menón”. Madrid: Editorial.

Patricio de A. (1871). Platón, Obras completas, tomo 5. “Fedón”. Madrid: Editorial.

Silverman, Allan, "Plato’s Middle Period Metaphysics and Epistemology", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2022 Edition), Edward N. Zalta & Uri Nodelman (eds.)

Reeve, C. D. C., Curd, P., Cohen, S. M. (2016) Readings in Ancient Greek Philosophy: From Thales to Aristotle. Fourth Edition, “Aristotle”. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. Indianapolis/Cambridge

---

I would like to thank my teacher, Mateus Bolsón Ruzzarin for guiding me down the path of remembrance, for patiently condensing the cloud so that it would finally create the storm.

This is not a race, it's a marathon.