Things to think about in the Meno 80-86

  1. What do the following terms mean in this passage:
    1. Recollection
    2. Learn
    3. Teach
    4. Know
    5. Ignorance
  2. Can you know something but not know you know it? Can you believe something but not be aware that you believe it?
  3. What does Socrates say to Meno about what he is demonstrating via his interaction with the slave boy?
  4. What does it mean to "recall the steps in regular order": is it important that Socrates provides the order?
  5. In what sense do the answers come out of the slave boy's head?
  6. What are true notions about what one does not know? what role do they play in the passage?

One good way to do this argument analysis would be to take as the conclusion something like the claim that recollection starts to occur in this exchange and that it is possible because the slave boy already has the requisite materials in him before the exchange starts. The task will be to figure out what definition of learn, teach, recollect, know, believe, etc. make that conclusion make sense.

Another good direction to take an argument analysis is to start with the paradox at the beginning (called Meno's Paradox) and construct Plato's argument that there is a solution to it from claims found in this passage.

MENO 80-86:

SOCRATES: I know, Meno, what you mean; but just see what a tiresome dispute you are introducing. You argue that a man cannot enquire either about that which he knows, or about that which he does not know; for if he knows, he has no need to enquire; and if not, he cannot; for he does not know the very subject about which he is to enquire (Compare Aristot.
Post. Anal.).

How can we get inquiry going? How can we know we've found what we're looking for?
MENO: Well, Socrates, and is not the argument sound?

SOCRATES: I think not.

MENO: Why not?

SOCRATES: I will tell you why: I have heard from certain wise men and women who spoke of things divine that--

MENO: What did they say?

SOCRATES: They spoke of a glorious truth, as I conceive.

MENO: What was it? and who were they?

SOCRATES: Some of them were priests and priestesses, who had studied how they might be able to give a reason of their profession: there have been poets also, who spoke of these things by inspiration, like Pindar, and many others who were inspired. And they say--mark, now, and see whether their words are true--they say that the soul of man is immortal, and at one time has an end, which is termed dying, and at another time is born again, but is never destroyed. And the moral is, that a man ought to live always in perfect holiness. 'For in the ninth year Persephone sends the souls of those from whom she has received the penalty of ancient crime back again from beneath into the light of the sun above, and these are they who become noble kings and mighty men and great in wisdom and are called saintly heroes in after ages.' The soul, then, as being immortal, and having been born again many times, and having seen all things that exist, whether in this world or in the world below, has knowledge of them all; and it is no wonder that she should be able to call to remembrance all that she ever knew about virtue, and about everything; for as all nature is akin, and the soul has learned all things; there is no difficulty in her eliciting or as men say learning, out of a single recollection all the rest, if a man is strenuous and does not faint; for all enquiry and all learning is but recollection. And therefore we ought not to listen to this sophistical argument about the impossibility of enquiry: for it will make us idle; and is sweet only to the sluggard; but the other saying will make us active and inquisitive. In that confiding, I will gladly enquire with you into the nature of virtue.

SO this is clearly presented as something that will solve 'Meno's Paradox,' the conundrum presented above: we already know everything, we just need to recollect it! and part of that must involve recognizing the thing we were looking for.
MENO: Yes, Socrates; but what do you mean by saying that we do not learn, and that what we call learning is only a process of recollection? Can you teach me how this is?

SOCRATES: I told you, Meno, just now that you were a rogue, and now you ask whether I can teach you, when I am saying that there is no teaching, but only recollection; and thus you imagine that you will involve me in a contradiction.

MENO: Indeed, Socrates, I protest that I had no such intention. I only asked the question from habit; but if you can prove to me that what you say is true, I wish that you would.

It is interesting that Socrates' answer to this challenge is an example of recollection: elsewhere, Socrates wants definitions of things like 'virtue' and 'courage' etc. and rejects examples. Maybe something about this case is different, but it does seem to be in tension with those other cases.

NOTE: these words of Meno set up the entire exchange that follows as a proof that recollection is the right account of what we otherwise might call 'learning.'
SOCRATES: It will be no easy matter, but I will try to please you to the utmost of my power. Suppose that you call one of your numerous attendants, that I may demonstrate on him.

MENO: Certainly. Come hither, boy.

SOCRATES: He is Greek, and speaks Greek, does he not?

MENO: Yes, indeed; he was born in the house.

SOCRATES: Attend now to the questions which I ask him, and observe whether he learns of me or only remembers.

MENO: I will.

SOCRATES: Tell me, boy, do you know that a figure like this is a square?

BOY: I do.

SOCRATES: And you know that a square figure has these four lines equal?

BOY: Certainly.

SOCRATES: And these lines which I have drawn through the middle of the square are also equal?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: A square may be of any size?

BOY: Certainly.

SOCRATES: And if one side of the figure be of two feet, and the other side be of two feet, how much will the whole be? Let me explain: if in one direction the space was of two feet, and in the other direction of one foot, the whole would be of two feet taken once?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: But since this side is also of two feet, there are twice two feet?

BOY: There are.

SOCRATES: Then the square is of twice two feet?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And how many are twice two feet? count and tell me.

BOY: Four, Socrates.

At this point, Socrates has drawn a square which has four quadrants. Each quadrant is 1 unit in length and width. Thus the whole square contains 4 square feet.
SOCRATES: And might there not be another square twice as large as this, and having like this the lines equal?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And of how many feet will that be?

BOY: Of eight feet.

SOCRATES: And now try and tell me the length of the line which forms the side of that double square: this is two feet--what will that be?

BOY: Clearly, Socrates, it will be double.

The slave boy has now guessed that the length of the side of a square that contains 8sq.ft of area is 4 units.
SOCRATES: Do you observe, Meno, that I am not teaching the boy anything, but only asking him questions; and now he fancies that he knows how long a line is necessary in order to produce a figure of eight square feet; does he not?

MENO: Yes.

SOCRATES: And does he really know?

MENO: Certainly not.

SOCRATES: He only guesses that because the square is double, the line is double.

MENO: True.

SOCRATES: Observe him while he recalls the steps in regular order. (To the Boy:) Tell me, boy, do you assert that a double space comes from a double line? Remember that I am not speaking of an oblong, but of a figure equal every way, and twice the size of this--that is to say of eight feet; and I want to know whether you still say that a double square comes from double line?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: But does not this line become doubled if we add another such line here?

BOY: Certainly.

SOCRATES: And four such lines will make a space containing eight feet?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: Let us describe such a figure: Would you not say that this is the figure of eight feet?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And are there not these four divisions in the figure, each of which is equal to the figure of four feet?

BOY: True.

SOCRATES: And is not that four times four?

BOY: Certainly.

SOCRATES: And four times is not double?

BOY: No, indeed.

SOCRATES: But how much?

BOY: Four times as much.

SOCRATES: Therefore the double line, boy, has given a space, not twice, but four times as much.

BOY: True.

SOCRATES: Four times four are sixteen--are they not?

The slave boy now sees that the square that has a side that is 4 units has an area of 16 sq. feet.
BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: What line would give you a space of eight feet, as this gives one of sixteen feet;--do you see?

Socrates points to the 16sq. ft. square.
BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And the space of four feet is made from this half line?

Socrates points to the 4 sq. ft. square and its side that is 2 ft long.
BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: Good; and is not a space of eight feet twice the size of this, and half the size of the other?

BOY: Certainly.

SOCRATES: Such a space, then, will be made out of a line greater than this one, and less than that one?

BOY: Yes; I think so.

SOCRATES: Very good; I like to hear you say what you think. And now tell me, is not this a line of two feet and that of four?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: Then the line which forms the side of eight feet ought to be more than this line of two feet, and less than the other of four feet?

BOY: It ought.

SOCRATES: Try and see if you can tell me how much it will be.

BOY: Three feet.

SOCRATES: Then if we add a half to this line of two, that will be the line of three. Here are two and there is one; and on the other side, here are two also and there is one: and that makes the figure of which you speak?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: But if there are three feet this way and three feet that way, the whole space will be three times three feet?

Yet another square, this one 3 feet on a side, with an area of 9 sq. feet.
BOY: That is evident.

SOCRATES: And how much are three times three feet?

BOY: Nine.

SOCRATES: And how much is the double of four?

BOY: Eight.

SOCRATES: Then the figure of eight is not made out of a line of three?

BOY: No.

SOCRATES: But from what line?--tell me exactly; and if you would rather not reckon, try and show me the line.

BOY: Indeed, Socrates, I do not know.

The slave boy has reached a state of not knowing, and knowing that he does not know. That is called 'aporia.' It means 'no way out' literally, but also 'puzzlement.' It is considered an important stage because it means that he is now open to figuring things out and knows that he does not know.

So perhaps it is as important to 'know' what one does not know (i.e. that one does not know it) as it is to be able to recognize it when one finds it?
SOCRATES: Do you see, Meno, what advances he has made in his power of recollection? He did not know at first, and he does not know now, what is the side of a figure of eight feet: but then he thought that he knew, and answered confidently as if he knew, and had no difficulty; now he has a difficulty, and neither knows nor fancies that he knows.

MENO: True.

SOCRATES: Is he not better off in knowing his ignorance?

MENO: I think that he is.

SOCRATES: If we have made him doubt, and given him the 'torpedo's shock,' have we done him any harm?

This is what Socrates is presenting as the effect of his conversations with other people: it shocks them and makes them realize their own ignorance.
MENO: I think not.

SOCRATES: We have certainly, as would seem, assisted him in some degree to the discovery of the truth; and now he will wish to remedy his ignorance, but then he would have been ready to tell all the world again and again that the double space should have a double side.

MENO: True.

SOCRATES: But do you suppose that he would ever have enquired into or learned what he fancied that he knew, though he was really ignorant of it, until he had fallen into perplexity under the idea that he did not know, and had desired to know?

MENO: I think not, Socrates.

SOCRATES: Then he was the better for the torpedo's touch?

MENO: I think so.

Note that Socrates has argued, not just claimed, that the slave boy is better off. Meno's answers commit him to accepting as a conclusion that the slave boy is better off. There are certainly assumptions made, but it is an argument. Can we present it in schematic bullet point form?
Also, note that he is in a state where Meno's paradox may apply: he is looking for something but does not know the answer. How will he know he has found it? In this case, it is clear how he will know he has found it: it will be a square of 8 sq. ft. He has criteria that the answer must fit (parallel criteria for the question 'what is virtue' would be that the definition of virtue must reliably identify all and only things agreed to be virtuous). Does this mean that Socrates' purported example of a solution to Meno's paradox is not a good example? Does it mean that Meno's paradox is not a real paradox? That it is a silly sophistic trick?
SOCRATES: Mark now the farther development. I shall only ask him, and not teach him, and he shall share the enquiry with me: and do you watch and see if you find me telling or explaining anything to him, instead of eliciting his opinion. Tell me, boy, is not this a square of four feet which I have drawn?

Strong claims: Recollection is about to occur! Socrates will only ask. He will not teach. He shall share the enquiry (in what sense 'share'?)

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And now I add another square equal to the former one?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And a third, which is equal to either of them?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: Suppose that we fill up the vacant corner?

BOY: Very good.

SOCRATES: Here, then, there are four equal spaces?

BOY: Yes.

At this point, Socrates has drawn 4 squares identical to the first square (which had an area of 4 sq. ft.), and he has put them contiguous with each other such that those 4 squares form a larger square. It is a 16sq. ft square.
SOCRATES: And how many times larger is this space than this other?

BOY: Four times.

SOCRATES: But it ought to have been twice only, as you will remember.

BOY: True.

SOCRATES: And does not this line, reaching from corner to corner, bisect each of these spaces?

Socrates draws a line through the diagonal of the 4sq.ft. square. And he asks whether each half of the square is equal to the other half.
Is it worth asking how they know that the diagonal actually cuts a square in half? I am not sure, but I wonder.
BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And are there not here four equal lines which contain this space?

At this point, Socrates has added three more diagonals, each of which divides one of the four squares he drew.
BOY: There are.

SOCRATES: Look and see how much this space is.

BOY: I do not understand.

SOCRATES: Has not each interior line cut off half of the four spaces?

BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And how many spaces are there in this section?

Socrates points to the square section that the four diagonals form.
BOY: Four.

SOCRATES: And how many in this?

Socrates points to a triangle that is one of the half-squares.
BOY: Two.

Two square feet.

SOCRATES: And four is how many times two?

BOY: Twice.

SOCRATES: And this space is of how many feet?

Pointing to the square formed by the diagonals.
BOY: Of eight feet.

SOCRATES: And from what line do you get this figure?

Pointing to that same square.
BOY: From this.

Pointing to a diagonal.
SOCRATES: That is, from the line which extends from corner to corner of the figure of four feet?

doing the Socratic double-confirm before going for the reveal.
BOY: Yes.

SOCRATES: And that is the line which the learned call the diagonal. And if this is the proper name, then you, Meno's slave, are prepared to affirm that the double space is the square of the diagonal?

BOY: Certainly, Socrates.

Now the demonstration is concluded and Socrates and Meno will now talk about it. Where is the 'recollection'?
SOCRATES: What do you say of him, Meno? Were not all these answers given out of his own head?

An interesting claim: Socrates asked the questions: the slave boy has 'given the answer out of his own head' in what sense?

If we reject Socrates' claim, what more can we do? It renders a lot of the dialogue a mistake. Aren't we better off figuring out a way that it can be true and seeing where the thought leads?

There is surely a sense in which answering a question 'yes' or 'no' involves material from one's own head.

MENO: Yes, they were all his own.

SOCRATES: And yet, as we were just now saying, he did not know?

MENO: True.

SOCRATES: But still he had in him those notions of his--had he not?

MENO: Yes.

SOCRATES: Then he who does not know may still have true notions of that which he does not know?

So the person Socrates examines in other dialogues may have true notions in them!

And a person may not realize/know what she knows!
MENO: He has.

SOCRATES: And at present these notions have just been stirred up in him, as in a dream; but if he were frequently asked the same questions, in different forms, he would know as well as any one at last?

Oh, so maybe recollection has NOT fully occurred: it takes repeated and frequent questionings.

What would that consist of? A suggestion is that it would involve being able to survive a Socratic examination, an 'elenchus,' which requires flexible ability to answer questions about a topic from all angles.

MENO: I dare say.

SOCRATES: Without any one teaching him he will recover his knowledge for himself, if he is only asked questions?

So 'teaching' is telling someone the answer, but asking leading questions is not.
MENO: Yes.

SOCRATES: And this spontaneous recovery of knowledge in him is recollection?

Spontaneous? How so? He had lots of knowledge in him and was led by the nose.

MENO: True.

SOCRATES: And this knowledge which he now has must he not either have acquired or always possessed?

Wow! Is this a reasonable thing to claim?
MENO: Yes.

SOCRATES: But if he always possessed this knowledge he would always have known; or if he has acquired the knowledge he could not have acquired it in this life, unless he has been taught geometry; for he may be made to do the same with all geometry and every other branch of knowledge. Now, has any one ever taught him all this? You must know about him, if, as you say, he was born and bred in your house.

MENO: And I am certain that no one ever did teach him.

SOCRATES: And yet he has the knowledge?

MENO: The fact, Socrates, is undeniable.

SOCRATES: But if he did not acquire the knowledge in this life, then he must have had and learned it at some other time?
MENO: Clearly he must.
SOCRATES: Which must have been the time when he was not a man?
MENO: Yes.
SOCRATES: And if there have been always true thoughts in him, both at the time when he was and was not a man, which only need to be awakened into knowledge by putting questions to him, his soul must have always possessed this knowledge, for he always either was or was not a man?
MENO: Obviously.
SOCRATES: And if the truth of all things always existed in the soul, then the soul is immortal. Wherefore be of good cheer, and try to recollect what you do not know, or rather what you do not remember.
MENO: I feel, somehow, that I like what you are saying.
SOCRATES: And I, Meno, like what I am saying. Some things I have said of which I am not altogether confident. But that we shall be better and braver and less helpless if we think that we ought to enquire, than we should have been if we indulged in the idle fancy that there was no knowing and no use in seeking to know what we do not know;--that is a theme upon which I am ready to fight, in word and deed, to the utmost of my power.


I am highly puzzled by this passage, and always have been. It is called a "Platonic myth" presumably because it falls short of a proof and seems as much like a story as an explanation as a proof or a theory.
Whatever we think of it, this is considered central to Platonic thought of the 'middle dialogues.'  Can we play a believer's game and construct a way that it makes sense to speak of  all knowledge as 'recollection'? Is it possible to buy into it without buying into reincarnation?