<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg024.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="95"><said who="#Anytus"><label>An.</label><p>Socrates, I consider you are too apt to speak ill of people. I, for one, if you will take my advice, would warn you to be careful: in most cities it is probably easier to do people harm than good, and particularly in this one; <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="95"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="95a"/> I think you know that yourself.<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">Anytus goes away. His parting words show that (in Plato’s view) he regarded Socrates as an enemy of the restored democracy which, he hints, has popular juries only too ready to condemn such an awkward critic.</note></p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Meno, I think Anytus is angry, and I am not at all surprised: for he conceives, in the first place, that I am speaking ill of these gentlemen; and in the second place, he considers he is one of them himself. Yet, should the day come when he knows what <q type="emph">speaking ill</q> means, his anger will cease; at present he does not know.<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">This is probably not a reference to a prosecution of Anytus himself, but a suggestion that what he needs is a Socratic discussion on <q type="emph">speaking ill,</q> for <q type="emph">ill</q> may mean <q type="emph">maliciously,</q> <q type="emph">untruthfully,</q> <q type="emph">ignorantly,</q> etc.</note> Now you must answer me: are there not good and honorable men among your people also?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly. </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="95b"/><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well then, are they willing to put themselves forward as teachers of the young, and avow that they are teachers and that virtue is to be taught?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>No, no, Socrates, I assure you: sometimes you may hear them refer to it as teachable, but sometimes as not.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Then are we to call those persons teachers of this thing, when they do not even agree on that great question?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>I should say not, Socrates.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well, and what of the sophists? Do you consider these, its only professors, <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="95c"/> to be teachers of virtue?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>That is a point, Socrates, for which I admire Gorgias: you will never hear him promising this, and he ridicules the others when he hears them promise it. Skill in speaking is what he takes it to be their business to produce.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Then you do not think the sophists are teachers of virtue?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>I cannot say, Socrates. I am in the same plight as the rest of the world: sometimes I think that they are, sometimes that they are not.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And are you aware that not only you and other political folk <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="95d"/> are in two minds as to whether virtue is to be taught, but Theognis the poet also says, you remember, the very same thing?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>In which part of his poems?</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>In those elegiac lines where he says—<quote type="verse"><l met="elegiac">Eat and drink with these men; sit with them, and be pleasing unto them, who wield great power; for from the good wilt thou win thee lessons in the good; but mingle with the bad,</l></quote> <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="95e"/><cit><quote type="verse">and thou wilt lose even the sense that thou hast.</quote><bibl>Theognis 33-36 Bergk</bibl></cit>Do you observe how in these words he implies that virtue is to be taught?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>He does, evidently.</p></said></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="96"><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>But in some other lines he shifts his ground a little, saying—<quote type="verse"><l met="elegiac">Could understanding be created and put into a man</l></quote><bibl>Theognis 434-438 Bergk</bibl> (I think it runs thus) <quote type="verse">many high rewards would they obtain</quote><quote type="verse"><l met="Continued"/></quote> <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="96"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="96a"/><cit><quote type="verse">for he would have followed the precepts of wisdom: but not by teaching wilt thou ever make the had man good</quote><bibl>Bergk 434-438.</bibl></cit> You notice how in the second passage he contradicts himself on the same point?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Apparently.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well, can you name any other subject in which the professing teachers are not only refused recognition as teachers of others, but regarded as not even understanding it themselves, <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="96b"/> and indeed as inferior in the very quality of which they claim to be teachers; while those who are themselves recognized as men of worth and honor say at one time that it is teachable, and at another that it is not? When people are so confused about this or that matter, can you say they are teachers in any proper sense of the word?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>No, indeed, I cannot.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well, if neither the sophists nor the men who are themselves good and honorable are teachers of the subject, clearly no others can be?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>I agree. </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="96c"/><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And if there are no teachers, there can be no disciples either?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>I think that statement is true.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And we have admitted that a thing of which there are neither teachers nor disciples cannot be taught?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>We have.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>So nowhere are any teachers of virtue to be found?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>That is so.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And if no teachers, then no disciples?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>So it appears.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Hence virtue cannot be taught? </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="96d"/><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>It seems likely, if our investigation is correct. And that makes me wonder, I must say, Socrates, whether perhaps there are no good men at all, or by what possible sort of process good people can come to exist?</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>I fear, Meno, you and I are but poor creatures, and Gorgias has been as faulty an educator of you as Prodicus of me. So our first duty is to look to ourselves, and try to find somebody who will have some means or other of making us better. <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="96e"/> I say this with special reference to our recent inquiry, in which I see that we absurdly failed to note that it is not only through the guidance of knowledge that human conduct is right and good; and it is probably owing to this that we fail to perceive by what means good men can be produced.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>To what are you alluding, Socrates?</p></said></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="97"><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>I mean that good men must be useful: we were right, were we not, in admitting that <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="97"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97a"/> this must needs be so?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And in thinking that they will be useful if they give us right guidance in conduct: here also, I suppose, our admission was correct?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>But our assertion that it is impossible to give right guidance unless one has knowledge looks very like a mistake.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>What do you mean by that?</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>I will tell you. If a man knew the way to Larisa, or any other place you please, and walked there and led others, would he not give right and good guidance?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly. </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97b"/><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well, and a person who had a right opinion as to which was the way, but had never been there and did not really know, might give right guidance, might he not?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And so long, I presume, as he has right opinion about that which the other man really knows, he will be just as good a guide—if he thinks the truth instead of knowing it—as the man who has the knowledge.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Just as good.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Hence true opinion is as good a guide to rightness of action as knowledge; and this is a point we omitted just now in our consideration of the nature of virtue, <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97c"/> when we stated that knowledge is the only guide of right action; whereas we find there is also true opinion.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>So it seems.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Then right opinion is just as useful as knowledge.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>With this difference, Socrates, that he who has knowledge will always hit on the right way, whereas he who has right opinion will sometimes do so, but sometimes not.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>How do you mean? Will not he who always has right opinion be always right, so long as he opines rightly?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>It appears to me that he must; and therefore I wonder, Socrates, <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97d"/> this being the case, that knowledge should ever be more prized than right opinion, and why they should be two distinct and separate things.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well, do you know why it is that you wonder, or shall I tell you?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Please tell me.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>It is because you have not observed with attention the images of Daedalus.<note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">Cf. <bibl n="Plat. Euthyph. 11">Plat. Euthyph. 11</bibl>. Socrates pretends to believe the old legend according to which Daedalus, the first sculptor, contrived a wonderful mechanism in his statues by which they could move.</note> But perhaps there are none in your country.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>What is the point of your remark?</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>That if they are not fastened up they play truant and run away; but, if fastened, they stay where they are. </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97e"/><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p> Well, what of that?</p></said></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="98"><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>To possess one of his works which is let loose does not count for much in value; it will not stay with you any more than a runaway slave: but when fastened up it is worth a great deal, for his productions are very fine things And to what am I referring in all this? To true opinion. For these, so long as they stay with us, are a fine possession, <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="98"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98a"/> and effect all that is good; but they do not care to stay for long, and run away out of the human soul, and thus are of no great value until one makes them fast with causal reasoning. And this process, friend Meno, is recollection, as in our previous talk we have agreed. But when once they are fastened, in the first place they turn into knowledge, and in the second, are abiding. And this is why knowledge is more prized than right opinion: the one transcends the other by its trammels.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Upon my word, Socrates, it seems to be very much as you say. </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98b"/><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And indeed I too speak as one who does not know but only conjectures: yet that there is a difference between right opinion and knowledge is not at all a conjecture with me but something I would particularly assert that I knew: there are not many things of which I would say that, but this one, at any rate, I will include among those that I know.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Yes, and you are right, Socrates, in so saying.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well, then, am I not right also in saying that true opinion leading the way renders the effect of each action as good as knowledge does?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>There again, Socrates, I think you speak the truth. </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98c"/><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>So that right opinion will be no whit inferior to knowledge in worth or usefulness as regards our actions, nor will the man who has right opinion be inferior to him who has knowledge.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>That is so.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And you know that the good man has been admitted by us to be useful.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Since then it is not only because of knowledge that men will be good and useful to their country, where such men are to be found, but also on account of right opinion; and since neither of these two things—knowledge <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98d"/> and true opinion—is a natural property of mankind, being acquired—or do you think that either of them is natural?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Not I.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Then if they are not natural, good people cannot be good by nature either.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Of course not.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And since they are not an effect of nature, we next considered whether virtue can be taught.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And we thought it teachable if virtue is wisdom?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And if teachable, it must be wisdom?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And if there were teachers, it could be taught, <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98e"/> but if there were none, it could not?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Quite so.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>But surely we acknowledged that it had no teachers?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>That is true.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Then we acknowledged it neither was taught nor was wisdom?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>But yet we admitted it was a good?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And that which guides rightly is useful and good?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="99"><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And that there are only two things— <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="99"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99a"/> true opinion and knowledge—that guide rightly and a man guides rightly if he have these; for things that come about by chance do not occur through human guidance; but where a man is a guide to what is right we find these two things—true opinion and knowledge.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>I agree.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well now, since virtue is not taught, we no longer take it to be knowledge?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Apparently not. </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99b"/><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>So of two good and useful things one has been rejected: knowledge cannot be our guide in political conduct.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>I think not.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Therefore it was not by any wisdom, nor because they were wise, that the sort of men we spoke of controlled their states—Themistocles and the rest of them, to whom our friend Anytus was referring a moment ago. For this reason it was that they were unable to make others like unto themselves—because their qualities were not an effect of knowledge.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>The case is probably as you say, Socrates.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And if not by knowledge, as the only alternative it must have been by good opinion. <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99c"/> This is the means which statesmen employ for their direction of states, and they have nothing more to do with wisdom than soothsayers and diviners; for these people utter many a true thing when inspired, but have no knowledge of anything they say.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>I daresay that is so.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And may we, Meno, rightly call those men divine who, having no understanding, yet succeed in many a great deed and word?</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Then we shall be right in calling those divine of whom <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99d"/> we spoke just now as soothsayers and prophets and all of the poetic turn; and especially we can say of the statesmen that they are divine and enraptured, as being inspired and possessed of God when they succeed in speaking many great things, while knowing nought of what they say.</p></said><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And the women too, I presume, Meno, call good men divine; and the Spartans, when they eulogize a good man, say—<q type="spoken">He is a divine person.</q> </p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99e"/><said who="#Meno"><label>Men.</label><p>And to all appearance, Socrates, they are right; though perhaps our friend Anytus may be annoyed at your statement.</p></said></div></div></body></text></TEI>