What role does the theory of recollection play in response to the paradox of Plato: Meno?

Jesus Jeronimo Ortiz Duque∙ 10 minute read

Introduction

The theory of recollection is a way to explain how we acquire knowledge. Plato states that our soul knows everything, and we just remember what we have forgotten in this instance of our existence, this life. This helps to approach virtue in another way; we are trying to respond: If virtue can be taught, developed by practice, acquired by nature… or if none of these is true, how can we acquire virtue?

That is the reason why this theory appears at the middle of the script; in particular Plato is trying to figure out the idea of Virtue acquired by divinity; it is both knowledge but can not be taught because it is not natural in humans but in their souls as a recollection of past memoirs when they were living another life; different from the current.

The theory of forms, the allegory of the cave and Virtue (Overview)

The theory of forms is one of the most important and famous theories created by Plato, this explains how senses lie to the human being and how we should act as we are unable to perceive with them but with our reason. In addition it explains the process of discovering the Truth and how it may be harsh to people.  But, what is a form? The Form is the most perfect and unique state of anything.

In the introduction to ‘Gorgias’ there is a connection with virtue[1] and ‘Meno’: ‘…the goals of life (Gorgias 467a-468e). The discussion then focuses on the contribution of virtue to achieving those goals, with Socrates arguing, and Polus forced-kicking and screaming-to agree, that it is better to suffer injustice than to do it.’

Later in ‘Gorgias’ Virtue[2] is portrayed as beneficial by Plato and talks about things that are neither good nor bad, like banal or trivial.

SOCRATES: Hence, we don't simply want to slaughter people, or exile them from their cities and confiscate their property as such; we want to do these things if they are beneficial, but if they're harmful we don't. For we want the things that are good, as you agree, and we don't want those that are neither good nor bad, nor those that are bad. Right Do you think that what I'm saying is true, Polus, or don't you? Why don't you answer POLUS: I think it's true.(Gorgias 468c)

What Is Virtue?

I propose these two definitions to explain what I understand from Plato’s scripts.

Virtue is to do actions in the real world, but aiming to do good things with the help of wisdom they beneficial and then if we do actions that are good, make us better in every aspect, and bring others benefit then the cycle of virtue is completed and everyone being this way is how we can aim for something greater than all humanity.

Humans do actions in the world they live in. But there is also the use of reason that can change the way an action is done and why, the outcomes are endless and the reasons too. But let us focus on the greatest good. The greatest good is the precept in which virtue is brought to reality, and to aim at this said good is to think of it as a perfect form or something.

In the process of defining virtue[3] , at the beginning of ‘Meno’ we have questions like: ‘How will you look for it, Socrates, when you do not know at all what it is? How will you aim to search for something you do not know at all? If you should meet with it, how will you know that this is the thing that you did not know?’(80d). In the introduction[4] to the ‘Phaedo’ all “the virtues” are for the philosopher: ‘purifications of the soul and should be aimed everytime and never be balanced with actions that do not contain virtue’.

Arguments for The theory of recollection

Immortal soul

Here[5] Plato is stating that if the debater's argument is taken as the truth, this will make us believe that if we do not know something we cannot learn it. To respond this he presents the theory of recollection[6]:

Persephone will return to the sun above in the ninth year the souls of those from whom she will exact punishment for old miseries, and from these come noble kings, mighty in strength and greatest in wisdom, and for the rest of time men will call them sacred heroes. (81c)

They say the human soul is immortal; at times it comes to an end, which they call dying, at times it is reborn, but it is never destroyed, and one must therefore live one's life as piously as possible... (81b)

Take for example mathematics and what a life is, imagine a life being a positive real number representing the age lived in an instance of existing, then if we sum infinitely all the instances we will have a sum of existences together. Virtue adds positive value to a life, then if we add positive things daily our value as virtuous persons would be more as one ages. What if the soul is not immortal? There is really no reason for being pious because of this premise. Because we think that is the best thing to do, this is irrational and does not aim at the Truth. Imagine someone who has no faith, then there is no projection in the future to him or her, this can be a problem because this person won’t take action because of the lack of chance to live or transcend. Although there are some other ways of thinking that can save people without faith.

Everything has been learned

Then if we work with the principle that the human soul is immortal[7] and the recipient lives a life of piosity, it will learn a lot of things in each instance of his existence in the real world.

 As the soul is immortal, has been born often and has seen all things here and in the underworld, there is nothing which it has not learned  (81c)

Everything has been learned as if we were to have a Déjà vu everytime we learn something, also the soul is immortal. So we have infinite memoirs of our endless existences. Well then, if we already have learned everything, Why should we continue with this endless search of things we already know? This is a waste of time. Maybe enjoying life at its fullest without worrying about learning things, just learn as it goes on. Suppose that we know everything at the moment we are born, this could be a blessing or a curse depending on the point of view, and we just remember what we already know as life goes on. Despite this there’s the point of view as a problem, we know everything but from our one point of view, this lacks an omniscient perspective, and by that point we do not know everything.

The power of recollection

The power of the immortal soul[8] and the infinite learning then gives anyone an incredible power of doing anything they could possibly imagine, the only downside would be that they need to search for what they have interest in this life.

So it is in no way surprising that it can recollect the things it knew before, both about virtue and other things. As the whole of nature is akin, and the soul has learned everything, nothing prevents a man, after recalling one thing only-a process men call learning-discovering everything else for himself. (81c-d)

Learning would be discovering everything again. For example when we learn to speak as kids, we suddenly gain consciousness as if we were aware of everything and nothing at the same time. This part of the theory of recollection takes the soul as an angular stone to the conclusion of a certainty in every human and this can be a problem if assume that humans do not have a soul; therefore this mechanism does not stand in the modern days, and making it faulty in terms of an epistemological way. On the other hand, consciousness of human nature is pretty unique if we compare it to other beings, so we can modernize the idea of soul to the power of being sentient and this conclusion would fit in today’s way of acquiring knowledge.

Searching endlessly

At last the searching has to be endless and aimed at recollecting[9] as much as possible on every instance of our existence.

If he is brave and does not tire of the search, for searching and learning are, as a whole, recollection, and then must, therefore, not believe that debater's argument, for it would make us idle, and fainthearted men like to hear it,  whereas my argument makes them energetic and keen on the search.(81d)

It is like having a dream and our ideas are recollections. If someone is committed to learn everything he knows and makes other things good and the outcome is good this will undoubtedly make this instance a well lived life. Conversely there is no need to search anything for someone that already knows everything and if someone else already knows that, then we should believe their word because as we had learned everything, they also know everything. Humans are not perfect and in the process of speaking make mistakes. This can lead to a misunderstanding and if we believe the truth everytime we will not learn from those who know everything then we will be blinded by errors. Human nature is characterized by the constant movement, for example the building of great cities, not to move in the real world but across time. Humans are curious by nature, we have infinite questions as children and as we grow up we become lazy with the search for answers, we need to stop thinking of these because we need to build another life and this becomes our next great step. What has to be clear is the necessity of humans to search for what they think is the best. There are great questions that have to be answered in order to either move forward in time or in reality.

Denying the innate knowledge and in defense of Plato’s view

Innate knowledge is not likely to happen, because humans are not born with any previous understanding of the world, it is the way they live their lives, the experiences and perceptions and information that they receive that create knowledge about it. On the contrary we have certainty that other aspects of human knowledge are likely to be some kind of instinct or knowledge and this is to learn a native language, this is in some way a priori knowledge and this may resemble to the theory of recollection but seen on another perspective, so Plato’s view was not wrong neither right.

Conclusion

In the end we have Virtue not completely defined by Plato, this is a common feature of his works and that is why I tried to define Virtue in the beginning and then as we analyze the arguments these definitions are put up to the test. Then in the theory of recollection and theory of forms show us that human beings are subject to error and tend to aim and engage in some idea but without the correct amount of repetitions these efforts are pointless and even harmful. Also we have seen that knowledge is not there when we were born but there are some instincts that can count as a priori knowledge.

The importance of Plato’s Meno paradox is to ask ourselves what we really know, how we acquire virtue and the importance of always seeking for new knowledge and new ways of recollection.  Nobody knows what virtue is and no one is able to teach it. Then it is acquired by something inside us that makes us want to be good in a way that adds goodness to everything and everyone. Therefore Virtue could be a way to surpass humanity or give all of ourselves to transcend our humanity and project ourselves over time endlessly.

Notes

[1] Plato, Gorgias, trans. D. J. Zeyl (Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1987), p 219.
[2] Plato, Gorgias, 468c.
[3] Plato, Meno, trans. G. M. A. Grube (Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1980), 80d.
[4] Plato, Phaedo, trans. Benjamin Jowett (Project Gutenberg, 1999), 64a, https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1658.
[5] Plato, Obras completas, ed. Patricio de Azcárate, vol. 4 (Madrid: Printed by Manuel G. Hernández, 1871), pp  305-306.
[6] Plato, Meno, 81c-e.
[7] Plato, Meno, 81c.
[8] Plato, Meno, 81c-d.
[9] Plato, Meno, 81d.

Bibliography

Plato. Gorgias. Translated by D. J. Zeyl. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1987.
Plato. Meno. Translated by G. M. A. Grube. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1980.
Plato. Obras completas. Edited by Patricio de Azcárate. Vol. 4. Madrid: Printed by Manuel G. Hernández, 1871.
Plato. Phaedo. Translated by Benjamin Jowett. Project Gutenberg, 1999. Accessed March 17, 2025. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1658