Tuesday, February 5, 2008

Is a person virtuous because he possesses a kind of expert knowledge? Compare pp. 28 & 46.

Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,

1 comment:

Chris Groeger said...

It's hard to pin down either Aristotle or Socrates on this question.

Aristotle argues (p. 13) that activities, arts, and sciences aim at an end, or good. Medicine aims at health, shipbuilding at a ship. In a further discussion of "proper functions" for flute players and shoemakers, as well as for "man as man," (p. 20-21) he says that performing the function well, or setting high standards, is to perform it in conformity with excellence or virtue. So there are as many virtues as there are human pursuits. If by "expert knowledge" we mean the specific skills, habits, and knowledge that harp players, generals, and shoemakers have, then it might be said that specific virtues are connected with possessing specific "expert knowledge."

In a later section (p. 32) Aristotle discusses virtue, and ends by distinguishing between "intellectual" and "moral" virtues. Since moral virtues include generosity and self-control, it is clear they are not a kind of expert knowledge, although they do represent the rational part of the human soul ruling over the irrational or appetitive part. At the end he states that "...praiseworthy characteristics are what we call virtues." Again, this doesn't seem to have any necessary connection with expert knowledge.

Finally, in the section on the contemplative life (p. 32-35), Aristotle clearly identifies the highest virtue with theoretical knowledge, and the pursuit of this type of knowledge (also called philosophy) as the happiest kind of life. The philosopher is virtuous by virtue of (no pun intended!) his knowledge.

Turning to Socrates, we find him implying that, just as horses can be improved or made "excellent in their appropriate virtue" by trainers, so can humans (p. 40, 47). However, when he asks Callias (p. 40) whether there is such a trainer and Callias gives him the name of a Sophist, Socrates then says he himself does not have such knowledge. Since much of the Apology argues that Socrates is the wisest of men (albeit because he knows he is ignorant), the message would appear to be that such knowledge isn't possible for humans. Or, alternatively, that Socrates' own method of questioning is actually the way to make young people excellent or virtuous. This doesn't seem to call for any expert knowledge on the part of the trainees.

Socrates also discusses (p. 40-41) more specific excellences or virtues, such as the skills of politicians, poets, or craftsmen. While he admits they have expert knowledge of their fields, they assume they have knowledge about other fields, and thus fall short of wisdom (and presumably the more general "virtue which belongs to a man and a citizen.")

Finally, Socrates mentions the "voice" or the "sign of the God" (54-55) which opposes any of his actions which are not virtuous. If he is right about always doing what the God requires, and if other people can have such a voice as well, then it would follow that virtue means obeying an inner voice rather than drawing on expert knowledge.

While Socrates couldn't find any truly wise men, and professed his own lack of knowledge, Plato had no trouble locating such people in his later work, The Republic. He called them "philosopher-kings."

February 12, 2008 at 9:39 PM

Post a Comment