To understand what Plato means when he claims that knowledge is virtue, it is necessary to break down the statement. To begin with, the Socratic idea of knowledge of which Plato speaks is not knowledge in the common sense of the word. For him knowledge is not information that is learned; instead, it is more what is already known by the soul to be true. Individuals possess true knowledge and this gives them what Plato calls opinions, which may be another term for instinctive understandings of the truth. When men do not permit their true opinions to “wander off” and be corrupted by outside forces, they remain sources of knowledge. They are the essences of what human beings can know absolutely and, when these things are consciously know, it follows that virtue exists. Socrates goes so far as to declare that virtue is an instinct given by God to the virtuous. It then follows that knowledge is virtue; when men hold to the instincts or opinions known by them, and which must be true because they are not changed by the guidance of other men, they must act in virtuous ways because such true knowledge cannot allow for anything else.
How Plato employs this thinking in the Apology is interesting, in terms of his defense of Socrates. What actually occurs is that the judgments against Socrates are condemned because, as Plato reveals in multiple accusations, the philosopher is being judged by those unfit to do so. This is in essence the sum of the defense. In consistently challenging the validity of the accusers, Plato then reinforces the “more true” wisdom or knowledge of Socrates. He begins by examining a certain class of accuser. There is a politician thought wise, and who fully believes himself to be wise. When it is put to him that he is in fact not wise at all, Socrates is then accused of doing evil. For Plato, this alone translates to a true lack of knowledge in the politician, and that also equates to a lack of virtue. In other words, the politician acts in a non-virtuous way, slandering the name of Socrates, because his absence of knowledge cannot allow for real virtue in him. Going to the poets for answers, Plato finds an equally disturbing reality; they can produce greatness, but they have no real knowledge as to how or why, so they too are unfit to judge Socrates. Finally, artisans are just as disappointing. Like the poets, they believe that their innate talent translates to a wider knowledge, but it does not. All of this goes to what may be called an offensive defense of Socrates; he is virtuous and wise, not because Plato can rove this, but because none of his accusers is in any real way virtuous and wise. That this defense fails is then all the more to be expected, because Plato is expressing ideas which defy the self-concepts of those certain that Socrates has done evil.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Plato’s Ideas on Knowledge".
In defending Socrates, Plato emphatically resists the idea that a man’s goodness is judged by how well he lives, or even if he lives or dies at all. This is important in that it relates to the ideals of knowledge and virtue Plato asserts. It is too easy to allow circumstances to determine if a man’s actions are good, and it is unreasonable as well. This is a profound moral truth, and one actually apart from any belief in knowledge and virtue as being the same. People consistently apply frames of reference to actions, and to such an extent that even goodness id defined by them. This is dangerous, and more than one great thinker has noted how it is often necessary for one individual to know and share a truth others do not see. The moral imperative then attached to this is that people must always bear in mind how they are powerfully guided by external and societal forces into beliefs of what is right. In Platonic terms, this means that people must first and foremost hold to their instincts, and not let them be misdirected by others. Plato aside, it means that everyone is responsible for an awareness; whether or not knowledge and virtue are one and the same, it is difficult to deny that ideas are guided by others, and that good may often be lost in the process. In a sense, then, human psychology greatly affects morality. The sheer power of the external is easily capable of altering thinking at the most internal – and possibly most insightful and true – levels.
As to whether or not knowledge truly is virtue, it is arguable that it is only when the Platonic concept of knowledge is used. In ordinary terms, this is an idea difficult to justify. When knowledge is seen as information taken in, and on any matter whatsoever, there is no real connection between it and virtue because such “knowledge” is removed from morality. It is an instrument and not a process, and there is no clear or likely association between it and doing good. Virtue, conversely, is a more “living” thing, and it exists as people feel and behave. Human psychology is such that information by no means generates virtuous behavior as such; people often know the right thing to do but are motivated in other directions more likely serving their own interests, or they have mistaken ideas of what good actually is. There are in fact endless ways in which people transform information into action, and morally virtuous behavior is only one.
When, however, Plato’s definition of knowledge as a visceral instinct or opinion is held, the situation changes. Knowledge is the virtue because knowledge is expanded far beyond the usual idea of it. It is a deeply felt sense of a truth, one given by God according to Plato, but valid even if that source is questioned and the essence remains. Knowledge here is in fact the vital link between the known and the felt. It is the “information” that transcends information because it encompasses the most important elements of being: morality and how human beings behave toward one another. When this knowledge is in place and trusted, then, virtue must follow because no actual truth can defy what is good. This is a thing common to humanity, even as it is often suppressed or altered. Put another way, knowledge is not virtue only when knowledge is not real, instinctive knowledge.
- Plato, Five Great Dialogues of Plato: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo. Claremont: Coyote Canyon Press, 1994.
