Recollection In Meno

Charles Miller
Philosophy Introduction to Knowledge
Prof. Polger
23 February 2015
Paper #1 In Meno, Plato believed that learning is recollection, as previously voiced by Socrates. Plato also believed that this argument was valid argument that because perception can deceive us, it can be wrong, so our knowledge must come from recollection. Setting this up as a deductive argument is simple. Stated by the IEP (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy) “A deductive argument is an argument that is intended by the arguer to be (deductively) valid, that is, to provide a guarantee of the truth of the conclusion provided that the argument 's premises (assumptions) are true.” So according to Plato’s believes that knowledge is recollection we can set up
true premises to reach a guaranteed conclusion. The premises in this argument is that, if perception deceives us then knowledge is not perception. Then the conclusion to this statement in Plato’s case is that knowledge is recollection. This is a valid argument using the deductive reasoning strategy, which is because the premises are true then the conclusion must be true. In the Meno, Plato goes into great detail in trying to prove that his premises are correct.
He uses the example of the cave and how ones reality is shaped by perception but their knowledge is based on recollection. In the cave allegory the man is tied up and only sees puppets of real things but the things he is seeing are not the real things. They are just forms of the objects that are someplace else, Plato calls this “the realm of the forms” and he also says, “We do not learn, and that what we call learning is only a process of recollection.” (Plato). This implies that we don’t in fact learn anything true at all because the forms are somewhere else. But what we can do is recall information taught to us and because perception can lead us to false truths we get to this information by remembering rather than looking at it. Going back to the cave allegory Plato gives the example if the man escaped the cave his reality would be crushed because he could only recall on the images he saw in the cave of these real things. It just wouldn’t be right to him even though outside the cave is where the real things are. Whether this is just a comment on society and telling us that we are stuck in the cave and not able to find true knowledge or it is just a reinforcement on his theory that knowledge is recollection this story has a lot of flaws in the story and his ideas of what knowledge
is. Even though Plato’s argument is valid because his premises is true so using deductive reasoning his conclusion must be true. There is enough holes in the argument to question its soundness. When Plato gives his example of the man trapped in the cave he explains that the man is seeing the forms on the wall in front of him but when he escapes he is terrified of the “realm of the forms” because his knowledge is telling him that these real forms are in fact the false forms. Plato believes that the “realm of the forms” are the only correct forms there can be. This is false, let us take a desk for example, when we are old enough to label something as a desk that form and description of a desk will be what you measure all other objects with. If the object fits under the category of a desk then in fact it is a form of a desk. It has more to do with the description of the object that we perceive and then recall. If it looks like a desk, acts as a desk, then it is a desk. No one can tell someone that a desk isn’t a desk without them thinking you are absolutely insane. So when Plato implies that there is this land where all forms are I find this complexly untrue due to the fact that everyone’s first perception of a form is different. When someone asks you to draw a desk almost everyone will draw a similar drawing because when we are exposed to enough forms we can reach the true form of an object from repetition, reinforcement, and forming a general description of what the object actually is. This is why I believe that Plato’s argument is valid but not sound because it is unrealistic to think that there is just one form out there that is true and others are just copies. There is no true form because an object is based on recollection of perception of an infinite amount of objects that fit a similar description.

Although there is some trues in Plato’s Meno it raises a lot of question with in itself.
Like where is the Realm of the forms and how do I gain true knowledge if all I see is false things. If we know what we know then what we know is true. Each person doesn’t think the same so no one’s reality is the same which means that there is no one true reality. We are all different and have different minds and things we can perceive to be true. But if someone doesn’t believe your view then does that mean it is false. Absolutely not, it is true to you so each person’s truths and morals are different therefore the way we come to these truths are all unique. Plato didn’t believe this, he implied in the Meno that all of our truths are false and there is no way to get to absolute truth but through our own truths we can get a generalization of what things are. “One ever feels twoness, an American, a Negro, two souls, two thoughts” (W.E.B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk). Many other great minds back then have since disproven Plato but to give the man some credit, he was a brilliant mind that had a lot of tremendous ideas about the way we
learn.

Work Cited
"Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. N.p., Oct. 2003. Web. 19 Feb. 2015.
B., Du Bois W. E. The Souls of the Black Folk: Essays and Sketches. N.p.: Dodd Mead, 1961. Print.
Plato, and R. S. Bluck. Meno. Cambridge: U, 1961. Print.