Correspondence with Jirsa on the Meno

 22. Aug. 2024

Vážený pane řediteli,

rád bych na Vašem ústavu přednesl přednášku na téma 'Platonův Menon'. Připojuji příspěvek na mém blogu z 20. srpna, který ukazuje, jak se klasičtí filosofové brání diskusi na toto téma.

Doufám, že moji nabídku zvážíte a sdělíte mi své rozhodnutí.

Kdybych to uměl, příspěvek bych Vám poslal v příloze, pořadatelé internetu však zasílání příloh změnili, a o věc jsem se pokoušel marně. Příspěvek následuje:

Plato and the internet conference that did not take place

Jakub Jirsa odpověděl 28 Aug 2024

Vážený pane Tomine,

Díky za Váš dopis.

Za prvé si nejsem jist, zda text Vašeho blogu nějak ukazuje, že se „klasičtí filosofové brání diskusi“ na téma dialogu Menón.

Za druhé, pokud se Váš argument ohledně datace vzniku dialogu opírá o dva body, které v emailu zmiňujete, mám k nim následující dotazy: 

1)      Pasáž z Diogéna Laertského: proč by Platón nemohl sepsat dialog s Anytem kdykoli po soudu a Sókratově smrti, aby – mimo jiné – ukázal, že za soudem byly osobní nevraživosti a typově jaké situace soudu předcházely? Z textu v Životopisech se nedozvíme, že by Platón zachytil reálné setkání, je to nabízeno jako ukázka toho, co má DL na mysli.

2)      Poslední věta v dialogu Menón: opět, proč je nutné předpokládat, že Platón píše před Menónovým mučením a před expedicí? Stejně jako na jiných místech se nabízí, že v celém závěrečném odstavci Platón posluchači/čtenáři sděluje, že kdyby se Menón staral více o sebe sama (o své ctnosti a poznání) a k tomu samému by přesvědčil Anyta – prospěl by Atéňanům: asi nejen tak, že náležitě přesvědčený Anytos by možná nepoňoukal Meléta k žalobě (a Sókratés by dále mohl žít, první „prospěch“ Atéňanům), ale z Menóna i Anyta by se zřejmě stal lepší člověk (další prospěch). 

S díky a s pozdravem,

Jakub Jirsa

I translate. 1. My letter to Jirsa:

‘Dear Director,

I should like to present at your Institute a paper on Plato’s Meno. I am adding the last Article from my blog, published on my blog August 20, which shows that classicists prevent discussion of the dating of the Meno on the internet. I hope that you will consider my offer and inform me of your decision.’

Jakub Jirsa, the Director of the Philosophy Institute at the Faculty of Philosophy at Charles University in Prague, replied on 28 Aug 2024:

‘Dear Mr Tomin,

In the first place I am not sure that the text on your blog shows that classicists prevent discussion of the dating of the Meno on the internet.’

[Jirsa’s opening sentence can be seen as a good example of such prevention. I presented Jirsa with an offer of a paper on the Meno, he responded with a reference to an article on my blog.

Since Jirsa opened the question of the article on my blog, which I presented to him as an example of the way in which classicists prevent discussion of the dating of the Meno on the internet, let me elucidate it. When I informed John Doherty about the misinformation concerning Plato on the internet, he was delighted and immediately invited me to a discussion of this matter: ‘Hey Julius, John from EditorNinja here! Just saw your booking and really looking forward to our call. It's scheduled for 30 minutes.’ John Doherty informed me about a guest he invited to the discussion, Robert Gotshall, who self-identifies himself as follows: ‘I am an actor, copy editor, and educator with a strong background in the classics.’ I looked forward to the discussion, only to be disappointed at the last moment. Obviously, John Doherty contacted the classicists and was told: ‘The dating of the Meno cannot be discussed.’]

But back to Jirsa’s letter. Jirsa writes: ‘In so far as your argument concerning the dating of the Meno relies on two points, which you mention in your email, I have two questions concerning them:

1)      The passage from Diogenes Laertius: Why could not Plato write the dialog with Anytus at any time after the death of Socrates, in order to show, among other things, that at the background of the trial was personal grudge and malice and what situations preceded the trial? From the text in the ‘Lives’ we do not learn that Platon reported on a real meeting; it is offered as an example of what Diog. Laert. thinks.’

Let me quote the passage: ‘Socrates would take to task those who thought highly of themselves, proving them to be fools, as to be sure he treated Anytus, according to Plato’s Meno. For Anytus could not endure to be ridiculed by Socrates, and so in the first place stirred up against him Aristophanes and his friends; then afterwards he helped to persuade Meletus to indict him on a charge of impiety and corrupting the youth.’

May I ask Jirsa what in the passage in Diogenes’ ‘Life of Socrates’ can be viewed ‘as an example of what Diog. Laert. thinks?’ Is it ‘that at the background of the trial was personal grudge and malice and what situations preceded the trial’?

Plato’s Apology of Socrates is full of Socrates’ references to Anytus’ ‘grudge and malice’ directed against Socrates, beginning with the opening passage, in which he says that his accusers ‘have said little or nothing true’ about him. Let me quote what Socrates said after Meletus proposed his death sentence: ‘so far as Meletus is concerned, I have even now been acquitted, and not merely acquitted, but anyone can see that, if Anytus and Lycon had not come forward to accuse me, he would have been fined a thousand drachmas for not receiving a fifth part of the votes.’ (36a) But in detecting ‘grudge and malice’ at the background of the trial, Socrates in his ‘Defence speech’ goes beyond Anytus and Lycon: ‘Great hatred has arisen against me in the minds of many persons. And this it is which will cause my condemnation, not Meletus or Anytus, but the prejudice and dislike of the many.’ (28a)

Let me now turn to Jirsa’s second point:

2)      ‘The last sentence in the Meno: again, why must one presuppose that Plato writes prior to Meno’s torture, and prior to the expedition? As in other places, so in the last paragraph in the Meno Plato tells his audience, his reader, that if Meno took greater care of himself (of his virtues and of his learning} and would persuade Anytus of the same, he would benefit the Athenians; for a properly persuaded Anytus would perhaps refrain from prompting Meletus to indict Socrates (so that Socrates might live, the first benefit for the Athenians), but both Meletus and Anytus would become better men (a further benefit).’

To begin with, let me quote the last sentence: ‘It is now time for me to go my way, but do you persuade our friend Anytus of that whereof you are now yourself persuaded, so as to put him in a gentler mood; for if you can persuade him, you will do a good turn to the people of Athens also.’

Plato does not tell us what it is, of which ‘Meno himself is now persuaded’, but he undoubtedly presupposes that we will find ourselves. On getting this right our understanding of the Meno depends; to do so, we must grasp the main line of the discussion.

The Meno begins with Meno addressing Socrates: ‘Can you tell me, Socrates, whether virtue can be taught, or is acquired by practice, not teaching? Or if neither by practice nor by learning, whether it comes to mankind by nature or in some other way?’

Of all these questions, it is the question whether virtue can be taught, which is in the centre of attention. As the discussion progresses, it is the political virtue on which the discussion becomes focussed; political virtue, properly understood, embraces the whole virtue, virtue in its totality.

Virtue can be taught if it is knowledge, if it is wisdom. But if it is knowledge, there must be those who teach it and those who are learning it. The question is, are there any teachers of virtue? For if there are no teachers of virtue, then we must conclude that it is not knowledge.

Plato and Socrates see a fundamental difference between ‘political virtue’ as it was exercised by such statesmen as Thucydides, Aristeides, and Pericles, who were unable to pass their political skills to their progeny, and political virtue that could be taught. Socrates does not give any example of political virtue which can be and is taught, but he makes the difference between the two clear in Socrates’ final exposition: ‘If through all this discussion our queries and statements have been correct, virtue is found to be neither natural nor taught, but it is imparted to us by a divine dispensation without understanding in those who receive it, unless there should be somebody among the statesmen capable of making a statesman of another. And if there should be any such, he might fairly be said to be among the living what Homer says Teiresias was among the dead – “He alone has comprehension; the rest are flitting shades. In the same way he on earth, in respect of virtue, will be a real substance among shadows.’ To this Meno replies: ‘I think you put it excellently, Socrates.’

These are Meno’s last words. In the Meno, Meno undergoes a profound development, within the framework of which he is on the way of becoming a true statesman. With his enthusiastic ‘I think you put it excellently, Socrates’ Meno begins to view Plato and Socrates, and himself, as ‘a real substance among shadows.’

But after leaving Athens and returning to Thessaly, instead of making his best to become a prominent statesman within his native country, among his fellow aristocrats, Meno becomes a general of the Thessalian mercenaries in the army of Cyrus. The Meno could not have been written after this happened.