Method Of Argument And Theories Of Knowledge

he thought he knew, and answered confidently as if he did

know, and he did not think himself at a loss, but now he does

think himself at a loss, and as he does not know, neither does

he think he knows. – That is true. Meno 17

Socrates uses this statement and the testing of the boy to prove that the boy

had no prior knowledge of the processes of mathematics. He was able to

answer the questions purely because he was able to use the knowledge

already imbedded in his soul. This excerpt from Meno is not about

mathematics. It is used by Plato to show the reader that Socrates?

arguments were not issue oriented, they were method oriented. This

concept is very important when analyzing the theories and methods of

Socrates? arguments with the shape and structure of the text.

Socrates? vague style of argument works very well in the dialogues we

have read. This is due to the unique shape and structure of the text. The

text in dialogues lacks traditional structure and warrants little or no direction

and/or climax to Socrates? arguments. The style of the text allows Socrates

to command the dialogues and arguments but restricts him from making a

persuasive or definitive point. He is never established as a clear winner. As

I have stated, Socrates? method of argument is not a persuasive method. It

is a method of argument through question and challenge. Thus, the

similarities of the style of Socrates? method of argument and the style of

dialogues we have read work well together.

Socrates? method of argument also works well with his theory of

knowledge. Both, the vague style of argument and the unspecific theories

are presented in the same manner, forming a distinct relationship. Socrates?

method of argument is used to deliver his theories of knowledge. He does

this in a dialogue with a subject who claims that he has knowledge of some

matter that is proven in a proposition that defines an ethical term. There is a

series of questions from Socrates that he picks out. Then he takes a number

of other propositions that, when put together, prove the difference of the

original definition. The argument is examined next to each individual to see

if there is false argument. At this point the establishment of theory, or more

importantly, the establishment of Socrates? specific theories of the acquisition

of knowledge, is not at stake. The question is not whether Socrates, through

his method of argument, has proven his theories of knowledge, but rather,

has Socrates disproved the subject?s false conceit

Socrates? method of argument of is vague and indirect. It is not a

means of argument though persuasion, but rather a means of argument

through questioning and refute. This method works very well with the vague

and indirect shape and structure of the dialogues we have read. The method

also works very well with Socrates? theories of knowledge. As his theories

are also very vague, and are concerned more with disproving the theories of

others rather than presenting Socrates? concrete theory or definition of

knowledge.