Paradox of Inquiry - Paper Example

Introduction

The inquiry is described as the systematic and goal-directed search for knowledge which one thinks one doesn't have. Discovering something by chance is not the same as inquiry because one should seek to answer a question without having an already preselected answer. The Meno's paradox is a paradox of inquiry which originated from the dialogue between Plato and Meno. It is in this dialogue that questions concerning inquiry were first systematically analyzed. From their dialogue, both Meno and Plato do not know what virtue is and therefore they are not able to inquire into the nature of virtue.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Meno's paradox has a puzzle about definitions in that one cannot come to know something that they did not already know. Furthermore, the paradox of inquiry (Sheng, et.al 2015) proves that either one knows the answer or they don't. The dilemma here is that if one already knows the answer to an inquiry then they cannot find it since they already have it hence the inquiry is unnecessary (80e). This is true because inquiry can never produce new knowledge but only recapitulates on ideas that are already known. On the other hand, if one does not know the answer to a question then they have no idea of what to look for and would not recognize it even if they stumbled upon it, making the inquiry is impossible. It is not possible to know what one does not know because someone cannot both know and not know the same thing. Therefore, an inquiry is either unnecessary or impossible. Moreover, one can know the questions that they have no answer to. The paradox of inquiry questions how knowledge can be obtained and if it is possible to know if something is right even if we have never experienced it. It is a challenge because the paradox makes it seem as though no one could ever learn anything when in a real sense everyone thinks they learn almost all the time.

In addition, Meno's paradox does not take into consideration the act of forgetting and so it is clear that one can search for something that they already know but forgot due to lack of memory on that particular thing. In trying to solve the paradox Socrates uses the theory of recollection which states that the soul of man is immortal (Miller, et.al 2015) in that it dies and is reborn over and over. In this way, the soul recollects memories from the previous lives but only when exposed to the experiences in this life (81d). Hence making it possible to know something that one has not experienced in this life. In this theory, it is stated that prior knowledge of things is prenatal that is, it is obtained from before birth just as the human soul also exists long before the birth of a person. People are born with abilities such as reasoning and are able to form the ability to reason based on observations but one does not gain the ability to reason empirically. In a concession, inquiry seems impossible in some sense in that what can appear to be learning something new may as well be just a recollection of something that is already known.

The doctrine of recollection solves the paradox of inquiry by stating that the human soul has already come into contact with everything there is. In other words, the human soul already knows everything, when people are born the human body forgot all knowledge from the previous lives of the soul. Under the right exposure to similar experiences, such knowledge can easily be remembered hence making knowing something just a matter of recollection. Meno's paradox only works when new knowledge is to be imparted into the soul but because Socrates' doctrine says that such knowledge is already there people are not in the situation that the paradox says they are in. In this case, the paradox is no longer a problem.

It is not very clear if the doctrine of recollection (Possen, et.al 2016) is really true and so Socrates supports the doctrine by trying to show that a common slave boy has knowledge already in him. This he does by asking the boy a series of geometric questions which the boy eventually gives him the right answer but only after several questions and mistakes along the way. Socrates only gives the slave boy leading questions hence proving that knowledge is innately in all of us because the boy answered all the questions from his own thinking. This doctrine needs more support to substantiate it. The theory of recollection shows that the idea of inquiry being impossible is false since inquiry consists in recollection. Knowing and not knowing can be said to be recollection and forgetting, hence making inquiry possible. The above statement can be considered both correct and incorrect.

Conclusion

Having prior knowledge of either related or unrelated ideas to that which is under inquiry might not be appropriate enough in helping one discover that which they seek. This can actually hinder one from finding the right answer because most often the prior knowledge may not be true or it might be interpreted wrongly. It is a proven fact that Meno's paradox can be conquered. What is hard to believe is the belief by Socrates that souls can be passed from one body to another and from one lifetime to the next. This makes it difficult to prove the doctrine of recollection because one cannot really be sure if immortal souls exist in reality.

Reference

Miller, T. M. (2015). Plato's Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul.

Possen, D. D. (2016). Meno: Kierkegaard and the Doctrine of Recollection. In Volume 2, Tome I: Kierkegaard and the Greek World-Socrates and Plato (pp. 47-64). Routledge.

Sheng, C. (2015). Plato's Epistemology: a Coherent Account in Meno, Phaedo, and Theaetetus (Doctoral dissertation, University of Leeds).