Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Meno (/ ˈ m iː n oʊ /; Ancient Greek: Μένων, Ménōn) is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato around 385 BC., but set at an earlier date around 402 BC. [1] Meno begins the dialogue by asking Socrates whether virtue (in Ancient Greek: ἀρετή, aretē) can be taught, acquired by practice, or comes by nature. [2]
(Plato, Apology 22d, translated by Harold North Fowler, 1966). [1] It is also sometimes called the Socratic paradox, although this name is often instead used to refer to other seemingly paradoxical claims made by Socrates in Plato's dialogues (most notably, Socratic intellectualism and the Socratic fallacy). [2]
Plato's problem describes the disparity between input (poverty of the stimulus) and output (grammar). As Plato suggests in the Meno dialogue, the bridge between input (whether limited or lacking) and output is innate knowledge. Poverty of the stimulus is crucial to the Platonic argument and it is a linchpin concept in Chomskyan linguistics.
16. “Knowledge which is acquired under compulsion obtains no hold on the mind.” 17. “Time is the moving image of reality.” 18. “The empty vessel makes the loudest sound.”
The concept posits the claim that learning involves the act of rediscovering knowledge from within oneself. This stands in contrast to the opposing doctrine known as empiricism, which posits that all knowledge is derived from experience and sensory perception. Plato develops the theory of anamnesis in his Socratic dialogues: Meno, Phaedo, and ...
Many philosophers and theologians have addressed the Euthyphro dilemma since the time of Plato, though not always with reference to the Platonic dialogue. According to scholar Terence Irwin, the issue and its connection with Plato was revived by Ralph Cudworth and Samuel Clarke in the 17th and 18th centuries. [3]
Polanyi's paradox, named in honour of the British-Hungarian philosopher Michael Polanyi, is the theory that human knowledge of how the world functions and of our own capability are, to a large extent, beyond our explicit understanding.
The swamping problem is a problem that appears in the context of epistemology that shows that the idea that knowledge has no additional value over true belief. The problem assumes that knowledge is a true justified belief—the canonical definition—and proceeds to show that knowledge has no more value over true belief by showing that the justification requirement does not add value to the ...