In the dialogue between Socrates and Meno, the two men start their discussion with the definition of virtue (Plato 1). It occurred, however, that virtue is complicated to define in its global sense. Accordingly, the philosophers came up with an idea that in order to understand what is virtue, they should understand if the virtue can be taught or is it a natural gift. The discussion showed that the history had no examples of teachers, who would be able to explain the virtue to their students (Plato 28). Consequently, if there were no teachers, who could teach people how to be courageous, wise or tolerant, and the virtue itself would not be studied.
Socrates put forward the idea that it is not necessary to study a subject in order to know it. To prove his theory, he talked to a slave boy about the geometry and, by the set of leading questions, he pursued the boy to give logically-granted, right answers about the subject, which he had never studied (Plato 18). Socrates called this phenomenon a recollection. He explained it by the statement that our soul is immortal and, whereas our body dies, the soul continues to live and collect the information about the surrounding world. Accordingly, it is possible that the soul, which lives in our body, had numerous previous lives, during which it was able to obtain the knowledge of geometry. Thus, the slave boy was able to answer the questions intuitively, without actually studying the subject.
The same explanation is right in regards to true belief or true opinion. A person may have a true opinion, which is not grounded upon any knowledge or experience. The true opinion is just an inner voice, which is telling the right answer or the right way in the majority of cases. The true opinion, however, may be false. It happens, when our surroundings or circumstances change and make our true opinion change as well. Accordingly, under such conditions, our previous true opinion happens to be false.
Knowledge, on the other hand, is a constant virtue. We acquire knowledge through learning and it does not change with the flow of time. Socrates explained the difference between true opinion and knowledge by saying that true opinion is something that we had tethered to us by force. While it stays tethered, it can be helpful; however, once the chains are removed, the true opinion is not able to assist us in making the rightful decision. The knowledge is tethered to us voluntarily; accordingly, it cannot leave us and will always help us to act rightfully. This is what makes knowledge be a virtue.
Judging from the above, can we claim that knowledge is more significant and precious than true opinion? Definitely, knowledge is the grounded experience, which has proved its importance throughout the centuries.
However, as we remember, Socrates considered knowledge to be a virtue and he had proved that virtues cannot be taught (Plato 33). This leads the discussion to the conclusion that most politicians or men, who have the authority to administer the lives of others, are guided by true belief, rather than knowledge. This allows us to draw a parallel between true opinion and divination, because prophets usually say or do the right things, without having any explainable basis under them.
To sum it up, the discussion between Socrates and Meno ended by claiming that the majority of the important deeds were produced under the true opinion, rather than knowledge. However, knowledge is much more precious, than true opinion, because only the knowledge is able to stay true under changing circumstances and the flow of time.
Works Cited
Plato, Meno, South Australia: The University of Adelaide Library, 2010. Ebooks.