Socrates makes numerous different arguments regarding virtue in the dialogue Meno. These include what defines virtue and whether or not it is possible for people to posses it. He touches on how virtue can be attained, whether or not one is born being virtuous, they learn it or it is another factor for example, sheer luck. Socrates was correct on many of his points, however his thoughts on the acquisition of virtue through luck lacks sufficient evidence to be believed true.
Virtue cannot be a form of knowledge. In order for something to be knowledge, someone must be able to teach it to others. Virtue cannot be knowledge because knowledge needs to be taught. Socrates brings to light that in order to teach something, one must know what it is that they are teaching. Someone who does not know themselves how to fly a kite could not possibly teach someone else how to. It is much agreed between Socrates and Meno that no one truly knows what virtue is and because of this cannot be taught. Socrates proves this by pointing out that, “...If virtue could be taught he would have found the man who could make his sons good men...” He, referring to Thucydides, had two sons, neither of which was considered virtuous. However, Thucydides educated his children in many different disciplines, but apparently could not find a teacher of virtue even though he found teachers for other aspects of life he found valuable. Nor could he teach it himself, even though he himself was thought to posses virtue.
However, just because virtue cannot be taught does not mean that there are no people with virtue. Socrates viewed many people as virtuous. His examples included Themistocles, Lysimachus and Thucydides. Both Meno and Anytus agreed with these examples, because all three men exhibited the traits which our philosophers had so far deemed to be the qualities of good, or virtuous. Virtue is often interchanged with goodness. It is unlikely that one could be considered to be a good person without...