One of the ideas I couldn't shake while reading Meno is the impact genetics could play in regards to natural ability and general tendencies. Obviously, Rosalin Franklin wasn't around to teach Plato all about DNA or the science of inheritance and the level of randomness that comes with it. I think one could argue that to a degree people can be born virtuous in that their genetic makeup can sway them towards having a virtuous nature. And of course kids aren't replicas of their parents (that'd be weird) so a virtuous father can give birth to a scoundrel son. What do you think? Do you think it is possible that the recalling of past knowledge could be simply attributed to the genes rather than a cosmic coincidence allowing people to recall things from before their time.

Let's see if I can get a proper discussion going in the comments.

If good deeds are done because of vanity, are they still good?

Post what you think in the comments and I'll reply once everyone has had their say.

While discussing Euthyphro in class it became blatantly obvious that one of the hardest things to pin down in a translation was the tone of the dialogue. For most literary works tone is built very intricately by choosing extremely precise words, but we are not really reading Plato’s words. And because we were all reading different translations we were all finding subtle discrepancies in the tone that impacted the way we took the text. My version was extremely palatable compared to Bloom’s and this meant I interpreted the conversation to be far more lighthearted than some of my classmates. This difference also gives the text a new sort of life, because a hundred different versions can have a hundred different subtle differences, meaning that Plato’s dialogues can be read and reread an untold amount of times while still being fresh and interesting. 

Euthyphro

“He alone seems to me to have begun his political career correctly, for the right way to begin is to look after the young men of the City first so that they will be as good as possible, just as a good farmer naturally looks after his young plants first and the rest later.”

Given the date I would rather dissect this particular piece of Euthyphro, rather than trying to combat the work as a whole. The comment itself seems to be of a fond nature, until you realize it is Socrates talking about Meletus, the man who accused him of corrupting the youth of Athens. I think there is a lot of power in at least attempting to recognize the views of others, even if they oppose your own. Socrates, and in turn Plato, has been able to analyze the situation as only a philosopher can, and see that Meletus’ intentions are noble, even if they are misguided. In Socrates’ eyes Meletus was doing what he felt was right. Many people throughout the world are striving to do what is right, and ultimately getting it very wrong. Those in government are not exempt. It is possible for government officials to try and do what they think is right, and still get things wrong. However, there are others that preach for laws and amendments based on who will offer them the most money. As adults in this difficult time it is our job to decide who is leading this country astray because of missteps and who is leading it astray in pursuit of the almighty dollar. Unfortunately, I think we all know which path our new orange overlord follows.