Myself (As Socrates)- Meno! There you are. I am glad to have found you. I have been itching to have a conversation with you about a subject that has been running through my mind the entire day.
Myself (As Meno)- Hello there Socrates. What have you to talk to me about?
Socrates- I have been pondering trying to form an opinion about a very controversial and important question. I was hoping to get your insight on the subject?
Meno- Well of course. You know i enjoy these conversations. Go ahead.
Socrates- Do you think that virtues can be taught? Or are they already initiated before birth?
Meno- Oh well that's an easy one. Virtue is something that a person is born with. Everyone knows that.
Socrates- Oh is that so?
Meno- But of course. I cannot see any other logical explanation to describe the actions of human beings on a day to day basis if this statement were not accurate.
Socrates- I'd have to say that i agree to disagree. If this statement of yours is true than would you be able to explain to me why some behave showing no moral standards? Is mortality and nobility along with righteousness, and integrity inherited?
Meno- Virtue may be a result of practice, or inherent trait. Some may be born into the environment and around individuals that do not uphold the highest standards. Thus causing the same traits to be inherited into them. They themselves had been taught a different meaning of integrity and righteousness and these teachings were then taught to their children. The generation continues.
Socrates- So then based on your statements, would it be correct to assume that there are simple two types of people in this world? Moral and immoral?
Meno- I would like to think so, yes.
Socrates- Ah. Okay. Well let me continue further then, would i also be correct in assuming that you are simply "lucky" if you happen to be born into a family that upholds higher standards than others? Is luck the only factor in this equation?
Meno- The way that I see it, luck is the only possible factor. Usually I do not like to associate things like "luck" with my assumptions and statements, only because I have absolutely no way of proving that "luck" is a factor, or if it even exists in the first place. But in this one instance, I will assume that luck is the only possible determining factor if one grows up practicing moral actions or not.
Socrates- Okay. I agree that luck is not the most trustworthy factor to rely on. But with that said, I have yet another question for you.
Meno- Go right ahead.
Socrates- Would it be logical for me to state that associating "good" people with "moral" people, and "bad" people with "immoral" people would be completely and totally accurate? Or are there flaws in this statement?
Meno- I would have to say that this statement sounds pretty accurate to me. Those of good morals and intentions are ones to act in a "good" way, or preform "good" actions. If you are a good person, you have good intentions. Simply because of that, people who obtain true morals are known to be "good" people. It would be the same for those who obtain "immoral" standards. If one thinks immorally, would you expect them to act any differently?
Socrates- "I reason with your statement. You have provided some good points! But with that, let me provide you with just one more provocative thought that I have.
Meno- Go right ahead.
Socrates- No virtuous quality is good without moderation and justice.
Meno- Ah. I'm going to have to agree with that, Socrates.
Meno- Hello Socrates!! I have been looking for you all day.
Socrates- Hello Meno, may I ask you why?
Meno- Ah! BecauseI have been dying to get your inference on a question that has been running…