Dan Devereux

ARISTOTLE thought his predecessors in general, and Plato in particular, made a serious mistake in failing to mark the boundaries separating the different sciences and branches of philosophical inquiry. All of them failed to grasp the fundamental distinction between practical and theoretical knowledge. Ethics and politics, the prime examples of practical knowledge, differ from such theoretical sciences as metaphysics and physics not only in their aims but in their methods and subject matter as well. Indeed, Aristotle thinks the differences are such that we cannot regard practical and theoretical knowledge as two species of a single genus, for there is no common definition of knowledge which applies to both.

Plato's "laches" is an investigation into the nature of courage with the intention of demonstrating the difficulty of singling out one virtue, namely courage, and defining it separately from the other cardinal virtues such as bravery, wisdom, justice, temperance, and piety. As the dialogue proceeds it becomes evident that socrates not only relates courage with the battlefield, but also with other spheres of life. Of special interest is his reference of being courageous regarding desires and pleasures where an overlap of virtues is anticipated. This extension of the range of manifestations of courage indicates that his conception of courage transcends the traditional one in which he hints at a new sort of unity of courage and temperance, and on the other of courage and justice. One of plato's main aims in writing this dialogue was to mark out the intellectual limits of the two generals' positions, especially that of nicias, whose philosophical position could appear to be deceptively similar to the socratic one which he did not fully understand.

The paper offers an interpretation of Aristotle's discussion of the active and contemplative lives in the Nicomachean Ethics. In the first section I outline an interpretation recently set out by John Cooper in his book Reason and Human Good in Aristotle. Through criticism of Cooper's interpretation I attempt to develop my own. In the second section I argue that the active life is a life devoted to practical activity and does not include philosophical contemplation as one of its constituents. I then take issue with Cooper's claim that the contemplative life rules out the possession of moral virtue, and try to show that Aristotle's conception of this life need not be regarded as unreasonably narrow. Finally, I note several respects in which the Nicomachean discussion represents a philosophical advance over the earlier Eudemian Ethics.

Plato's dialogues form the basis of Socratic Ethics and Moral Psychology. Among Plato's thirty-five dialogues there is a group of eleven or twelve that share certain features setting them apart from the rest. In these dialogues, which are considerably shorter than the others, Socrates always has the role of questioner. The questions he discusses are mostly about specific virtues and how they are related to each other: for example, piety is discussed in the Euthyphro, courage in the Laches, temperance in the Charmides, and justice and temperance in the Gorgias. A major theme of Socratic dialogues is Socrates' opposition to the “sophists,” a varied lot with different interests and claims to fame who shared certain characteristics that justified their common designation. Socrates debates the issue, if virtue is an art or skill that involves knowing what is truly good and evil, the virtuous person should be able to “size up” a situation and determine, as to what sort of action is called for to resolve a particular situation.

This study of Plato’s hypothetical method is a more than welcome addition to the literature on philosophical method in Plato’s middle dialogues. Benson’s study is remarkable for unusual care and thoroughness in the development of its arguments, and the fairness of its treatment of rival interpretations. One can safely predict that future work on the topic will have to come to grips with his arguments and original interpretations.Benson begins with a careful analysis of the brief descriptions of the method in Meno and Phaedo, then examines its application there and in relevant Republic passages. Benson finds the method a way of conducting what he calls ‘de novo inquiry’ aimed at acquiring knowledge. In Meno the..