Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Response to the Review Symposium on Reading Plato’s Dialogues to Enhance Learning and Inquiry: Exploring Socrates’ Use of Protreptic for Student Engagement

  • Published:
Studies in Philosophy and Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. Ahlstrom-Vij (2013, 26–27) discusses some of the relevant research. And see Ballantyne 2019.

  2. See Hook et al. 2017; Krumrei-Mancuso 2017; Wright et al. 2017, 7–8. See also Hannon 2020 for reason to think that deliberation in democracies (“the exchange of reasons for preferring certain outcomes or believing certain facts”; 593) fosters empathetic understanding which is a moral good.

  3. The view emerges when we read Phaedo 68c-69d with Republic 485a-487a.

  4. For references and a concise summary, see Gonzalez 2000, 259 − 63.

  5. Jonas talks as if virtue is justice, courage, and the like, and I will follow suit for simplicity. I realize that virtue might be, roughly, just the equipment with which one flourishes (whatever that equipment is—justice, courage, and so forth, or something else instead), in which case, perhaps, everyone always values virtue.

  6. You can do this in addition to protrepticizing them or even just in protrepticizing them. In protrepticizing them, for example, you might do it if they think that virtue is a sham and that attaining power is all that matters, caseclosed, such that all that is necessary to determine how to live well is to calculate the surest means of attaining it. You might argue forcefully to the contrary just so they will hear out the alternative views.

  7. See Zagzebski 2017, 110 ff. for reason to think a person is, at most, only partly virtuous unless they have reliable success in reaching virtuous ends and that this is the case regardless of how hard it is to reach them. ‘Reliable success’ is Zagzebski’s phrase. She implies, incidentally, that Socrates is at least partly virtuous; see especially 10.

References

  • Ahlstrom-Vij, Kristoffer. 2013. Epistemic Paternalism: A Defence. London: Palgrave.

  • Ballantyne, Nathan. 2019. Knowing Our Limits. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Gonzalez, Francisco J. 2000. “Is There an Art of Living?” Salmagundi 126/127: 253 − 75.

  • Hannon, Michael. 2020. “Empathetic Understanding and Deliberative Democracy.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 101, no. 3: 591–611.

  • Hook, Joshua N., Jennifer E. Farrell, Kathryn A. Johnson, Daryl R. Van Tongeren, Don E. David, and Jamie D. Aten. 2017. “Intellectual Humility and Religious Tolerance.” Journal of Positive Psychology 12, no. 1: 29–35.

  • Jonas, Mark E. and Yoshiaki Nakazawa. 2020. A Platonic Theory of Moral Education: Cultivating Virtue in Contemporary Democratic Classrooms. New York: Routledge.

  • Krumrei-Mancuso, Elizabeth J. 2017. “Intellectual Humility and Prosocial Values: Direct and Mediated Effects.” Journal of Positive Psychology 12, no. 1: 13–28.

  • Marshall, Mason. 2021. Reading Plato’s Dialogues to Enhance Learning and Inquiry: Exploring Socrates’ Use of Protreptic for Student Engagement. New York: Routledge.

  • Wright, Jennifer Cole, Thomas Nadelhoffer, Tyler Perini, Amy Langville, Matthew Echos, and Kelley Venezia. 2017. “The Psychological Significance of Humility.” Journal of Positive Psychology 12, no. 1: 3–12.

  • Zagzebski, Linda Trinkhaus. 2017. Exemplarist Moral Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pepperdine University, Malibu, CA, USA

    Mason Marshall

Authors
  1. Mason Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mason Marshall.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marshall, M. Response to the Review Symposium on Reading Plato’s Dialogues to Enhance Learning and Inquiry: Exploring Socrates’ Use of Protreptic for Student Engagement. Stud Philos Educ 41, 711–717 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-022-09848-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-022-09848-2

Search

Navigation