To possess one of his works which is let loose does not count for much in value; it will not stay with you any more than a runaway slave: but when fastened up it is worth a great deal, for his productions are very fine things And to what am I referring in all this? To true opinion. For these, so long as they stay with us, are a fine possession, 98a and effect all that is good; but they do not care to stay for long, and run away out of the human soul, and thus are of no great value until one makes them fast with causal reasoning. And this process, friend Meno, is recollection, as in our previous talk we have agreed. But when once they are fastened, in the first place they turn into knowledge, and in the second, are abiding. And this is why knowledge is more prized than right opinion: the one transcends the other by its trammels.

Upon my word, Socrates, it seems to be very much as you say.

And indeed I too speak as one who does not know but only conjectures: yet that there is a difference between right opinion and knowledge is not at all a conjecture with me but something I would particularly assert that I knew: there are not many things of which I would say that, but this one, at any rate, I will include among those that I know.

Yes, and you are right, Socrates, in so saying.

Well, then, am I not right also in saying that true opinion leading the way renders the effect of each action as good as knowledge does?

There again, Socrates, I think you speak the truth.

So that right opinion will be no whit inferior to knowledge in worth or usefulness as regards our actions, nor will the man who has right opinion be inferior to him who has knowledge.

That is so.

And you know that the good man has been admitted by us to be useful.

Yes.

Since then it is not only because of knowledge that men will be good and useful to their country, where such men are to be found, but also on account of right opinion; and since neither of these two things—knowledge 98d and true opinion—is a natural property of mankind, being acquired—or do you think that either of them is natural?

Not I.

Then if they are not natural, good people cannot be good by nature either.

Of course not.

And since they are not an effect of nature, we next considered whether virtue can be taught.

Yes.

And we thought it teachable if virtue is wisdom?

Yes.

And if teachable, it must be wisdom?

Certainly.

And if there were teachers, it could be taught, 98e but if there were none, it could not?

Quite so.

But surely we acknowledged that it had no teachers?

That is true.

Then we acknowledged it neither was taught nor was wisdom?

Certainly.

But yet we admitted it was a good?

Yes.

And that which guides rightly is useful and good?

Certainly.

And that there are only two things— 99a true opinion and knowledge—that guide rightly and a man guides rightly if he have these; for things that come about by chance do not occur through human guidance; but where a man is a guide to what is right we find these two things—true opinion and knowledge.

I agree.

Well now, since virtue is not taught, we no longer take it to be knowledge?

Apparently not.

So of two good and useful things one has been rejected: knowledge cannot be our guide in political conduct.

I think not.

Therefore it was not by any wisdom, nor because they were wise, that the sort of men we spoke of controlled their states—Themistocles and the rest of them, to whom our friend Anytus was referring a moment ago. For this reason it was that they were unable to make others like unto themselves—because their qualities were not an effect of knowledge.

The case is probably as you say, Socrates.

And if not by knowledge, as the only alternative it must have been by good opinion. 99c This is the means which statesmen employ for their direction of states, and they have nothing more to do with wisdom than soothsayers and diviners; for these people utter many a true thing when inspired, but have no knowledge of anything they say.

I daresay that is so.

And may we, Meno, rightly call those men divine who, having no understanding, yet succeed in many a great deed and word?

Certainly.

Then we shall be right in calling those divine of whom 99d we spoke just now as soothsayers and prophets and all of the poetic turn; and especially we can say of the statesmen that they are divine and enraptured, as being inspired and possessed of God when they succeed in speaking many great things, while knowing nought of what they say.

Certainly.

And the women too, I presume, Meno, call good men divine; and the Spartans, when they eulogize a good man, say—“He is a divine person.”

And to all appearance, Socrates, they are right; though perhaps our friend Anytus may be annoyed at your statement.

For my part, I care not. As for him, Meno, we will converse with him some other time. At the moment, if through all this discussion our queries and statements have been correct, virtue is found to be neither natural nor taught, but is imparted to us by a divine dispensation without understanding in those who receive it, 100a unless there should be somebody among the statesmen capable of making a statesman of another. And if there should be any such, he might fairly be said to be among the living what Homer says Teiresias was among the dead—He alone has comprehension; the rest are flitting shades. ¹ In the same way he on earth, in respect of virtue, will be a real substance among shadows.

I think you put it excellently, Socrates.

Then the result of our reasoning, Meno, is found to be that virtue comes to us by a divine dispensation, when it does come. But the certainty of this we shall only know when, before asking in what way virtue comes to mankind, we set about inquiring what virtue is, in and by itself. It is time now for me to go my way, but do you persuade our friend Anytus of that whereof you are now yourself persuaded, so as 100c to put him in a gentler mood; for if you can persuade him, you will do a good turn to the people of Athens also.