To be tamed one would have to have a higher order animal delineating what it is to be tame and exercising authority/breeding/feeding/care.... so it is possible that we are tame and our master is the omnipresent superorganism-culture/society
This does not really answer, is man a tame animal, it solves for you of the question asking, is someone (not necessarily man) born wild?
And maybe goes onto asert/answer of the unasked question, what is it that tames a person? (not necessarily man).
You are giving to example od example.
You have not answered the question, even if what you say is correct.
I have changed my mind it doesn't solve 'is anyone born wild?'
All it does it asert there is transformation, it has little to do with wild or tame.
Master and servant one would think are good examples for answering or solving this question, but may not be as they are established rolls, they are still both wild and tame for the transformation they give and or recieve. They are still not defined as tame or wild? As both could be used to transform one into tame man or transform one into wild man. Just as they are the transformee. The servant could tame a master as well as make wild a master as master could do the same for servant. But i am putting words or intentions into your supposition that may not be there or need to be, but this is where it comes to answering a Platonic question, due process.
(I am still not sure the question has anything to do with wildness)
Elabourate so we can see if it fits.
To be availed tamed, one may therefore be wild?
To be availed tamed, one may not therefore be wild?
But this question does not ask about the process of taming.
Is man a tame animal?
Must we ask about process in order to answer it?
This process does in some extent actually say we are not tame, and that it needs to be learned (your supposition) taught.
But it goes onto progression rather than what the question is asking which is stationary.
Is man a tame animal?
Not, 'is man trainable?'.
Unless you are actually answering the question 'No, man is not a tame animal'?
Which although i have just put words into your supposition i am not sure you are saying this.
If it helps break the question down for us both to see how you do this.
I will try later perhaps to do so also.
By the way Thanks for your reply
---------- Post added 11-22-2009 at 01:34 AM ----------
Just curious as to what you are addressing in Plato? Could you please refer us to the dialogue and to where we can find this idea so we can discuss it in further depth?
Sorry for not being more clear about this and will go away now and try and find what and where it was that Plato placed and asked this question of me.
I think it was in Meno, i will find it and quote it to you.
I have come to this area because i wanted to do a little Platonic process with the question rather than just simply answering it, but the intention is still there that i want it answered. If indeed it can be to my full satisfaction.
But it has more to do with the question and answering it than Platonic view, than from the specific piece, I dont want the question to get waylayed by the magnitude of something like Meno wholeness even if a little process from this is welcome, i just want the answer to solving the question and then answering it, i dont want History i dont want circumstance i want a bit of process and an answer.
Is this agreeable? Is this proper?
There are many questions that Plato Socrates asks that we never get round to answering, like in previous Euthyphro 'What is pious and impious?'
No one answered this for me, so I am trying to make it more about the question even if i am letting on who the author is.
Thanks and will have it for you by tomorrow hopefully.
edit; and as i am almost sure it comes from Meno i am not sure i want it to turn into an anamnesis question although this may be harder to omit than to include.