Meno - Plato

'Meno' is a typical dialogue between a man named Meno and Socrates.  The conversation gets rolling when Meno asks:

"Can you tell me, Socrates, whether virtue is acquired by teaching or by practice; or if neither teaching nor by practice, then whether it comes to man by nature, or in what other way?"

Socrates, as is his wont, cannot give a straight answer.

"...I confess with shame that I know literally nothing about virtue; and when I do not know the 'quid' of anything how can I know the 'quale'?"

Thus begins the Socratic dialogue wherein the seek the meaning of virtue so that they can circle back to the original question of how it is acquired.  (The smartass in me might have given Socrates some purposefully bad answer, 'Virtue is the quality by which one judges a horse!', just to force him into a straight answer.  We're probably better off that Plato didn't write 'Meno' in that way.)
Meno tries to define virtue. He speaks of administering the state, benefiting himself and injuring enemies and taking care not to suffer personal harm.  He lists a woman's duties as keeping house and obeying her husband.  Then he notes that different ages and conditions have different virtues.  "Virtue is relative to the actions and ages of each of us in all that we do. The same may be said of vice."
Socrates notes that the definition is 'a swarm' and not very precise and asks for some common element.  Meno finds this difficult but Socrates keeps at it.  He notes that both men and women must have temperance and justice.  Meno agrees that justice is virtue.  The verbal jousting goes on at some length.  Meno comes around to suggesting that 'Virtue is the desire of things honourable and the power of attaining them."  Socrates counters that everyone really thinks of themselves as honourable; is everyone virtuous?  No, of course they're not.
Eventually they get back to the main question. Socrates points out that virtuous men don't always have virtuous children.  If their children could be taught virtue, like they can be taught things like horse-riding, then these virtuous men would certainly have done a better job teaching them.  He concludes that the absence of teachers suggests that virtue cannot be taught.  There is a pretty obvious flaw in that reasoning.

I'm a fan of the Socratic method but there is a fine line between an honest search for answers and using verbal cleverness to make others feel foolish.  I have trouble reading Plato/Socrates as being on the right side of that line.