Volume 4

The works of Plato. A new and literal version, chiefly from the text of Stallbaum ... By Henry Cary [vol. II, Henry Davis, vols. III-VI, George Burges] / [Plato].

  • Plato
Date:
1848-1854
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The works of Plato. A new and literal version, chiefly from the text of Stallbaum ... By Henry Cary [vol. II, Henry Davis, vols. III-VI, George Burges] / [Plato]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    15/570 (page 7)
    to the reasoning, that makes things the most opposite to be one ? And I fear that we shall find some pleasures to be quite opposite to others. [7.] Prot Perhaps so. But how will that injure my argu¬ ment ? Soc. Because, we will say, you call things, dissimilar in themselves, by another name.^*^ For you call all pleasant things good. Now that pleasant things are not pleasant, no one dis¬ putes. But though the most of them are evil, and (some)^^ good, as we assert, yet all of them you call good, although confessing them to be dissimilar, when one compels you by reasoning (to do so). By what name then do you call that, which, existing in evil pleasures equally with good, (causes) ^ all to be a good ? [8.] Prot. How say you, Socrates? Think you that any person, after having laid down that pleasure is the good, will agree with you ? or will bear with you, while asserting that ^^some pleasures are good, but others evil?^^ Soc. But you will at least acknowledge that pleasures are unlike to one another, and some even opposite to others ? Prot. By no means, as far as they are pleasures. Soc. We are now brought back again to the same position, Protarchus. We will say then that a pleasure does not differ 20—20 Greek is On TcporrayopevHQ avra dvofxoia ovra irkpcp (pr](yop,ev drop, an : where, since nobody has been able to elicit a satisfac¬ tory sense, various alterations have been suggested by De Grou, Hein- dorf, and Baumgarten Crusius; which, says Stalb., are unnecessary, if we take, with Heindorf on Lysid. p. 45, krkpip ovopan in the sense of “ another, i. e. not its own, name.” But as srepog is never found in that sense, we must still have recourse to conjecture. For the train of ideas ap¬ pears to lead to On Trpocrayopeveig ravra rd ovr dvopoi, d erspcp (pijaopev ovopan, “ Because you call things really unlike by the same name, which we should call by another.” Opportunely then has one MS. ovr dvopoia. Stalbaum, in ed. 2, adopts the interpretation of Heindorf, but without be¬ ing able to support it by a single similar passage. Ficinus has “bona quaedam,” as if his MS. read Kai dyaOd nva, what the sense requires, in lieu of Kal dyaOd de—Compare § 10, Kai dvopoiai Tiveg avrwv. 22 Stalbaum, in ed. 2, has laboured hard to support the construction. For he did not perceive that Ospevov had probably dropt out between dyaObv and eivai, as is evident from Q'epevov rjdovTjv elvai rdyaObv in the very next speech of Protarchus. 23—23 This assertion is however made in Gorg. p. 499, C. =§ 118, quoted by Stalb. after Heind.