Plato, Protagoras, ed. John Burnet, 336

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

[336]

ΣΩ.

νῦν δʼ ἐστὶν ὥσπερ ἂν εἰ δέοιό μου Κρίσωνι τῷ Ἱμεραίῳ δρομεῖ ἀκμάζοντι ἕπεσθαι, ἢ τῶν δολιχοδρόμων τῳ ἢ τῶν ἡμεροδρόμων διαθεῖν τε καὶ ἕπεσθαι, 336 336a εἴποιμι ἄν σοι ὅτι πολὺ σοῦ μᾶλλον ἐγὼ ἐμαυτοῦ δέομαι θέουσιν τούτοις ἀκολουθεῖν, ἀλλʼ οὐ γὰρ δύναμαι, ἀλλʼ εἴ τι δέῃ θεάσασθαι ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ ἐμέ τε καὶ Κρίσωνα θέοντας, τούτου δέου συγκαθεῖναι· ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ οὐ δύναμαι ταχὺ θεῖν, οὗτος δὲ δύναται βραδέως. εἰ οὖν ἐπιθυμεῖς ἐμοῦ καὶ Πρωταγόρου ἀκούειν, τούτου δέου, ὥσπερ τὸ πρῶτόν μοι ἀπεκρίνατο διὰ βραχέων τε καὶ αὐτὰ τὰ ἐρωτώμενα, οὕτω καὶ νῦν ἀποκρίνεσθαι· 336b εἰ δὲ μή, τίς ὁ τρόπος ἔσται τῶν διαλόγων; χωρὶς γὰρ ἔγωγʼ ᾤμην εἶναι τὸ συνεῖναί τε ἀλλήλοις διαλεγομένους καὶ τὸ δημηγορεῖν.
ἀλλʼ—ὁρᾷς; —ἔφη, ὦ Σώκρατες, δίκαια δοκεῖ λέγειν Πρωταγόρας ἀξιῶν αὑτῷ τε ἐξεῖναι διαλέγεσθαι ὅπως βούλεται, καὶ σὺ ὅπως ἂν αὖ σὺ βούλῃ.
ὑπολαβὼν οὖν ὁ Ἀλκιβιάδης, οὐ καλῶς λέγεις, ἔφη, ὦ Καλλία· Σωκράτης μὲν γὰρ ὅδε ὁμολογεῖ μὴ μετεῖναί οἱ μακρολογίας καὶ παραχωρεῖ Πρωταγόρᾳ, τοῦ δὲ διαλέγεσθαι 336c οἷός τʼ εἶναι καὶ ἐπίστασθαι λόγον τε δοῦναι καὶ δέξασθαι θαυμάζοιμʼ ἂν εἴ τῳ ἀνθρώπων παραχωρεῖ. εἰ μὲν οὖν καὶ Πρωταγόρας ὁμολογεῖ φαυλότερος εἶναι Σωκράτους διαλεχθῆναι, ἐξαρκεῖ Σωκράτει· εἰ δὲ ἀντιποιεῖται, διαλεγέσθω ἐρωτῶν τε καὶ ἀποκρινόμενος, μὴ ἐφʼ ἑκάστῃ ἐρωτήσει μακρὸν λόγον ἀποτείνων, ἐκκρούων τοὺς λόγους καὶ οὐκ ἐθέλων 336d διδόναι λόγον, ἀλλʼ ἀπομηκύνων ἕως ἂν ἐπιλάθωνται περὶ ὅτου τὸ ἐρώτημα ἦν οἱ πολλοὶ τῶν ἀκουόντων· ἐπεὶ Σωκράτη γε ἐγὼ ἐγγυῶμαι μὴ ἐπιλήσεσθαι, οὐχ ὅτι παίζει καί φησιν ἐπιλήσμων εἶναι. ἐμοὶ μὲν οὖν δοκεῖ ἐπιεικέστερα Σωκράτης λέγειν· χρὴ γὰρ ἕκαστον τὴν ἑαυτοῦ γνώμην ἀποφαίνεσθαι.
μετὰ δὲ τὸν Ἀλκιβιάδην, ὡς ἐγᾦμαι, Κριτίας ἦν ὁ εἰπών· ὦ Πρόδικε καὶ Ἱππία, Καλλίας μὲν δοκεῖ μοι μάλα πρὸς 336e Πρωταγόρου εἶναι, Ἀλκιβιάδης δὲ ἀεὶ φιλόνικός ἐστι πρὸς ὃ ἂν ὁρμήσῃ· ἡμᾶς δὲ οὐδὲν δεῖ συμφιλονικεῖν οὔτε Σωκράτει οὔτε Πρωταγόρᾳ, ἀλλὰ κοινῇ ἀμφοτέρων δεῖσθαι μὴ μεταξὺ διαλῦσαι τὴν συνουσίαν.

Protagoras. Plato. ed. John Burnet. Oxford. 1903.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The Annenberg CPB/Project.

Current edition Perseus

Πρωταγόρας (Greek) (Platonis Opera, Tomus III: Tetralogia V-VII. Burnet, John, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1903.)

Translations (1)

Protagoras Perseus (Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 2. Lamb, W.R.M., translator. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1924 (printing).) — 336 focus

Soc.

but I am afraid it is as though you asked me to keep pace with Criso the runner of Himera in his prime, or to keep up in a match with one of the long-distance¹ or day-course² racers, and I could only tell you that 336a I wish that of myself, without your asking, I could keep pace with such runners, but of course I cannot. If you want to have the spectacle of Criso and me running together, you must ask him to adapt his pace; for whereas I cannot run fast, he can run slowly. So if you desire to hear Protagoras and me, ask him to resume the method of answering which he used at first—in short sentences and keeping to the point raised. Otherwise 336b what is to be our mode of discussion? For I thought that to hold a joint discussion and to make a harangue were two distinct things.
Ah, but you see, Socrates, he said, Protagoras thinks it only fair to claim that he be allowed to discuss in his chosen style, in return for your claim that it should be in yours.
At this Alcibiades intervened, saying: You do not state it quite philosophically, Callias,³ for Socrates here confesses he is no hand at long discourses, and yields therein to Protagoras; 336c but I should be surprised if he yields to any man in ability to argue, or in understanding the interchange of reason. Now if Protagoras confesses himself inferior to Socrates in argumentation, Socrates has no more to ask: but if he challenges him, let him discuss by question and answer; not spinning out a lecture on each question—beating off the arguments, refusing to give a reason, and so dilating 336d until most of his hearers have forgotten the point at issue. For Socrates, I warrant you, will not forget, despite his jesting way of calling himself forgetful. Now I think Socrates’ proposal is the more equitable—for each of us should declare his personal opinion.
After Alcibiades, the next, I believe, to speak was Critias: Prodicus and Hippias, he said, it seems to me that Callias is all for supporting Protagoras, while Alcibiades is always for a contest 336e in anything he takes up. It is not for us to contend on either side for Socrates or for Protagoras, but jointly to request them both not to break off 337a our conference unconcluded.

Commentary

Commentary on Plato, Protagoras (Plato. Platonis Protagoras. Adam, James; Adam, Adela Marion, editors. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1921.) focus

συγκαθεῖναι : intransitive as in Rep. VIII. 563A οἱ δὲ γέροντες ξυγκαθιέντες τοῖς νέοις: so παρέχω for παρέχω ἐμαυτόν below, 348A ἕτοιμός εἰμί σοι παρέχειν ἀποκρινόμενος : cf. also ἐκεῖνοί τε ἀπέκρυψαν (sc. ἑαυτούς ) Thuc. V. 65. 5. The omission of the reflexive pronoun is a well-recognised way of making transitive verbs into intransitive.

χωρίς . Soph. O.C. 808 χωρὶς τό τ’ εἰπεῖν πολλὰ καὶ τὰ καίρια . ‘In talibus locis δίχα, χωρίς etc. non, ut vulgo, seiunctionem et separationem, sed diversitatem et oppositionem significant’ (Kroschel). The usage is frequent in Plato. δημηγορεῖν is contionari —platform oratory.

ὁρᾷς . Almost like our colloquial ‘don't you know’ (when used parenthetically and without interrogative force): the ἀλλά belongs in strict logic to δίκαια δοκεῖ λέγειν . Heindorf quotes parallels from Aristophanes, e.g. Peace, 330-1 οὐκἂν ὀρχησαίμεθ’, εἴπερ ὠφελήσαιμέν τί σε. ἀλλ’ ὁρᾶτ’, οὔπω πέπαυσθε . Where ὁρᾷς or ὁρᾶτε stand in this way as the first word of a sentence, editors generally regard the usage as interrogative, e.g. Eur. Orest. 581 ὁρᾷς; Ὀδυσσέως ἄλοχον οὐ κατέκτανε .

καὶ σύ . So the original hand in T: B has καί σοι . If we read καὶ σοί , the construction is ἀξιῶν αὑτῷ τε ἐξεῖναι διαλέγεσθαι ὅπως βούλεται καὶ σοὶ ἐξεῖναι κτλ. , but Protagoras has nowhere asked that Socrates should be permitted to converse as he likes: quite the contrary. With σύ the construction is καὶ σὺ δίκαια δοκεῖς λέγειν ἀξιῶν διαλέγεσθαι ὅπως ἂν κτλ. , i.e. and your demand that Protagoras should converse as you wish likewise seems fair. Protagoras asked to be allowed to use his own style in 335A Socrates requested that Protagoras should converse as Socrates wished in 334D 335C 335E Alcibiades' defence of Socrates in the next chapter seems also to imply the reading σύ here. The only objection to this view lies in the position of τε after αὑτῷ : we should expect it to follow Πρωταγόρας. τε is however frequently misplaced (see above on 316D . σοί can only be retained if we either (1) take καὶ σοί as altogether independent of ἀξιῶν — which is barely possible, or (2) regard Plato as guilty of inaccurate writing.

λόγον τε δοῦναι καὶ δέξασθαι . We should expect τε to follow δοῦναι : see on 316D

ἐκκρούων . ‘Vox ducta a pugilatu, cuius proprium κρούειν de rep. IV. p. 422B οὐδ’ εἰ ἐξείη—ὑποφεύγοντι ( τῷ πύκτῃ ) τὸν πρότερον αἰεὶ προσφερόμενον ἀναστρέφοντα κρούειν etc.’ Heindorf. The simple verb is used metaphorically in Theaet. 154E of beating arguments with arguments, ἤδη ἂν—συνελθόντες σοφιστικῶς εἰς μάχην τοιαύτην ἀλλήλων τοὺς λόγους τοῖς λόγοις ἐκρούομεν , and the compound in Phaedr. 228E ἐκκέκρουκάς με ἐλπίδος. Here the idea is of beating off, staving off by force, i.e. here by μακρηγορία : ἐκκρούειν δίκην is used by Demosthenes of staving off a trial by συκοφαντία and the like.

οὐχ ὅτι : ‘not but what’. The idiom (as if οὐ λέγω ὅτι , omitto quod ) is tolerably common in Plato, e.g. Gorg. 450E οὐχ ὅτι τῷ ῥήματι οὕτως εἶπες, Theaet. 157B τὸ δ’ εἶναι πανταχόθεν ἐξαιρετέον, οὐχ ὅτι ἡμεῖς—ἠναγκάσμεθα—χρῆσθαι αὐτῷ.

χρὴ γὰρ κτλ. : said apologetically.

φιλόνικος . The MSS. read φιλόνεικος and presently συμφιλονεικεῖν . It is however clear that the word comes from φιλο‐ and νίκη , not from φιλο‐ and νεῖκος (in which case the form would be φιλονεικής : compare φιλοκερδής, φιλοκυδής , but φιλότιμος, φιλόδοξος, φιλόθηρος and the like). Schanz has found only two traces of the original spelling with iota in Plato's MSS. (A, B, T): viz. in Laws, XI. 935B , where Paris A has ἀριστείων πέρι φιλονικήσῃ , and Alcib. I, 122C, where φιλονικίαν appears as a correction for φιλονεικίαν in T. We might in consequence be tempted to suppose that Plato himself wrote φιλόνεικος through the influence of a false etymology, were it not that the derivation from νίκη alone suits the meaning, and that in more than one passage he shows himself conscious of the connection of the word with νίκη , notably in Rep. IX. 586C τί δέ; περὶ τὸ θυμοειδὲς οὐχ ἕτερα τοιαῦτα ἀνάγκη γίγνεσθαι, ὃς ἂν αὐτὸ τοῦτο διαπράττηται ἢ φθόνῳ διὰ φιλοτιμίαν ἢ βίᾳ διὰ φιλονικίαν( φιλονεικίαν Α ) ἢ θυμῷ διὰ δυσκολίαν, ρλησμονὴν τιμῆς τε καὶ νίκης καὶ θυμοῦ διώκων ἄνευ λογισμοῦ τε καὶ νοῦ ; Cf. also ibid. 581A-B. The orthography of this word is an old subject of dispute (see Stallbaum on Rep. VIII. 545A ); Schanz (Preface to vol. VI, p. X) declares himself, after a full discussion, for φιλόνικος .

Plato Protagoras 336

ed. John Burnet

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

ΣΩ.

Current edition Perseus

Soc.

Commentary

Stable identifiers