1.39. Further, it is alleged that he said to one of his slaves, “I would have given you a flogging, had I not been in a passion.” Being mounted on horseback, he quickly got down again, declaring that he was afraid he would be infected with horse-pride. He advised those who got drunk to view themselves in a mirror; for they would then abandon the habit which so disfigured them. To drink to excess was nowhere becoming, he used to say, save at the feasts of the god who was the giver of wine. He also disapproved of over-sleeping. At any rate in the Laws he declares that “no one when asleep is good for anything.”
1.39. ἀλλὰ καὶ πρός τινα τῶν παίδων, μεμαστίγωσο ἄν, εἶπεν, εἰ μὴ ὠργιζόμην. ἐφʼ ἵππου καθίσας εὐθέως κατέβη φήσας εὐλαβεῖσθαι μὴ ἱπποτυφίᾳ ληφθῇ. τοῖς μεθύουσι συνεβούλευε κατοπτρίζεσθαι· ἀποστήσεσθαι γὰρ τῆς τοιαύτης ἀσχημοσύνης. πίνειν δʼ εἰς μέθην οὐδαμοῦ πρέπον ἔλεγε πλὴν ἐν ταῖς ἑορταῖς τοῦ καὶ τὸν οἶνον δόντος θεοῦ. καὶ τὸ πολλὰ δὲ καθεύδειν ἀπήρεσκεν αὐτῷ. ἐν γοῦν τοῖς Νόμοις φησί· κοιμώμενος οὐδεὶς οὐδενὸς ἄξιος· εἶναί τε ἥδιον τῶν ἀκουσμάτων τὴν ἀλήθειαν· οἱ δὲ τὸ λέγειν τἀληθῆ. καὶ περὶ ἀληθεία δʼ ἐν τοῖς Νόμοις φησὶν οὕτως·
1.40. He also said that the truth is the pleasantest of sounds. Another version of this saying is that the pleasantest of all things is to speak the truth. Again, of truth he speaks thus in the Laws: “Truth, O stranger, is a fair and durable thing. But it is a thing of which it is hard to persuade men.” His wish always was to leave a memorial of himself behind, either in the hearts of his friends or in his books. He was himself fond of seclusion according to some authorities. His death, the circumstances of which have already been related, took place in the thirteenth year of the reign of King Philip, as stated by Favorinus in the third book of his Memorabilia, and according to Theopompus honours were paid to him at his death by Philip. But Myronianus in his Parallels says that Philo mentions some proverbs that were in circulation about Plato’s lice, implying that this was the mode of his death.
1.40. καλὸν μὲν ἡ ἀλήθεια, ὦ ξένε, καὶ μόνιμον· ἔοικε μὴν οὐ ῥᾴδιον 〈εἶναι〉 πείθειν. ἀλλὰ καὶ ἠξίου μνημόσυνον αὑτοῦ λείπεσθαι ἢ ἐν φίλοις ἢ ἐν βιβλίοις· ἐξετόπιζε καὶ αὐτὸς τὰ πλεῖστα, καθά τινες φασί. Καὶ ἐτελεύτα μὲν ὃν εἴπομεν τρόπον Φιλίππου βασιλεύοντος ἔτος τρισκαιδέκατον, καθὰ καὶ Φαβωρῖνός φησιν Ἀπομνημονευμάτων τρίτῳ. ὑφʼ οὗ καὶ ἐπιτιμηθῆναί φησιν αὐτὸν Θεόπομπος. Μυρωνιανὸς δʼ ἐν Ὁμοίοις φησὶ Φίλωνα παροιμίας μνημονεύειν περὶ τῶν Πλάτωνος φθειρῶν, ὡς οὕτως αὐτοῦ τελευτήσαντος.
1.41. He was buried in the Academy, where he spent the greatest part of his life in philosophical study. And hence the school which he founded was called the Academic school. And all the students there joined in the funeral procession. The terms of his will were as follows: “These things have been left and devised by Plato: the estate in Iphistiadae, bounded on the north by the road from the temple at Cephisia, on the south by the temple of Heracles in Iphistiadae, on the east by the property of Archestratus of Phrearrhi, on the west by that of Philippus of Chollidae: this it shall be unlawful for anyone to sell or alienate, but it shall be the property of the boy Adeimantus to all intents and purposes:”
1.41. καὶ ἐτάφη ἐν τῇ Ἀκαδημείᾳ, ἔνθα τὸν πλεῖστον χρόνον διετέλεσε φιλοσοφῶν. ὅθεν καὶ Ἀκαδημαϊκὴ προσηγορεύθη ἡ ἀπʼ αὐτοῦ αἵρεσις. καὶ παρεπέμφθη πανδημεὶ πρὸς τῶν αὐτόθι διαθέμενος τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον· “Τάδε κατέλιπε Πλάτων καὶ διέθετο· τὸ ἐν Ἰφιστιαδῶν χωρίον, ᾧ γείτων βορρᾶθεν ἡ ὁδὸς ἡ ἐκ τοῦ Κηφισιᾶσιν ἱεροῦ, νοτόθεν τὸ Ἡράκλειον τὸ ἐν Ἰφιστιαδῶν, πρὸς ἡλίου δὲ ἀνιόντος Ἀρχέστρατος Φρεάρριος, πρὸς ἡλίου δὲ δυομένου Φίλιππος Χολλείδης· καὶ μὴ ἐξέστω τοῦτο μηδενὶ μήτε ἀποδόσθαι μήτε ἀλλάξασθαι, ἀλλʼ ἔστω Ἀδειμάντου τοῦ παιδίου εἰς τὸ δυνατόν·
1.42. “the estate in Eiresidae which I bought of Callimachus, bounded on the north by the property of Eurymedon of Myrrhinus, on the south by the property of Demostratus of Xypete, on the east by that of Eurymedon of Myrrhinus, and on the west by the Cephisus; three minae of silver; a silver vessel weighing 165 drachmas; a cup weighing 45 drachmas; a gold signet-ring and earring together weighing four drachmas and three obols. Euclides the lapidary owes me three minae. I enfranchise Artemis. I leave four household servants, Tychon, Bictas, Apollonides and Dionysius.”
1.42. καὶ τὸ ἐν Εἰρεσιδῶν χωρίον, ὃ παρὰ Καλλιμάχου ἐπριάμην, ᾧ γείτων βορρᾶθεν Εὐρυμέδων Μυρρινούσιος, νοτόθεν δὲ Δημόστρατος Ξυπεταιών, πρὸς ἡλίου ἀνιόντος Εὐρυμέδων Μυρρινούσιος, πρὸς ἡλίου δυομένου Κηφισός. ἀργυρίου μνᾶς τρεῖς. φιάλην ἀργυρᾶν ἕλκουσαν ρξεʼ, κυμβίον ἄγον μεʼ, δακτύλιον χρυσοῦν καὶ ἐνώτιον χρυσοῦν ἄγοντα συνάμφω δʼ δραχμάς, ὀβολοὺς γʼ. Εὐκλείδης ὁ λιθοτόμος ὀφείλει μοι τρεῖς μνᾶς. Ἄρτεμιν ἀφίημι ἐλευθέραν. οἰκέτας καταλείπω Τύχωνα Βίκταν Ἀπολλωνίδην Διονύσιον.
1.43. “Household furniture, as set down in the inventory of which Demetrius has the duplicate. I owe no one anything. My executors are Leosthenes, Speusippus, Demetrius, Hegias, Eurymedon, Callimachus and Thrasippus.” Such were the terms of his will. The following epitaphs were inscribed upon his tomb: “Here lies the god-like man Aristocles, eminent among men for temperance and the justice of his character. And he, if ever anyone, had the fullest meed of praise for wisdom, and was too great for envy.”
1.43. σκεύη 〈.....〉 τὰ γεγραμμένα, ὧν ἔχει ἀντίγραφα Δημήτριος. ὀφείλω δʼ οὐδενὶ οὐθέν. ἐπίτροποι Λεωσθένης Σπεύσιππος Δημήτριος Ἡγίας Εὐρυμέδων Καλλίμαχος Θράσιππος. Καὶ διέθετο μὲν οὕτως. ἐπεγράφη δʼ αὐτοῦ τῷ τάφῳ ἐπιγράμματα τάδε· πρῶτον·σωφροσύνῃ προφέρων θνητῶν ἤθει τε δικαίῳἐνθάδε δὴ κεῖται θεῖος Ἀριστοκλέης·εἰ δέ τις ἐκ πάντων σοφίης μέγαν ἔσχεν ἔπαινοντοῦτον ἔχει πλεῖστον καὶ φθόνος οὐχ ἕπεται.
1.44. Next: “Earth in her bosom here hides Plato’s body, but his soul hath its immortal station with the blest, Ariston’s son, whom every good man, even if he dwell afar off, honours because he discerned the divine life.” And a third of later date:A. Eagle, why fly you o’er this tomb? Say, is your gaze fixed upon the starry house of one of the immortals?B. I am the image of the soul of Plato, which has soared to Olympus, while his earth-born body rests in Attic soil.
1.44. ἕτερον δέ·γαῖα μὲν ἐν κόλπῳ κρύπτει τόδε σῶμα Πλάτωνος,ψυχὴ δʼ ἀθάνατον τάξιν ἔχει μακάρωνυἱοῦ Ἀρίστωνος, τόν τις καὶ τηλόθι ναίωντιμᾷ ἀνὴρ ἀγαθὸς θεῖον ἰδόντα βίον.καὶ ἄλλο νεώτερον·αἰετέ, τίπτε βέβηκας ὑπὲρ τάφον; ἦ τινος, εἰπέ,ἀστερόεντα θεῶν οἶκον ἀποσκοπέεις;—ψυχῆς εἰμι Πλάτωνος ἀποπταμένης ἐς Ὄλυμπονεἰκών, σῶμα δὲ 〈γῆ〉 γηγενὲς Ἀτθὶς ἔχει.
1.45. There is also an epitaph of my own which runs thus: “If Phoebus did not cause Plato to be born in Greece, how came it that he healed the minds of men by letters? As the god’s son Asclepius is a healer of the body, so is Plato of the immortal soul.” And another on the manner of his death: “Phoebus gave to mortals Asclepius and Plato, the one to save their souls, the other to save their bodies. From a wedding banquet he has passed to that city which he had founded for himself and planted in the sky.” Such then are his epitaphs.
1.45. ἔστι καὶ ἡμέτερον οὕτως ἔχον·καὶ πῶς εἰ μὴ Φοῖβος ἀνʼ Ἑλλάδα φῦσε Πλάτωνα,ψυχὰς ἀνθρώπων γράμμασιν ἠκέσατο;καὶ γὰρ ὁ τοῦδε γεγὼς Ἀσκληπιός ἐστιν ἰητὴρσώματος, ὡς ψυχῆς ἀθανάτοιο Πλάτων.καὶ ἄλλο, ὡς ἐτελεύτα·Φοῖβος ἔφυσε βροτοῖς Ἀσκληπιὸν ἠδὲ Πλάτωνα,τὸν μὲν ἵνα ψυχήν, τὸν δʼ ἵνα σῶμα σάοι.δαισάμενος δὲ γάμον πόλιν ἤλυθεν, ἣν ποθʼ ἑαυτῷἔκτισε καὶ δαπέδῳ Ζηνὸς ἐνιδρύσατο.καὶ τὰ μὲν ἐπιγράμματα ταῦτα.
1.46. His disciples were Speusippus of Athens, Xenocrates of Chalcedon, Aristotle of Stagira, Philippus of Opus, Hestiaeus of Perinthus, Dion of Syracuse, Amyclus of Heraclea, Erastus and Coriscus of Scepsus, Timolaus of Cyzicus, Euaeon of Lampsacus, Python and Heraclides of Aenus, Hippothales and Callippus of Athens, Demetrius of Amphipolis, Heraclides of Pontus, and many others, among them two women, Lastheneia of Mantinea and Axiothea of Phlius, who is reported by Dicaearchus to have worn men’s clothes. Some say that Theophrastus too attended his lectures. Chamaeleon adds Hyperides the orator and Lycurgus, and in this Polemo agrees.
1.46. Μαθηταὶ δʼ αὐτοῦ Σπεύσιππος Ἀθηναῖος, Ξενοκράτης Καλχηδόνιος, Ἀριστοτέλης Σταγειρίτης, Φίλιππος Ὀπούντιος, Ἑστιαῖος Περίνθιος, Δίων Συρακόσιος, Ἄμυκλος Ἡρακλεώτης, Ἔραστος καὶ Κορίσκος Σκήψιοι, Τιμόλαος Κυζικηνός, Εὐαίων Λαμψακηνός, Πύθων καὶ Ἡρακλείδης Αἴνιοι, Ἱπποθάλης καὶ Κάλλιππος Ἀθηναῖοι, Δημήτριος Ἀμφιπολίτης, Ἡρακλείδης Ποντικὸς καὶ ἄλλοι πλείους, σὺν οἷς καὶ γυναῖκες δύο Λασθένεια Μαντινικὴ καὶ Ἀξιοθέα Φλειασία ἣ καὶ ἀνδρεῖα ἠμπίσχετο, ὥς φησι Δικαίαρχος. ἔνιοι δὲ καὶ Θεόφραστον ἀκοῦσαί φασιν αὐτοῦ· καὶ Ὑπερίδην τὸν ῥήτορα Χαμαιλέων φησὶ καὶ Λυκοῦργον.
1.47. Sabinus makes Demosthenes his pupil, quoting, in the fourth book of his Materials for Criticism, Mnesistratus of Thasos as his authority. And it is not improbable. Now, as you are an enthusiastic Platonist, and rightly so, and as you eagerly seek out that philosopher’s doctrines in preference to all others, I have thought it necessary to give some account of the true nature of his discourses, the arrangement of the dialogues, and the method of his inductive procedure, as far as possible in an elementary manner and in main outline, in order that the facts I have collected respecting his life may not suffer by the omission of his doctrines. For, in the words of the proverb, it would be taking owls to Athens, were I to give you of all people the full particulars.
1.47. ὁμοίως Πολέμων ἱστορεῖ. καὶ Δημοσθένην Σαβῖνος λέγει Μνησίστρατον Θάσιον παρατιθέμενος ἐν δʼ Μελετητικῆς ὕλης· καὶ εἰκός ἐστι. Φιλοπλάτωνι δέ σοι δικαίως ὑπαρχούσῃ καὶ παρʼ ὁντινοῦν τὰ τοῦ φιλοσόφου δόγματα φιλοτίμως ζητούσῃ ἀναγκαῖον ἡγησάμην ὑπογράψαι καὶ τὴν φύσιν τῶν λόγων καὶ τὴν τάξιν τῶν διαλόγων καὶ τὴν ἔφοδον τῆς ἐπαγωγῆς, ὡς οἷόν τε στοιχειωδῶς καὶ ἐπὶ κεφαλαίων, πρὸς τὸ μὴ ἀμοιρεῖν αὐτοῦ τῶν δογμάτων τὴν περὶ τοῦ βίου συναγωγήν· γλαῦκα γὰρ εἰς Ἀθήνας, φασίν, εἰ δέῃ σοι τὰ κατʼ εἶδος διηγεῖσθαι.
1.48. They say that Zeno the Eleatic was the first to write dialogues. But, according to Favorinus in his Memorabilia, Aristotle in the first book of his dialogue On Poets asserts that it was Alexamenus of Styra or Teos. In my opinion Plato, who brought this form of writing to perfection, ought to be adjudged the prize for its invention as well as for its embellishment. A dialogue is a discourse consisting of question and answer on some philosophical or political subject, with due regard to the characters of the persons introduced and the choice of diction. Dialectic is the art of discourse by which we either refute or establish some proposition by means of question and answer on the part of the interlocutors.
1.48. Διαλόγους τοίνυν φασὶ πρῶτον γράψαι Ζήνωνα τὸν Ἐλεάτην· Ἀριστοτέλης δὲ ἐν πρώτῳ Περὶ ποιητῶν Ἀλεξαμενὸν Στυρέα ἢ Τήιον, ὡς καὶ Φαβωρῖνος ἐν Ἀπομνημονεύμασι. δοκεῖ δέ μοι Πλάτων ἀκριβώσας τὸ εἶδος καὶ τὰ πρωτεῖα δικαίως ἂν ὥσπερ τοῦ κάλλους οὕτω καὶ τῆς εὑρέσεως ἀποφέρεσθαι. ἔστι δὲ διάλογος 〈λόγοσ〉 ἐξ ἐρωτήσεως καὶ ἀποκρίσεως συγκείμενος περί τινος τῶν φιλοσοφουμένων καὶ πολιτικῶν μετὰ τῆς πρεπούσης ἠθοποιίας τῶν παραλαμβανομένων προσώπων καὶ τῆς κατὰ τὴν λέξιν κατασκευῆς. διαλεκτικὴ δʼ ἐστὶ τέχνη λόγων, διʼ ἧς ἀνασκευάζομέν τι ἢ κατασκευάζομεν ἐξ ἐρωτήσεως καὶ ἀποκρίσεως τῶν προσδιαλεγομένων.
1.49. Of the Platonic dialogues there are two most general types, the one adapted for instruction and the other for inquiry. And the former is further divided into two types, the theoretical and the practical. And of these the theoretical is divided into the physical and logical, and the practical into the ethical and political. The dialogue of inquiry also has two main divisions, the one of which aims at training the mind and the other at victory in controversy. Again, the part which aims at training the mind has two subdivisions, the one akin to the midwife’s art, the other merely tentative. And that suited to controversy is also subdivided into one part which raises critical objections, and another which is subversive of the main position.
1.49. Τοῦ δὴ 〈δια〉λόγου τοῦ Πλατωνικοῦ δύʼ εἰσὶν ἀνωτάτω χαρακτῆρες, ὅ τε ὑφηγητικὸς καὶ ὁ ζητητικός. διαιρεῖται δὲ ὁ ὑφηγητικὸς εἰς ἄλλους δύο χαρακτῆρας, θεωρηματικόν τε καὶ πρακτικόν. καὶ τῶν ὁ μὲν θεωρηματικὸς εἰς τὸν φυσικὸν καὶ λογικόν, ὁ δὲ πρακτικὸς εἰς τὸν ἠθικὸν καὶ πολιτικόν. τοῦ δὲ ζητητικοῦ καὶ αὐτοῦ δύο εἰσὶν οἱ πρῶτοι χαρακτῆρες, ὅ τε γυμναστικὸς καὶ ἀγωνιστικός. καὶ τοῦ μὲν γυμναστικοῦ μαιευτικός τε καὶ πειραστικός, τοῦ δὲ ἀγωνιστικοῦ ἐνδεικτικὸς καὶ ἀνατρεπτικός.
1.50. I am not unaware that there are other ways in which certain writers classify the dialogues. For some dialogues they call dramatic, others narrative, and others again a mixture of the two. But the terms they employ in their classification of the dialogues are better suited to the stage than to philosophy. Physics is represented by the Timaeus, logic by the Statesman, Cratylus, Parmenides and Sophist, ethics by the Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus and Symposium, as well as by the Menexenus, Clitophon, the Epistles, Philebus, Hipparchus and the Rivals, and lastly politics by the Republic, the Laws, Minos, Epinomis, and the dialogue concerning Atlantis.
1.50. Οὐ λανθάνει δʼ ἡμᾶς ὅτι τινὲς ἄλλως διαφέρειν τοὺς διαλόγους φασί—λέγουσι γὰρ αὐτῶν τοὺς μὲν δραματικούς, τοὺς δὲ διηγηματικούς, τοὺς δὲ μεικτούσ—ἀλλʼ ἐκεῖνοι μὲν τραγικῶς μᾶλλον ἢ φιλοσόφως τὴν διαφορὰν τῶν διαλόγων προσωνόμασαν. εἰσὶ δὲ τοῦ μὲν φυσικοῦ οἷον ὁ Τίμαιος· τοῦ δὲ λογικοῦ ὅ τε Πολιτικὸς καὶ ὁ Κρατύλος καὶ Παρμενίδης καὶ Σοφιστής· τοῦ δʼ ἠθικοῦ ἥ τε Ἀπολογία καὶ ὁ Κρίτων καὶ Φαίδων καὶ Φαῖδρος καὶ τὸ Συμπόσιον Μενέξενός τε καὶ Κλειτοφῶν καὶ Ἐπιστολαὶ καὶ Φίληβος Ἵππαρχος Ἀντερασταί· τοῦ δὲ πολιτικοῦ ἥ τε Πολιτεία καὶ οἱ Νόμοι καὶ ὁ Μίνως καὶ Ἐπινομὶς καὶ ὁ Ἀτλαντικός·
1.51. To the class of mental obstetrics belong the two Alcibiades, Theages, Lysis and Laches, while the Euthyphro, Meno, Io, Charmides and Theaetetus illustrate the tentative method. In the Protagoras is seen the method of critical objections; in the Euthydemus, Gorgias, and the two dialogues entitled Hippias that of subversive argument. So much then for dialogue, its definition and varieties. Again, as there is great division of opinion between those who affirm and those who deny that Plato was a dogmatist, let me proceed to deal with this further question. To be a dogmatist in philosophy is to lay down positive dogmas, just as to be a legislator is to lay down laws. Further, under dogma two things are included, the thing opined and the opinion itself.
1.51. τοῦ δὲ μαιευτικοῦ Ἀλκιβιάδαι Θεάγης Λύσις Λάχης· τοῦ δὲ πειραστικοῦ Εὐθύφρων Μένων Ἴων Χαρμίδης Θεαίτητος· τοῦ δὲ ἐνδεικτικοῦ ὡς ὁ Πρωταγόρας· καὶ τοῦ ἀνατρεπτικοῦ Εὐθύδημος Γοργίας Ἱππίαι δύο. καὶ περὶ μὲν διαλόγου τί ποτέ ἐστι καὶ τίνες αὐτοῦ διαφοραί, 〈τοσαῦτα〉 ἀπόχρη λέγειν. Ἐπεὶ δὲ πολλὴ στάσις ἐστὶ καὶ οἱ μέν φασιν αὐτὸν δογματίζειν, οἱ δʼ οὔ, φέρε καὶ περὶ τούτου διαλάβωμεν. αὐτὸ τοίνυν τὸ δογματίζειν ἐστὶ δόγματα τιθέναι ὡς τὸ νομοθετεῖν νόμους τιθέναι. δόγματα δὲ ἑκατέρως καλεῖται, τό τε δοξαζόμενον καὶ ἡ δόξα αὐτή.
1.52. Of these the former is a proposition, the latter a conception. Now where he has a firm grasp Plato expounds his own view and refutes the false one, but, if the subject is obscure, he suspends judgement. His own views are expounded by four persons, Socrates, Timaeus, the Athenian Stranger, the Eleatic Stranger. These strangers are not, as some hold, Plato and Parmenides, but imaginary characters without names, for, even when Socrates and Timaeus are the speakers, it is Plato’s doctrines that are laid down. To illustrate the refutation of false opinions, he introduces Thrasymachus, Callicles, Polus, Gorgias, Protagoras, or again Hippias, Euthydemus and the like.
1.52. Τούτων δὲ τὸ μὲν δοξαζόμενον πρότασίς ἐστιν, ἡ δὲ δόξα ὑπόληψις. ὁ τοίνυν Πλάτων περὶ μὲν ὧν κατείληφεν ἀποφαίνεται, τὰ δὲ ψευδῆ διελέγχει, περὶ δὲ τῶν ἀδήλων ἐπέχει. καὶ περὶ μὲν τῶν αὐτῷ δοκούντων ἀποφαίνεται διὰ τεττάρων προσώπων, Σωκράτους, Τιμαίου, τοῦ Ἀθηναίου ξένου, τοῦ Ἐλεάτου ξένου· εἰσὶ δʼ οἱ ξένοι οὐχ, ὥς τινες ὑπέλαβον, Πλάτων καὶ Παρμενίδης, ἀλλὰ πλάσματά ἐστιν ἀνώνυμα· ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ Σωκράτους καὶ τὰ Τιμαίου λέγων Πλάτων δογματίζει. περὶ δὲ τῶν ψευδῶν ἐλεγχομένους εἰσάγει οἷον Θρασύμαχον καὶ Καλλικλέα καὶ Πῶλον Γοργίαν τε καὶ Πρωταγόραν, ἔτι Ἱππίαν καὶ Εὐθύδημον καὶ δὴ καὶ τοὺς ὁμοίους.
1.53. In constructing his proofs he makes most use of induction, not always in the same way, but under two forms. For induction is an argument which by means of certain true premisses properly infers a truth resembling them. And there are two kinds of induction, the one proceeding by way of contradiction, the other from agreement. In the kind which proceeds by contradiction the answer given to every question will necessarily be the contrary of the respondent’s position, e.g. “My father is either other than or the same as your father. If then your father is other than my father, by being other than a father he will not be a father. But if he is the same as my father, then by being the same as my father he will be my father.”
1.53. Ποιούμενος δὲ τὰς ἀποδείξεις πλείστῳ χρῆται τῷ τῆς ἐπαγωγῆς τρόπῳ, οὐ μὴν μονοτρόπῳ, ἀλλὰ διχῇ. ἔστι μὲν γὰρ ἐπαγωγὴ λόγος διά τινων ἀληθῶν τὸ ὅμοιον ἑαυτῷ ἀληθὲς οἰκείως ἐπιφέρων. δύο δὲ τῆς ἐπαγωγῆς εἰσι τρόποι, ὅ τε κατʼ ἐναντίωσιν καὶ ὁ ἐκ τῆς ἀκολουθίας. ὁ μὲν οὖν κατʼ ἐναντίωσίν ἐστιν ἐξ οὗ τῷ ἐρωτωμένῳ περὶ πᾶσαν ἀπόκρισιν ἀκολουθήσει τὸ ἐναντίον, οἷον· ὁ ἐμὸς πατὴρ τῷ σῷ πατρὶ ἤτοι ἕτερός ἐστιν ἢ ὁ αὐτός. εἰ μὲν οὖν ἕτερός ἐστι τοῦ ἐμοῦ πατρὸς ὁ σὸς πατήρ, πατρὸς ἕτερος ὢν οὐκ ἂν εἴη πατήρ· εἰ δὲ ὁ αὐτός ἐστι τῷ ἐμῷ πατρί, ὁ αὐτὸς ὢν τῷ ἐμῷ πατρὶ ὁ ἐμὸς ἂν εἴη πατήρ.
1.54. And again: “If man is not an animal, he will be either a stick or a stone. But he is not a stick or a stone; for he is animate and self-moved. Therefore he is an animal. But if he is an animal, and if a dog or an ox is also an animal, then man by being an animal will be a dog and an ox as well.” This is the kind of induction which proceeds by contradiction and dispute, and Plato used it, not for laying down positive doctrines but for refutation. The other kind of induction by agreement appears in two forms, the one proving the particular conclusion under discussion from a particular, the other proceeding by way of the universal [by means of particular facts]. The former is suited to rhetoric, the latter to dialectic. For instance, under the first form the question is raised, “Did so-and-so commit a murder?” The proof is that he was found at the time with stains of blood on him.
1.54. καὶ πάλιν· εἰ μή ἐστι ζῷον ὁ ἄνθρωπος, λίθος ἂν εἴη ἢ ξύλον. οὐκ ἔστι δὲ λίθος ἢ ξύλον· ἔμψυχον γάρ ἐστι καὶ ἐξ αὑτοῦ κινεῖται· ζῷον ἄρα ἐστίν. εἰ δὲ ζῷόν ἐστι, ζῷον δὲ καὶ ὁ κύων καὶ ὁ βοῦς, εἴη ἂν καὶ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ζῷον 〈ὢν〉 καὶ κύων καὶ βοῦς. οὗτος μὲν ὁ τῆς ἐπαγωγῆς κατʼ ἐναντίωσιν καὶ μάχην τρόπος, ᾧ ἐχρῆτο οὐ πρὸς τὸ δογματίζειν, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ διελέγχειν. ὁ δὲ τῆς ἀκολουθίας ἐστὶ διπλοῦς· ὁ μὲν τὸ ἐπὶ μέρους ζητούμενον διὰ τοῦ ἐπὶ μέρους ἀποδεικνύς, ὁ δὲ 〈διὰ〉 τοῦ καθόλου [διὰ τοῦ ἐπὶ μέρους]. καὶ ἔστιν ὁ μὲν πρότερος ῥητορικός, ὁ δὲ δεύτερος διαλεκτικός. οἷον ἐν τῷ προτέρῳ ζητεῖται, εἰ ὅδε ἀπέκτεινεν. ἀπόδειξις τὸ εὑρῆσθαι αὐτὸν κατʼ ἐκεῖνον τὸν χρόνον ᾑμαγμένον.
1.55. This is the rhetorical form of induction, since rhetoric also is concerned with particular facts and not with universals. It does not inquire about justice in the abstract, but about particular cases of justice. The other kind, where the general proposition is first established by means of particular facts, is the induction of dialectic. For instance, the question put is whether the soul is immortal, and whether the living come back from the dead. And this is proved in the dialogue On the Soul by means of a certain general proposition, that opposites proceed from opposites. And the general proposition itself is established by means of certain propositions which are particular, as that sleep comes from waking and vice versa, the greater from the less and vice versa. This is the form which he used to establish his own views.
1.55. ῥητορικὸς δʼ ἐστὶν ὁ τρόπος τῆς ἐπαγωγῆς οὗτος, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ἡ ῥητορικὴ περὶ τὰ ἐπὶ μέρους, οὐ τὰ καθόλου τὴν πραγματείαν ἔχει. ζητεῖ γὰρ οὐ περὶ αὐτοῦ τοῦ δικαίου, ἀλλὰ τῶν ἐπὶ μέρους δικαίων. ὁ δὲ ἕτερός ἐστι διαλεκτικός, προαποδειχθέντος τοῦ καθόλου διὰ τῶν ἐπὶ μέρους. οἷον ζητεῖται, εἰ ἡ ψυχὴ ἀθάνατος καὶ εἰ ἐκ τῶν τεθνεώτων οἱ ζῶντες· ὅπερ ἀποδείκνυται ἐν τῷ Περὶ ψυχῆς διά τινος καθολικοῦ, ὅτι ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων τὰ ἐναντία. καὶ αὐτὸ δὲ τὸ καθόλου κατασκευάζεται ἔκ τινων ὄντων ἐπὶ μέρους· οἷον ὅτι τὸ καθεύδειν ἐκ τοῦ ἐγρηγορέναι καὶ ἀνάπαλιν καὶ τὸ μεῖζον ἐκ τοῦ μικροτέρου καὶ ἀνάπαλιν. τούτῳ δὲ ἐχρῆτο εἰς τὴν τῶν ἑαυτῷ δοκούντων κατασκευήν.
1.56. But, just as long ago in tragedy the chorus was the only actor, and afterwards, in order to give the chorus breathing space, Thespis devised a single actor, Aeschylus a second, Sophocles a third, and thus tragedy was completed, so too with philosophy: in early times it discoursed on one subject only, namely physics, then Socrates added the second subject, ethics, and Plato the third, dialectics, and so brought philosophy to perfection. Thrasylus says that he published his dialogues in tetralogies, like those of the tragic poets. Thus they contended with four plays at the Dionysia, the Lenaea, the Panathenaea and the festival of Chytri. Of the four plays the last was a satiric drama; and the four together were called a tetralogy.
1.56. Ὥσπερ δὲ τὸ παλαιὸν ἐν τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ πρότερον μὲν μόνος ὁ χορὸς διεδραμάτιζεν, ὕστερον δὲ Θέσπις ἕνα ὑποκριτὴν ἐξεῦρεν ὑπὲρ τοῦ διαναπαύεσθαι τὸν χορὸν καὶ δεύτερον Αἰσχύλος, τὸν δὲ τρίτον Σοφοκλῆς καὶ συνεπλήρωσεν τὴν τραγῳδίαν, οὕτως καὶ τῆς φιλοσοφίας ὁ λόγος πρότερον μὲν ἦν μονοειδὴς ὡς ὁ φυσικός, δεύτερον δὲ Σωκράτης προσέθηκε τὸν ἠθικόν, τρίτον δὲ Πλάτων τὸν διαλεκτικὸν καὶ ἐτελεσιούργησε τὴν φιλοσοφίαν. Θράσυλος δέ φησι καὶ κατὰ τὴν τραγικὴν τετραλογίαν ἐκδοῦναι αὐτὸν τοὺς διαλόγους, οἷον ἐκεῖνοι τέτρασι δράμασιν ἠγωνίζοντο — Διονυσίοις, Ληναίοις, Παναθηναίοις, Χύτροις — ὧν τὸ τέταρτον ἦν Σατυρικόν· τὰ δὲ τέτταρα δράματα ἐκαλεῖτο τετραλογία.
1.57. Now, says Thrasylus, the genuine dialogues are fifty-six in all, if the Republic be divided into ten and the Laws into twelve. Favorinus, however, in the second book of his Miscellaneous History declares that nearly the whole of the Republic is to be found in a work of Protagoras entitled Controversies. This gives nine tetralogies, if the Republic takes the place of one single work and the Laws of another. His first tetralogy has a common plan underlying it, for he wishes to describe what the life of the philosopher will be. To each of the works Thrasylus affixes a double title, the one taken from the name of the interlocutor, the other from the subject.
1.57. Εἰσὶ τοίνυν, φησίν, οἱ πάντες αὐτῷ γνήσιοι διάλογοι ἓξ καὶ πεντήκοντα, τῆς μὲν Πολιτείας εἰς δέκα διαιρουμένης — ἣν καὶ εὑρίσκεσθαι σχεδὸν ὅλην παρὰ Πρωταγόρᾳ ἐν τοῖς Ἀντιλογικοῖς φησι Φαβωρῖνος ἐν Παντοδαπῆς ἱστορίας δευτέρῳ -τῶν δὲ Νόμων εἰς δυοκαίδεκα. τετραλογίαι δὲ ἐννέα, ἑνὸς βιβλίου χώραν ἐπεχούσης τῆς Πολιτείας καὶ ἑνὸς τῶν Νόμων. πρώτην μὲν οὖν τετραλογίαν τίθησι τὴν κοινὴν ὑπόθεσιν ἔχουσαν· παραδεῖξαι γὰρ βούλεται ὁποῖος ἂν εἴη ὁ τοῦ φιλοσόφου βίος. διπλαῖς τε χρῆται ταῖς ἐπιγραφαῖς καθʼ ἑκάστου τῶν βιβλίων, τῇ μὲν ἀπὸ τοῦ ὀνόματος, τῇ δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ πράγματος.
1.58. This tetralogy, then, which is the first, begins with the Euthyphro or On Holiness, a tentative dialogue; the Apology of Socrates, an ethical dialogue, comes second; the third is Crito or On what is to be done, ethical; the fourth Phaedo or On the Soul, also ethical. The second tetralogy begins with Cratylus or On Correctness of Names, a logical dialogue, which is followed by Theaetetus or On Knowledge, tentative, the Sophist or On Being, a logical dialogue, the Statesman or On Monarchy, also logical. The third tetralogy includes, first, Parmenides or On Ideas, which is logical, next Philebus or On Pleasure, an ethical dialogue, the Banquet or On the Good, ethical, Phaedrus or On Love, also ethical.
1.58. ταύτης τῆς τετραλογίας, ἥτις ἐστὶ πρώτη, ἡγεῖται Εὐθύφρων ἢ περὶ ὁσίου· ὁ διάλογος δʼ ἐστὶ πειραστικός· δεύτερος Ἀπολογία Σωκράτους, ἠθικός· τρίτος Κρίτων ἢ περὶ πρακτέου, ἠθικός· τέταρτος Φαίδων ἢ περὶ ψυχῆς, ἠθικός. δευτέρα τετραλογία, ἧς ἡγεῖται Κρατύλος ἢ περὶ ὀρθότητος ὀνομάτων, λογικός· Θεαίτητος ἢ περὶ ἐπιστήμης, πειραστικός· Σοφιστὴς ἢ περὶ τοῦ ὄντος, λογικός· Πολιτικὸς ἢ περὶ βασιλείας, λογικός. τῆς τρίτης ἡγεῖται Παρμενίδης ἢ περὶ ἰδεῶν, λογικός· Φίληβος ἢ περὶ ἡδονῆς, ἠθικός· Συμπόσιον ἢ περὶ ἀγαθοῦ, ἠθικός· Φαῖδρος ἢ περὶ ἔρωτος, ἠθικός.
1.59. The fourth tetralogy starts with Alcibiades or On the Nature of Man, an obstetric dialogue; this is followed by the second Alcibiades or On Prayer, also obstetric; then comes Hipparchus or The Lover of Gain, which is ethical, and The Rivals or On Philosophy, also ethical. The fifth tetralogy includes, first, Theages or On Philosophy, an obstetric dialogue, then Charmides or On Temperance, which is tentative, Laches or On Courage, obstetric, and Lysis or On Friendship, also obstetric. The sixth tetralogy starts with Euthydemus or The Eristic, a refutative dialogue, which is followed by Protagoras or Sophists, critical, Gorgias or On Rhetoric, refutative, and Meno or On Virtue, which is tentative.
1.59. Τῆς τετάρτης ἡγεῖται Ἀλκιβιάδης ἢ περὶ ἀνθρώπου φύσεως, μαιευτικός· Ἀλκιβιάδης δεύτερος ἢ περὶ εὐχῆς, μαιευτικός· Ἵππαρχος ἢ φιλοκερδής, ἠθικός· Ἀντερασταὶ ἢ περὶ φιλοσοφίας, ἠθικός. τῆς πέμπτης ἡγεῖται Θεάγης ἢ περὶ φιλοσοφίας, μαιευτικός· Χαρμίδης ἢ περὶ σωφροσύνης, πειραστικός· Λάχης ἢ περὶ ἀνδρείας, μαιευτικός· Λύσις ἢ περὶ φιλίας, μαιευτικός. τῆς ἕκτης ἡγεῖται Εὐθύδημος ἢ ἐριστικός, ἀνατρεπτικός· Πρωταγόρας ἢ σοφισταί, ἐνδεικτικός· Γοργίας ἢ περὶ ῥητορικῆς, ἀνατρεπτικός· Μένων ἢ περὶ ἀρετῆς, πειραστικός.
1.60. The seventh tetralogy contains, first, two dialogues entitled Hippias, the former On Beauty, the latter On Falsehood, both refutative; next Ion or On the Iliad, which is tentative, and Menexenus or The Funeral Oration, which is ethical. The eighth tetralogy starts with Clitophon or Introduction, which is ethical, and is followed by the Republic or On Justice, political, Timaeus or On Nature, a physical treatise, and Critias or Story of Atlantis, which is ethical. The ninth tetralogy starts with Minos or On Law, a political dialogue, which is followed by the Laws or On Legislation, also political, Epinomis or Nocturnal Council, or Philosopher, political, and lastly the Epistles, thirteen in number, which are ethical.
1.60. τῆς ἑβδόμης ἡγοῦνται Ἱππίαι δύο — α′ ἢ περὶ τοῦ καλοῦ, β′ ἢ περὶ τοῦ ψεύδους -ἀνατρεπτικοί· Ἴων ἢ περὶ Ἰλιάδος, πειραστικός· Μενέξενος ἢ ἐπιτάφιος, ἠθικός. τῆς ὀγδόης ἡγεῖται Κλειτοφῶν ἢ προτρεπτικός, ἠθικός· Πολιτεία ἢ περὶ δικαίου, πολιτικός· Τίμαιος ἢ περὶ φύσεως, φυσικός· Κριτίας ἢ Ἀτλαντικός, ἠθικός. τῆς ἐνάτης ἡγεῖται Μίνως ἢ περὶ νόμου, πολιτικός· Νόμοι ἢ περὶ νομοθεσίας, πολιτικός· Ἐπινομὶς ἢ νυκτερινὸς σύλλογος ἢ φιλόσοφος, πολιτικός· Ἐπιστολαὶ τρεισκαίδεκα, ἠθικαί — ἐν αἷς ἔγραφεν εὖ πράττειν, Ἐπίκουρος δὲ εὖ διάγειν, Κλέων χαίρειν — πρὸς Ἀριστόδημον μία, πρὸς Ἀρχύταν δύο, πρὸς Διονύσιον τέτταρες, πρὸς Ἑρμίαν καὶ Ἔραστον καὶ Κορίσκον μία, πρὸς Λεωδάμαντα μία, πρὸς Δίωνα μία, πρὸς Περδίκκαν μία, πρὸς τοὺς Δίωνος οἰκείους δύο.
1.61. In these epistles his heading was “Welfare,” as that of Epicurus was “A Good Life,” and that of Cleon “All Joy.” They comprise: one to Aristodemus, two to Archytas, four to Dionysius, one to Hermias, Erastus and Coriscus, one each to Leodamas, Dion and Perdiccas, and two to Dion’s friends. This is the division adopted by Thrasylus and some others. Some, including Aristophanes the grammarian, arrange the dialogues arbitrarily in trilogies.
1.61. καὶ οὗτος μὲν οὕτω διαιρεῖ καί τινες. Ἔνιοι δέ, ὧν ἐστι καὶ Ἀριστοφάνης ὁ γραμματικός, εἰς τριλογίας ἕλκουσι τοὺς διαλόγους, καὶ πρώτην μὲν τιθέασιν ἧς ἡγεῖται Πολιτεία Τίμαιος Κριτίας·
1.62. In the first trilogy they place the Republic, Timaeus and Critias; in the second the Sophist, the Statesman and Cratylus; in the third the Laws, Minos and Epinomis; in the fourth Theaetetus, Euthyphro and the Apology; in the fifth Crito, Phaedo and the Epistles. The rest follow as separate compositions in no regular order. Some critics, as has already been stated, put the Republic first, while others start with the greater Alcibiades, and others again with the Theages; some begin with the Euthyphro, others with the Clitophon; some with the Timaeus, others with the Phaedrus; others again with the Theaetetus, while many begin with the Apology. The following dialogues are acknowledged to be spurious: the Midon or Horse-breeder, the Eryxias or Erasistratus, the Alcyon, the Acephali or Sisyphus, the Axiochus, the Phaeacians, the Demodocus, the Chelidon, the Seventh Day, the Epimenides. Of these the Alcyon is thought to be the work of a certain Leon, according to Favorinus in the fifth book of his Memorabilia.
1.62. δευτέραν Σοφιστὴς Πολιτικὸς Κρατύλος· τρίτην Νόμοι Μίνως Ἐπινομίς· τετάρτην Θεαίτητος Εὐθύφρων Ἀπολογία· πέμπτην Κρίτων Φαίδων Ἐπιστολαί. τὰ δʼ ἄλλα καθʼ ἓν καὶ ἀτάκτως. ἄρχονται δὲ οἱ μέν, ὡς προείρηται, ἀπὸ τῆς Πολιτείας· οἱ δʼ ἀπὸ Ἀλκιβιάδου τοῦ μείζονος· οἱ δʼ ἀπὸ Θεάγους· ἔνιοι δὲ Εὐθύφρονος· ἄλλοι Κλειτοφῶντος· τινὲς Τιμαίου· οἱ δʼ ἀπὸ Φαίδρου· ἕτεροι Θεαιτήτου· πολλοὶ δὲ 〈ἀπʼ〉 Ἀπολογίας τὴν ἀρχὴν ποιοῦνται. νοθεύονται δὲ τῶν διαλόγων ὁμολογουμένως Μίδων ἢ Ἱπποτρόφος, Ἐρυξίας ἢ Ἐρασίστρατος, Ἀλκύων, Ἀκέφαλοι ἢ Σίσυφος, Ἀξίοχος, Φαίακες, Δημόδοκος, Χελιδών, Ἑβδόμη, Ἐπιμενίδης· ὧν ἡ Ἀλκυὼν Λέοντός τινος εἶναι δοκεῖ, καθά φησι Φαβωρῖνος ἐν τῷ πέμπτῳ τῶν Ἀπομνημονευμάτων.
1.63. Plato has employed a variety of terms in order to make his system less intelligible to the ignorant. But in a special sense he considers wisdom to be the science of those things which are objects of thought and really existent, the science which, he says, is concerned with God and the soul as separate from the body. And especially by wisdom he means philosophy, which is a yearning for divine wisdom. And in a general sense all experience is also termed by him wisdom, e.g. when he calls a craftsman wise. And he applies the same terms with very different meanings. For instance, the word φαῦλος (slight, plain) is employed by him in the sense of ἁπλοῦς (simple, honest), just as it is applied to Heracles in the Licymnius of Euripides in the following passage: “Plain (φαῦλος), unaccomplished, staunch to do great deeds, unversed in talk, with all his store of wisdom curtailed to action.”
1.63. Ὀνόμασι δὲ κέχρηται ποικίλοις πρὸς τὸ μὴ εὐσύνοπτον εἶναι τοῖς ἀμαθέσι τὴν πραγματείαν· ἰδιαίτατα μὲν σοφίαν ἡγεῖται εἶναι τὴν τῶν νοητῶν καὶ ὄντως ὄντων ἐπιστήμην, ἥν φησι περὶ θεὸν καὶ ψυχὴν σώματος κεχωρισμένην. ἰδίᾳ δὲ σοφίαν καὶ τὴν φιλοσοφίαν καλεῖ, ὄρεξιν οὖσαν τῆς θείας σοφίας. κοινῶς δὲ λέγεται παρʼ αὐτῷ σοφία καὶ ἡ πᾶσα ἐμπειρία, οἷον ὅταν σοφὸν λέγῃ τὸν δημιουργόν. χρῆται δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ διαφερόντως σημαινομένων τοῖς αὐτοῖς ὀνόμασιν. ὁ γοῦν φαῦλος λέγεται παρʼ αὐτῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ ἁπλοῦ, ὡς καὶ παρὰ Εὐριπίδῃ ἐν Λικυμνίῳ φέρεται ἐπὶ τοῦ Ἡρακλέους οὑτωσί·φαῦλον, ἄκομψον, τὰ μέγιστʼ ἀγαθόν,πᾶσαν ἐν ἔργῳ περιταμνόμενονσοφίαν, λέσχης ἀτρίβωνα.
1.64. But sometimes Plato uses this same word (φαῦλος) to mean what is bad, and at other times for what is small or petty. Again, he often uses different terms to express the same thing. For instance, he calls the Idea form (εἶδος), genus (γένος), archetype (παράδειγμα), principle (ἀρχή) and cause (αἴτιον). He also uses contrary expressions for the same thing. Thus he calls the sensible thing both existent and non-existent, existent inasmuch as it comes into being, non-existent because it is continually changing. And he says the Idea is neither in motion nor at rest; that it is uniformly the same and yet both one and many. And it is his habit to do this in many more instances.
1.64. χρῆται δὲ ὁ Πλάτων ἐνίοτε αὐτῷ καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ κακοῦ· ἔστι δʼ ὅτε καὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μικροῦ. πολλάκις δὲ καὶ διαφέρουσιν ὀνόμασιν ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ σημαινομένου χρῆται. τὴν γοῦν ἰδέαν καὶ εἶδος ὀνομάζει καὶ γένος καὶ παράδειγμα καὶ ἀρχὴν καὶ αἴτιον. χρῆται δὲ καὶ ταῖς ἐναντίαις φωναῖς ἐπὶ τοῦ αὐτοῦ. τὸ γοῦν αἰσθητὸν καὶ ὂν καλεῖ καὶ μὴ ὄν· ὂν μὲν διὰ τὸ γένεσιν αὐτοῦ εἶναι, μὴ ὂν δὲ διὰ τὴν συνεχῆ μεταβολήν. καὶ τὴν ἰδέαν οὔτε κινούμενον οὔτε μένον· καὶ ταὐτὸ καὶ ἓν καὶ πολλά. τὸ δʼ αὐτὸ καὶ ἐπὶ πλειόνων εἴθισται ποιεῖν.
1.65. The right interpretation of his dialogues includes three things: first, the meaning of every statement must be explained; next, its purpose, whether it is made for a primary reason or by way of illustration, and whether to establish his own doctrines or to refute his interlocutor; in the third place it remains to examine its truth. And since certain critical marks are affixed to his works let us now say a word about these. The cross X is taken to indicate peculiar expressions and figures of speech, and generally any idiom of Platonic usage; the diple (>) calls attention to doctrines and opinions characteristic of Plato;
1.65. Ἔστι δὲ ἡ ἐξήγησις αὐτοῦ τῶν λόγων τριπλῆ· πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ἐκδιδάξαι χρὴ ὅ τι ἐστὶν ἕκαστον τῶν λεγομένων· ἔπειτα, τίνος εἵνεκα λέλεκται, πότερα κατὰ προηγούμενον ἢ ἐν εἰκόνος μέρει, καὶ 〈εἰ〉 εἰς δογμάτων κατασκευὴν ἢ εἰς ἔλεγχον τοῦ προσδιαλεγομένου· τὸ δὲ τρίτον, εἰ ὀρθῶς λέλεκται. Ἐπεὶ δὲ καὶ σημεῖά τινα τοῖς βιβλίοις αὐτοῦ παρατίθενται, φέρε καὶ περὶ τούτων τι εἴπωμεν. Χῖ λαμβάνεται πρὸς τὰς λέξεις καὶ τὰ σχήματα καὶ ὅλως τὴν Πλατωνικὴν συνήθειαν· διπλῆ πρὸς τὰ δόγματα καὶ τὰ ἀρέσκοντα Πλάτωνι·
1.66. the dotted cross (⁜) denotes select passages and beauties of style; the dotted diple (⸖) editors’ corrections of the text; the dotted obelus (÷) passages suspected without reason; the dotted antisigma (Ͽ·) repetitions and proposals for transpositions; the ceraunium the philosophical school; the asterisk (✶) an agreement of doctrine; the obelus (-) a spurious passage. So much for the critical marks and his writings in general. As Antigonus of Carystus says in his Life of Zeno, when the writings were first edited with critical marks, their possessors charged a certain fee to anyone who wished to consult them.
1.66. Χῖ περιεστιγμένον πρὸς τὰς ἐκλογὰς καὶ καλλιγραφίας· διπλῆ περιεστιγμένη πρὸς τὰς ἐνίων διορθώσεις· ὀβελὸς περιεστιγμένος πρὸς τὰς εἰκαίους ἀθετήσεις· ἀντίσιγμα περιεστιγμένον πρὸς τὰς διττὰς χρήσεις καὶ μεταθέσεις τῶν γραφῶν· κεραύνιον πρὸς τὴν ἀγωγὴν τῆς φιλοσοφίας· ἀστερίσκος πρὸς τὴν συμφωνίαν τῶν δογμάτων· ὀβελὸς πρὸς τὴν ἀθέτησιν. τὰ μὲν σημεῖα ταῦτα καὶ τὰ βιβλία τοσαῦτα· ἅπερ Ἀντίγονός φησιν ὁ Καρύστιος ἐν τῷ Περὶ Ζήνωνος νεωστὶ ἐκδοθέντα εἴ τις ἤθελε διαναγνῶναι, μισθὸν ἐτέλει τοῖς κεκτημένοις.
1.67. The doctrines he approved are these. He held that the soul is immortal, that by transmigration it puts on many bodies, and that it has a numerical first principle, whereas the first principle of the body is geometrical; and he defined soul as the idea of vital breath diffused in all directions. He held that it is self-moved and tripartite, the rational part of it having its seat in the head, the passionate part about the heart, while the appetitive is placed in the region of the navel and the liver..
1.67. Τὰ δὲ ἀρέσκοντα αὐτῷ ταῦτα ἦν. ἀθάνατον ἔλεγε τὴν ψυχὴν καὶ πολλὰ μεταμφιεννυμένην σώματα, ἀρχήν τε ἔχειν ἀριθμητικήν, τὸ δὲ σῶμα γεωμετρικήν· ὡρίζετο δὲ αὐτὴν ἰδέαν τοῦ πάντῃ διεστῶτος πνεύματος. αὐτοκίνητόν τε εἶναι καὶ τριμερῆ· τὸ μὲν γὰρ αὐτῆς λογιστικὸν μέρος περὶ τῇ κεφαλῇ καθιδρῦσθαι, τὸ δὲ θυμοειδὲς περὶ τῇ καρδίᾳ, τὸ δὲ ἐπιθυμητικὸν περὶ τὸν ὀμφαλὸν καὶ τὸ ἧπαρ συνίστασθαι.
1.68. And from the centre outwards it encloses the body on all sides in a circle, and is compounded of elements, and, being divided at harmonic intervals, it forms two circles which touch one another twice; and the interior circle, being slit six times over, makes seven circles in all. And this interior circle moves by way of the diagonal to the left, and the other by way of the side to the right. Hence also the one is supreme, being a single circle, for the other interior circle was divided; the former is the circle of the Same, the latter that of the Other, whereby he means that the motion of the soul is the motion of the universe together with the revolutions of the planets..
1.68. Περιέχειν δὲ ἐκ τοῦ μέσου διὰ παντὸς κύκλῳ τὸ σῶμα καὶ συνεστάναι ἐκ τῶν στοιχείων. διαιρεθεῖσάν τε κατὰ ἁρμονικὰ διαστήματα δύο κύκλους ποιεῖν συνημμένους, ὧν τὸν ἐντὸς κύκλον ἑξαχῆ τμηθέντα τοὺς ἅπαντας ἑπτὰ κύκλους ποιεῖν. καὶ τοῦτον μὲν κατὰ διάμετρον κ〈ιν〉εῖσθαι ἐπʼ ἀριστερὰ ἔσωθεν, τὸν δὲ κατὰ πλευρὰν ἐπὶ τὰ δεξιά. διὸ καὶ κρατεῖν αὐτὸν ἕνα ὄντα· τὸν γὰρ ἕτερον ἔσωθεν διῃρῆσθαι. καὶ τὸν μὲν εἶναι ταὐτοῦ, τοὺς δὲ θατέρου, λέγων τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς κίνησιν εἶναι τὴν [δὲ] τοῦ ὅλου καὶ τὰς τῶν πλανωμένων φοράς.
1.69. And the division from the centre to the circumference which is adjusted in harmony with the soul being thus determined, the soul knows that which is, and adjusts it proportionately because she has the elements proportionately disposed in herself. And when the circle of the Other revolves aright, the result is opinion; but from the regular motion of the circle of the Same comes knowledge. He set forth two universal principles, God and matter, and he calls God mind and cause; he held that matter is devoid of form and unlimited, and that composite things arise out of it; and that it was once in disorderly motion but, inasmuch as God preferred order to disorder, was by him brought together in one place.
1.69. Οὕτω δʼ ἐχούσης τῆς ἐκ μέσου τομῆς αὐτῇ προσαρμοζομένης πρὸς τὰ ἔσχατα γινώσκειν τε τὰ ὄντα καὶ ἐναρμόζειν διὰ τὸ ἔχειν ἐν αὑτῇ τὰ στοιχεῖα κατὰ ἁρμονίαν. καὶ γίνεσθαι δόξαν μὲν κατὰ τὸν θατέρου κύκλον ὀρθούμενον, ἐπιστήμην δὲ κατὰ τὸν ταὐτοῦ. δύο δὲ τῶν πάντων ἀπέφηνεν ἀρχάς, θεὸν καὶ ὕλην, ὃν καὶ νοῦν προσαγορεύει καὶ αἴτιον. εἶναι δὲ τὴν ὕλην ἀσχημάτιστον καὶ ἄπειρον, ἐξ ἧς γίνεσθαι τὰ συγκρίματα. ἀτάκτως δέ ποτε αὐτὴν κινουμένην ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ φησιν εἰς ἕνα συναχθῆναι τόπον τάξιν ἀταξίας κρείττονα ἡγησαμένου.
1.70. This substance, he says, is converted into the four elements, fire, water, air, earth, of which the world itself and all that therein is are formed. Earth alone of these elements is not subject to change, the assumed cause being the peculiarity of its constituent triangles. For he thinks that in all the other elements the figures employed are homogeneous, the scalene triangle out of which they are all put together being one and the same, whereas for earth a triangle of peculiar shape is employed; the element of fire is a pyramid, of air an octahedron, of water an icosahedron, of earth a cube. Hence earth is not transmuted into the other three elements, nor these three into earth.
1.70. τραπέσθαι δὲ τὴν οὐσίαν ταύτην εἰς τὰ τέτταρα στοιχεῖα, πῦρ, ὕδωρ, ἀέρα, γῆν· ἐξ ὧν αὐτόν τε τὸν κόσμον καὶ τὰ ἐν αὐτῷ γεννᾶσθαι. μόνην δὲ τὴν γῆν ἀμετάβολον εἶναί φησι, νομίζων αἰτίαν τὴν τῶν σχημάτων διαφορὰν ἐξ ὧν σύγκειται. τῶν μὲν γὰρ ἄλλων ὁμογενῆ φησιν εἶναι τὰ σχήματα — ἅπαντα γὰρ ἐξ ἑνὸς συγκεῖσθαι τοῦ προμήκους τριγώνου — τῆς δὲ γῆς ἴδιον εἶναι τὸ σχῆμα· πυρὸς μὲν γὰρ εἶναι στοιχεῖον πυραμίδα, ἀέρος τὸ ὀκτάεδρον, ὕδατος τὸ εἰκοσάεδρον, γῆς δὲ κύβον. ὅθεν μήτε γῆν εἰς ταῦτα μεταβάλλειν, μήτε ταῦτα εἰς γῆν.
1.71. But the elements are not separated each into its own region of the universe, because the revolution unites their minute particles, compressing and forcing them together into the centre, at the same time as it separates the larger masses. Hence as they change their shapes, so also do they change the regions which they occupy. And there is one created universe, seeing that it is perceptible to sense, which has been made by God. And it is animate because that which is animate is better than that which is inanimate. And this piece of workmanship is assumed to come from a cause supremely good. It was made one and not unlimited because the pattern from which he made it was one. And it is spherical because such is the shape of its maker.
1.71. Οὐ διακεκρίσθαι δʼ εἰς τοὺς οἰκείους τόπους ἕκαστον, ὅτι ἡ περιφορὰ σφίγγουσα καὶ πρὸς τὸν μέσον συνάγουσα συγκρίνει τὰ μικρά, τὰ δὲ διακρίνει, τὰ μεγάλα. διόπερ τὰ εἴδη μεταβάλλοντα καὶ τοὺς τόπους μεταβάλλειν. Κόσμον τε εἶναι ἕνα γεννητόν, ἐπειδὴ καὶ αἰσθητός ἐστιν ὑπὸ θεοῦ κατεσκευασμένος· ἔμψυχόν τε εἶναι διὰ τὸ κρεῖττον εἶναι τοῦ ἀψύχου τὸ ἔμψυχον, τοῦτο δὲ δημιούργημα ὑποκεῖσθαι τοῦ βελτίστου αἰτίου. ἕνα τε αὐτὸν καὶ οὐκ ἄπειρον κατεσκευάσθαι, ὅτι καὶ τὸ ὑπόδειγμα ἓν ἦν ἀφʼ οὗ αὐτὸν ἐδημιούργησε· σφαιροειδῆ δὲ διὰ τὸ καὶ τὸν γεννήσαντα τοιοῦτον ἔχειν σχῆμα.
1.72. For that maker contains the other living things, and this universe the shapes of them all. It is smooth and has no organ all round because it has no need of organs. Moreover, the universe remains imperishable because it is not dissolved into the Deity. And the creation as a whole is caused by God, because it is the nature of the good to be beneficent, and the creation of the universe has the highest good for its cause. For the most beautiful of created things is due to the best of intelligible causes; so that, as God is of this nature, and the universe resembles the best in its perfect beauty, it will not be in the likeness of anything created, but only of God.
1.72. ἐκεῖνον μὲν γὰρ περιέχειν τὰ ἄλλα ζῷα, τοῦτον δὲ τὰ σχήματα πάντων. λεῖον δὲ καὶ οὐδὲν ὄργανον ἔχοντα κύκλῳ διὰ τὸ μηδεμίαν εἶναι χρῆσιν αὐτῶν. ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ ἄφθαρτον διαμένειν τὸν κόσμον διὰ τὸ μὴ διαλύεσθαι εἰς τὸν θεόν. καὶ τῆς μὲν ὅλης γενέσεως αἴτιον εἶναι τὸν θεόν, ὅτι πέφυκεν ἀγαθοποιὸν εἶναι τὸ ἀγαθόν. τοῦ δὲ οὐρανοῦ τῆς γενέσεως τὸ † αἴτιον· τοῦ γὰρ καλλίστου τῶν γεννητῶν τὸ ἄριστον εἶναι τῶν νοητῶν αἴτιον. ὥστε ἐπεὶ τοιοῦτος ὁ θεός, ὅμοιος δὲ τῷ ἀρίστῳ ὁ οὐρανὸς κάλλιστός γε ὤν, οὐθενὶ ἂν ὅμοιος εἴη τῶν γεννητῶν ἀλλʼ ἢ τῷ θεῷ.
1.73. The universe is composed of fire, water, air and earth; of fire in order to be visible; of earth in order to be solid; of water and air in order to be proportional. For the powers represented by solids are connected by two mean proportionals in a way to secure the complete unity of the whole. And the universe was made of all the elements in order to be complete and indestructible. Time was created as an image of eternity. And while the latter remains for ever at rest, time consists in the motion of the universe. For night and day and month and the like are all parts of time; for which reason, apart from the nature of the universe, time has no existence. But so soon as the universe is fashioned time exists.
1.73. Συνεστάναι δὲ τὸν κόσμον ἐκ πυρός, ὕδατος, ἀέρος, γῆς. ἐκ πυρὸς μέν, ὅπως ὁρατὸς ᾖ· ἐκ γῆς δέ, ὅπως στερεός· ἐξ ὕδατος δὲ καὶ ἀέρος, ὅπως ἀνάλογος — αἱ γὰρ τῶν στερεῶν δυνάμεις δύο μεσότησιν ἀναλογοῦσιν ὡς ἓν γενέσθαι τὸ πᾶν — ἐξ ἁπάντων δέ, ἵνα τέλειος καὶ ἄφθαρτος ᾖ. Χρόνον τε γενέσθαι εἰκόνα τοῦ ἀϊδίου. κἀκεῖνον μὲν ἀεὶ μένειν, τὴν δὲ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ φορὰν χρόνον εἶναι· καὶ γὰρ νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν καὶ μῆνα καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα πάντα χρόνου μέρη εἶναι. διόπερ ἄνευ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου φύσεως οὐκ εἶναι χρόνον· ἅμα γὰρ ὑπάρχειν αὐτῷ καὶ χρόνον εἶναι.
1.74. And the sun and moon and planets were created as means to the creation of time. And God kindled the light of the sun in order that the number of the seasons might be definite and in order that animals might possess number. The moon is in the circle immediately above the earth, and the sun in that which is next beyond that, and in the circles above come the planets. Further, the universe is an animate being, for it is bound fast in animate movement. And in order that the universe which had been created in the likeness of the intelligible living creature might be rendered complete, the nature of all other animals was created. Since then its pattern possesses them, the universe also ought to have them. And thus it contains gods for the most part of a fiery nature; of the rest there are three kinds, winged, aquatic and terrestrial.
1.74. Πρὸς δὲ χρόνου γένεσιν ἥλιον καὶ σελήνην καὶ τὰ πλανώμενα γενέσθαι. ὅπως δὲ διάδηλος τῶν ὡρῶν ᾖ ἀριθμὸς καὶ μετάσχοι τὰ ζῷα ἀριθμοῦ, τὸ τοῦ ἡλίου φῶς ἀνάψαι τὸν θεόν. εἶναι δὲ ἐν μὲν τῷ ὑπὲρ γῆς κύκλῳ σελήνην, ἐν δὲ τῷ ἐχομένῳ ἥλιον, ἐν δὲ τοῖς ἐπάνω τοὺς πλανήτας. ἔμψυχον δὲ πάντως διὰ τὸ ἐμψύχῳ φορᾷ δεδέσθαι. ἵνα δὲ ὁ κόσμος τελειωθῇ γενόμενος ὁμοίως τῷ νοητῷ ζῴῳ, τὴν τῶν ἄλλων ζῴων γενέσθαι φύσιν. ἐπεὶ οὖν ἐκεῖνο εἶχε, καὶ τὸν οὐρανὸν δεῖν ἔχειν. θεοὺς μὲν οὖν ἔχειν τὸ πολὺ πυρίνους· εἶναι δὲ τρία γένη τἆλλα, πτηνόν, ἔνυδρον, πεζόν.
1.75. And of all the gods in heaven the earth is the oldest. And it was fashioned to make night and day. And being at the centre it moves round the centre. And since there are two causes, it must be affirmed, he says, that some things are due to reason and others have a necessary cause, the latter being air, fire, earth and water, which are not exactly elements but rather recipients of form. They are composed of triangles, and are resolved into triangles. The scalene triangle and the isosceles triangle are their constituent elements.
1.75. γῆν δὲ πρεσβυτάτην μὲν εἶναι τῶν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ θεῶν· γενέσθαι δὲ ὡς δημιούργημα νύκτα καὶ ἡμέραν ποιεῖν· οὖσαν δʼ ἐπὶ τοῦ μέσου κινεῖσθαι περὶ τὸ μέσον. ἐπεὶ δʼ αἰτίαι εἰσὶ δύο, τὰ μὲν διὰ νοῦ εἶναι, τὰ δʼ ἐξ ἀναγκαίας αἰτίας, φησί, λεκτέον. ταῦτα δʼ ἐστὶν ἀήρ, πῦρ, γῆ, ὕδωρ — καὶ οὐκ ὄντα μὲν στοιχεῖα κατὰ ἀκρίβειαν, ἀλλὰ δεκτικά. ταῦτα δʼ ἐκ τῶν τριγώνων εἶναι συντιθεμένων καὶ διαλύεσθαι εἰς ταῦτα· στοιχεῖα δʼ αὐτῶν εἶναι τό τε πρόμηκες τρίγωνον καὶ τὸ ἰσοσκελές.