The Plato Paradigm

Euthyphro, being a seer in his spare time,considers Socrates to be unjustly charged with inventing new gods (as if the writ itself is an act of injustice). Meletus, Socrates' prosecutor, and the Many, do not take seriously the idea of a personal daemon, and fail to understand Socrates' daimonion (demonic power). Euthyphro identifies with Socrates as a victim of the Many, since Euthyphro himself is...

Socrates describes his accuser, Meletus, to Euthyphro, and emphasizes how young he is both through the direct description of his appearance and through the agricultural image of a farmer weeding out older plants. Meletus was the actual prosecutor in 399 BC, but he was put up to it by a powerful radical democrat, Anytus, who is not mentioned here (he appears in another dialogue, Meno). Despite appe...

This is the second Platonic dialogue to be analysed in this podcast. Euthyphro and Socrates meet outside the Stoa of the Archon King and begin to discuss their respective cases concerning offences to the gods Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

In this final episode on Hippias Minor we see how the dialogue is a dramatization of the consequences of the Many's misconstrual of appearance as a good in itself. Plato has made concrete three aspects of dynamis (ability/power) in the form of the paradeigmata "dialectician" (representing true ability as a means), and two paradeigmata for dynamis treated as a good end in itself - "aristocrat" (soc...

Conclusions are made regarding Plato's point in writing Hippias Minor, and how he went about writing it. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Socrates finally concludes that if anyone performs injustice willingly, it is the just man, but neither Hippias nor Socrates is happy with this conclusion. It is often said that the dialogue ends in aporia, but there was never any dialectical attempt to define a concept in any case. The eristic debate finishes in favour of Hippias, who may now be sure to have some new students. Socrates has failed...

Socrates makes one last attempt to have Hippias realize that ability is only a means and not a good end in itself. He posits justice as an ability. Were justice really an ability, we would need to regard it as an ability with necessarily good ends (were it to have bad ends, it would not be justice); but Hippias regards justice itself, being an ability, as good in itself, and for him this ability,...

Socrates continues to attempt to make Hippias rethink the notion that ability per se is good. Having questioned whether doing bad willingly (with ability) is better than doing bad unwillingly (without ability, and hence without choice) with regard to inanimate tools, he continues with animate tools (e.g., horses and slaves) whose souls do bad from choice (being able), and Hippias prefers even them...

In this eristic movement concerning the choice between two equally bad outcomes, one with ability (willingly) and one without ability (unwillingly) Socrates moves from inanimate tools to animate tools, such as horses, dogs, archers, where the worthless soul is less preferable because the outcome is bad without ability. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek...

Socrates continues his attempts to make Hippias realize that ability is a means, and not a good end in itself, by asking which bad end is preferable, the one by choice (with ability) or the one without choice (without ability). His examples turn to parts of the body. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at...

Is the intentional or the unintentional wrongdoer better? Hippias effectively contradicts his escape clause (where he pointed out that the intentional wrongdoer is considered by the Many to be worse) by choosing the intentional wrongdoer (Hippias has built his reputation upon the Many's admiration of ability per se). However, as he points out, the fields Socrates has chosen are running, wrestling,...

Eudicus brings Hippias back into the conversation. Hippias agrees to be questioned again. Socrates exploits Hippias' attempted escape clause to move the conversation from the ability to lie to the ability to do wrong. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Socrates cashes in on his investment at the beginning of the dialogue. Eudicus is availed upon to bring Hippias back into the conversation. Socrates is now able to play on Hippias' two contradictory criteria by which the ability to do wrong is either good or bad. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: ht...

Socrates does not allow Hippias to escape, but begins buttering up Hippias in an effort to return him to the conversation. This does not work, and Hippias remains uncooperative. Socrates will move on to stronger tactics next time. All of this marks the transition between the first and second major arguments of the dialogue. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the...

Socrates springs the double trap. Hippias escapes by moving the goalposts, from simple lying (the able person can lie or tell the truth at will and is therefore better) to injustice (no able person doing injustice willingly is considered better than one doing injustice unwillingly). This is not opening up the discussion, but an attempt by Hippias to end the discussion with the crowd still on his s...

Socrates at the beginning of the eristic debate had made Hippias interpret "polytropos" negatively as "unsimple" and "lying", making Odysseus very bad in contrast to Achilles the truthful and simple. Under pressure, Hippias has had to add "willingly", so that the evil Odysseus lies willingly. Socrates now springs an eristic surprise on Hippias, a double trap emphasizing the ability both of Hippias...

Socrates demonstrates how Homeric characters should be analysed - by comparing what they say with what they do. Could Plato be hinting at the way Platonic characters should be analysed? Socrates provocatively calls Achilles a liar for declaring his intention to go home, while never actually making any preparations. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek tex...

Socrates derails Hippias' attempt to turn the eristic competition into a rhetorical competition. Socrates praises Hippias while incidentally touching upon the art of learning and the art of judging character. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Socrates allows Hippias to escape being refuted, and Hippias proposes a straight rhetorical debate with speech and counter-speech, to prove that the true Achilles and the false Odysseus are two different people. The audience (Eudicus and friends) would decide. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https...

Hippias polytropos. Socrates never calls Hippias explicitly "polytropos", but he does point out how many technai (skills) Hippias is an expert in. He also goes out of his way to indicate that Hippias is always advertising his expertise in many technai. Hippias, then, is a deigma for the polytropos, but a rather useless polytropos since the products of his various types of expertise are used simply...

Hippias is happy for Socrates to publicize Hippias' ability in calculation, geometry, and astronomy, although Hippias' ability to lie and tell the truth in all these fields would seem to aid Socrates' general argument that the false and the true man are one and the same. Hippias is supposed to be defending the position that the true man is better than the false man, who is someone else (just as Ac...

Socrates eristically refutes Hippias' claim that Achilles is better than Odysseus by arguing that the true and the false are actually the same, but Hippias just as eristically escapes the refutation. Socrates until now had incidentally shown that Hippias is most able at calculation, but now Hippias in his escape allows Socrates to show that Hippias is most polytropos, as we'll see next time. Here...

So what was Hippias' prepared speech on Achilles, Nestor, and Odysseus about? And for what purpose? Being most able and most polytropos is distinguished. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Socrates seems to have no idea how to win.an eristic debate. Instead of making the audience laugh at Hippias, he allows the sophist to agree that he, Hippias, is the most able, most expert, and best, at arithmetic. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulting analyses may be found at: https://theplatoparadigm.com

Homer is finally dropped from the conversation. Hippias will say what he and Homer think... Socrates asks about the false person, and Hippias in response, because of eristic choices (Black or White, no Grey) offered by Socrates, attributes to the false person: ability, prudence, and expertise. Here I read through Platonic dialogues, translating and commenting on the Greek text as I go. The resulti...