I haven’t written here in a while, which I apologize for if there was anyone that was hoping for more regular updates. When I started this, I said I would write as often as I read things I felt I could say something about worth reading. It turns out that may include some substantial gaps. In any event, I am currently doing a reading group on Plato’s
Every time I have tried to read this I have been a bit stymied by the abrupt shift from "give every man what he is owed" to "reward your friends and punish your enemies." It seems to me that Polemarchus shifts his ground before Socrates has really disproved his original statement. It seems that he should put up at least some degree of objection that a man who has become insane is no longer owed what he might have been owed when sane, and so his definition can potentially be saved, but instead he goes to a completely different definition. Is this maybe less of a problem in Greek? Is it a false impression created by translation?
Every time I have tried to read this I have been a bit stymied by the abrupt shift from "give every man what he is owed" to "reward your friends and punish your enemies." It seems to me that Polemarchus shifts his ground before Socrates has really disproved his original statement. It seems that he should put up at least some degree of objection that a man who has become insane is no longer owed what he might have been owed when sane, and so his definition can potentially be saved, but instead he goes to a completely different definition. Is this maybe less of a problem in Greek? Is it a false impression created by translation?