Plato's Phaedo (~400 BC) translated by Benjamin Jowett Part 3

   Plato's Phaedo

Bonus:

It's a playbook!

Summary: Blah blah Socrates blah blah.

Commentary: So, as I've established however many times, these dialogues suck. The writing is clunky, the arguments are lazy, the construction is awkward. I'm probably going to just DNF Phaedo and I doubt I'll get very far on the others.

But, I think I know the reason why. Plato is trying to write a play. He's doing a terrible job (why would you have a play where one character talks as other characters for 20 minutes?) but that's why they suck. Beyond that, the philosophy is still more "vaguely claimed thesis with no evidence" that's not really worth commenting on, since I'd just be copying the same "prove it" every 5 lines.

Plato's Phaedo (~400 BC) translated by Benjamin Jowett

  Plato's Phaedo

Bonus: 

Socrates would hit the dog.

Summary: Bad arguments; written badly

Commentary: 

I admit the appearance of inconsistency in what I am saying; but there may not be any real inconsistency after all. There is a doctrine whispered in secret that man is a prisoner who has no right to open the door and run away; this is a great mystery which I do not quite understand. Yet I too believe that the gods are our guardians, and that we are a possession of theirs. Do you not agree?

Yes, I quite agree, said Cebes.

And if one of your own possessions, an ox or an ass, for example, took the liberty of putting himself out of the way when you had given no intimation of your wish that he should die, would you not be angry with him, and would you not punish him if you could? 

Certainly, replied Cebes.

As someone who had a cat run away, I can assure you that the first thing I would do if I found him would not be punish him. Some people would argue that this is intentionally flawed logic, or maybe some kind of satire/irony. I feel like if you construct Socrates as the uber-philosopher and then make him sound like an idiot it's shit writing.

Some Fruits of Solitude: Part 10 Temperance (59-72)

 Some Fruits of Solitude: Part 10 Temperance (59-72)

Bonus: 

It's one of the cardinal virtues!

Summary: Don't do too much of anything.

Commentary: 

59: Eat to live, don't live to eat.

60. Eat frugally.

61. Eating good food is good for your stomach.

62. Don't eat so much meat.

63. Enough is BETTER THAN a fest.

64. If you wake up hungry, you'll always sit down hungry?

65. Don't drink except when you're thirsty. (William Penn was not a Boy Scout.)

66. Not getting drunk is good.

67. Sometimes drinking strong drinks is good for you.

68. The most common things are the most useful. (Not actually a paraphrase.)

69. Don't overuse rare things.

70. Don't waste things.

71. Don't tell people to do anything you wouldn't do yourself.

72. Too much of anything is bad.

This feels like it'd be better split into 2 or 3 topics. Also, one or two spots where it's unclear if he's talking about drinking anything or drinking liquor. I think he's far enough in time to be past the "all drinks are alcohol" phase. 

Topic List: Ignorance, Education, Luxury, Inconsideration, Disappointment And Resignation, Murmurs, Censoriousness, Bounds of Charity, Frugality or Bounty, Discipline, Industry, Temperance

Look what I got!

 Went to a used bookstore today and tracked down Volume One of T5FSOB! It's the Ben Franklin one, so pretty high on my list. They had about half a dozen volumes. I'd like to get a full set someday, but I don't really have anywhere good to put them. If I found them in good condition for a good price I'd go for it. Otherwise, I'll wait until I have five feet of shelf available.

Brilliant!

On the one hand, BRILLIANT!! seems a little bit overstated here. On the other, I won four moves later, so I guess it was decent.

Happy Thanksgiving!

I'm thankful for this blog, and THE CLASSICS, and all the things I've learned from them.

I made colcannon today, which might be a classic dish.

Plato's Phaedo (~400 BC) translated by Benjamin Jowett

 Plato's Phaedo

Bonus: 

Why is Plato like this?

Summary: A frame story for a knob slobbering wall of text.

Commentary: I've written before about how much I hate the dialogue as a format, and I think Phaedo does a great job of demonstrating this.

First of all, the entire concept of a dialogue is usually more of just an awkward frame story. The two characters don't usually add anything particular to what could've been an essay. In this case, we get about two pages of them talking before Phaedo starts the intro to the intro of his long awkward story.

The awkwardness is the second thing. The Apology while disagreeable in content, is generally pleasantly written. I liked Jowett's translation, although I can see how Grube's might be more appropriate for an intro course or whatever. I looked at about a half dozen editions/translations of the Phaedo, and they all have awkward constructions like:

ECHECRATES: What was the manner of his death, Phaedo? What was said or done? And which of his friends were with him? Or did the authorities forbid them to be present—so that he had no friends near him when he died?

Not only does no one talk like this in real life, but it's also unnecessarily wordy.  You could probably cut around half of it without even going particularly skimpy.

"How did he die? What happened? Did he have anyone with him, any friends, or did they make him die alone?"

Wow, that was easy.

And, of course, it's not a dialogue unless the listener is just absolutely orally worshiping the main speaker:

ECHECRATES: You will have listeners who are of the same mind with you, and I hope that you will be as exact as you can.

OMG Phaedo, you're as good as Socrates! Not a high bar.

 Anyway, after this threeish pages, Phaedo starts his story. He attempts to word for word explain exactly what was said and done. That means that about half of this "dialogue" is one uninterrupted speech by one of the characters. Why do a dialogue at all if you're not going to have them talk to each other!?