The Plato Paradigm

The dialogue is traditionally considered to be about friendship. The structure of the dialogue suggests that there is more to it than that. For example, the narrated conversation between Socrates and the boys Lysis and Menexenus is contextualized as a demonstration to Hippothales on how to speak to one's lust object with a view to catching him. We may deduce from the non-reaction of the unknown audience to whom Socrates is narrating that this emphasis on eros (lust) is to engage the audience in a conversation otherwise of little interest.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

The dialogue concludes with Socrates disappointing both his audiences. He suggests to Lysis and Menexenus, his apparent friends, that they are a laughingstock to the others because they do not know what a friend is. As for his unknown audience, who would surely identify with Hippothales eager to learn from Socrates how to captivate a lust object, we may imagine the confusion caused by Socrates having some intimate words with Lysis and Menexenus while they are all being led out of the palaestra. Hippothales is not mentioned, and the feeling is that he is shut out.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 gives a summation of the case, as if in a lawcourt, listing all the things which friendship is not. Were the list to be true, we would need to conclude not only that friendship is still undefined, but that it is altogether impossibleHere 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

The boys a.re unchanged by the entire conversation, despite Socrates' attempt to intoxicate them with words. The main problem the boys have is an inability to compare what is being said with what has been said earlier. Politeness is a Good Thing according to poisoners, but some friendly criticism and opposition is the alcoholic antidote to hemlock. Alcohol only works, however, if it is ingestedHere 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

More evidence at the end of the dialogue that the boys are unable to put two thoughts together to create a rational conclusion. They appear not to understand even what "the same" means, let alone what "the proper" means. They return to assumptioms already refuted in previous arguments. Socrates is far from making them dialectically drunk; they appear to be teetotallers.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

Musings on a single sentence which may throw light on the entire dialogue. Socrates claims that they are, as it were, drunk by the logos. The need for the strange example earlier on of a dear son who has drunk hemlock being cured by a father with the aid of wine now makes sense If Socrates, the author of the logos, is the one applying alcohol to the problem, who is applying hemlock? I offer a few suggestions.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

An incautious reader of the dialogue might conclude that the entire discussion between Socrates, Lysis, and Menexenus, is a demonstration for Hippothales' benefit, designed to prove that the one lusted should love the one lusting. Hippothales, at least, is reportedly delighted with the result. The boys are not so happy. As for Socrates, he does not reveal his utter frustration with the mental sluggishness of his various audiences.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 reaches his sophistic conclusion, unsettling for Lysis, but Menexenus appears blissfully unaware of the implications. What is very clear is that the boys are oblivious to the sophistry itself. It would appear that Socrates' attempt to make the boys become critical, if not entirely dialectical, has failed.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 uses the same terminology from three different arguments to mix and match and thoroughly confuse Menexenus into agreeing that the one who desires someone is that person's friend.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