hide
Named Entity Searches
hide
Matching Documents
The documents where this entity occurs most often are shown below. Click on a document to open it.
Document | Max. Freq | Min. Freq | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
View all matching documents... |
Browsing named entities in Plato, Republic. You can also browse the collection for Plato (Colombia) or search for Plato (Colombia) in all documents.
Your search returned 33 results in 33 document sections:
“No, by heaven,” he said.
“Again, when a man thinks himself to be in the wrong,So Aristotle
Rhet. 1380 b 17OU) GI/GNETAI GA\R H( O)RGH\ PRO\S TO\
DI/KAION, and Eth. Nic. 1135 b 28E)PI\ FAINOME/NH| GA\R A)DIKI/A|
H( O)RGH/ E)STIN. This is true only with Plato's reservation GENNAIO/TEROS. The baser type is angry when
in the wrong. is it not true that the nobler he is the less is he
capable of anger though suffering hunger and coldCf. Demosthenes xv. 10 for the same general idea. and
whatsoever else at the hands of him whom he believes to be acting justly
therein, and as I sayO(\ LE/GW: idiomatic, “as I was
saying.” his spirit refuses to be aroused against such
a one?” “True,” he said. “But what
“So it seems,”
he said. “Come then, consider,” said I, “if we
can find a way out. We did agree that different natures should have
differing pursuits and that the nature of men and women differ. And yet now
we affirm that these differing natures should have the same pursuits. That
is the indictment.” “It is.” “What a
grandGENNAI/A: often as here ironical in Plato. Cf. Sophist 231
B, where interpreters misunderstand it. But the new L. and S. is
correct. thing,
“is
the power of the art of contradictionA)NTILOGIKH=S: one of several
designations for the eristic which Isocrates maliciously confounds with
dialectic while Plato is careful to distinguish them. Cf. E. S.
Thompson, The Meno of
Plato, Excursus
V., pp. 272 ff. and the introduction to E.H. Gifford's
Euthydemus, p. 42. Among the marks of eristic are the
pusuit of merely verbal oppositions as here and
Euthydemus 278 A, 301 B, Theaetetus 164 C;
the neglect to distinguish and divide, Philebus 17 A,
Phaedrus 265 E, 266 A, B; the failure to distinguish
the hypothesis from its consequences, Phaedo 101 E,
Parmenides 135-136.