This text is part of:
μὴ τοιοῦτον -- ποιήσωσι. For τοιοῦτον cf. 388 D note Richter conjectured μὴ τοιοῦτοι—ποιηθῶσι, “parum venuste,” as Hartman mercifully says. ἀντὶ ξυμμάχων -- ἀφομοιωθῶσιν. For the usual ampliative or explanatory asyndeton cf. 409 B. Aristotle objects that Plato's regulations would virtually divide his city into two hostile camps (Pol. B 5. 1264^{a} 24), and Grote does not see “what reply the Platonic Republic furnishes to this objection” (l.c. III p. 213). In reply to Aristotle, Plato might have pointed to his regulations about the interchange of classes (415 B ff.), which would have the effect of binding them together more securely. Moreover, where each individual has the work to do for which he is best qualified, one fruitful cause of discontent and sedition is removed. The wives and families of the lower class would also tend to keep them quiet. Nor does Aristotle's objection allow sufficient weight to the training by which Plato tries to protect his guardians from such ‘spiritual pride’ as would alienate their subjects. καὶ ἐγὼ εἶπον. See cr. n. καὶ ἔγωγ᾽ εἶπον, though generally retained, is surely wrong: it could only mean ‘I too, said I.’ No editor cites any other instance of ἔγωγε in this formula. τοῦτο μὲν κτλ. prepares us for the second scheme of education in Book VII: cf. 412 B, 414 A notes
The Republic of Plato. James Adam. 1902. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.