previous next

φήσει. We should expect φήσουσι, but the transition from plural to singular is common (see on 1 347 A), and Plato is probably thinking of the objector in 487 C (φαίη ἄν τις κτλ.): cf. 489 D and 490 D. οὐκ ἀγαθήν just above (instead of μὴ ἀγαθήν as in μὴ τὴν φύσιν) prepares the way for φήσει, by shewing that the infinitives are beginning to escape from the sway of ἀμφισβητῆσαι. φήσει in φήσει λογιζόμενος II 366 A furnishes an exact parallel to φήσει here. The best MSS—see cr. n.—read φήσειν, which is retained by Schneider and others. If φήσειν is right, we must either (1) refer it to ἕξουσι, and suppose that the future is “ob ἔσεσθαι pro φάναι receptum” (Schneider, Stallbaum), or (2) supply an οἴει (J. and C.). Neither explanation is in my judgment possible. φήσεις, the reading of q and editors before Bekker, may be defended from 489 B and 489 D, where Adimantus is identified with the antagonist of 487 C, but the corruption is not a very likely one. Madvig, more suo, expels the word. Cf. Introd. § 5.

Creative Commons License
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.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: