James Adam, The Republic of Plato

ἰατρικὸν κτλ. Plato is illustrating that particular variety of ὁμοίωσις and ἀλλοίωσις which πρὸς αὐτὰ τείνει τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα. As an instance of ὁμοίωσις he gives two ἰατρικοί (cf. I 350 A): these clearly have the same nature πρὸς αὐτὰ τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα, i.e. in this case πρὸς τὸ ἰατρεύεσθαι. ἀλλοίωσις he illustrates by the difference between an ἰατρικός and a τεκτονικός: these have different natures πρὸς τὰ ἐπιτηδεύματα, for the one is qualified ἰατρεύεσθαι, the other τεκταίνεσθαι. Nothing could be more clear; but the text has been plunged into confusion by the introduction of the words τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα after the second ἰατρικόν. The reading of A—see cr. n.—is indefensible; and the majority of recent editors print ἰατρικὸν μὲν καὶ ἰατρικὸν τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα with q. But τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα adds nothing to ἰατρικόν. It has indeed been thought that ἰατρικόν by itself suggests a doctor in actual practice, whereas an ἰατρικὸς τὴν ψυχήν need not practise. If so, we may fairly doubt whether the two have the same nature; and at all events the difference between them renders them inapt illustrations of Plato's argument. Jowett and Campbell attempt to escape these difficulties by taking τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα with the first ἰατρικόν as well as with the second; but the Greek does not permit of this solution. Similar objections apply to the readings of Bekker (and apparently Ficinus) ἰατρὸν μὲν καὶ ἰατρικὸν τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα, of Stephanus and other early editors ἰατρικὸν μὲν καὶ ἰατρικὴν τὴν ψυχὴν ἔχοντα (partly supported by Θ), and also, with some modifications, to Richards' otherwise unhappy proposal ἰατρικὸν μὲν καὶ ἰατρικὸν <εὐφυᾶ> τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα. Hermann reads ἰατρικὸν μὲν καὶ ἰατρικὴν τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντας, but the introduction of women is of course premature. I regard τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα as a relic of ἰατρὸν τὴν ψυχὴν ὄντα, a marginal annotation on ἰατρικόν. Cf. Introd. § 5.

ἐλέγομεν: ‘we were saying,’ i.e. ‘we meant.’ Nothing of the sort was actually said before.

διαφέρον: ‘excelling’ rather than ‘differing’ (D. and V.): hence τοῦτο δὴ— ἀποδιδόναι. Richards proposes διαφέρειν, to avoid the singular. But the subjects are distributed, as appears from καὶ τό— καὶ τό, as well as from ἑκατέρῳ; and the infinitive is somewhat less suitable here than it is below. Translate ‘if either the male or the female sex plainly excels the other’ etc.