What was going on: In Plato's Laws, a character called the Athenian Stranger is talking with Clinias and Megillus. He has just described pleasure and pain as two foolish advisers inside each of us, and now offers an image to explain them.
Imagine each of us is a clever puppet made by the gods, maybe as a toy, maybe for something serious. We have no idea which.
Let us suppose that each of us living creatures is an ingenious puppet of the gods, whether contrived by way of a toy of theirs or for some serious purpose—for as to that we know nothing;
The Athenian Stranger speaking, in Plato's Laws. Plato, Laws 644d, translated by R. G. Bury (1926)
What was going on: In Plato's Laws, an Athenian Stranger is talking with Clinias about a new city they are planning, with settlers about to arrive. He argues that office should go not to the rich, strong or well-born, but to whoever best obeys the laws.
Where the law bows to those in power, I see ruin coming. Where officials serve the law, I see a state that will be saved and blessed.
For wherever in a State the law is subservient and impotent, over that State I see ruin impending; but wherever the law is lord over the magistrates, and the magistrates are servants to the law, there I descry salvation and all the blessings that the gods bestow on States.
The Athenian Stranger speaking, in Plato's Laws. Plato, Laws 715d, translated by R. G. Bury (1926)
What was going on: In Plato's Laws, an Athenian visitor is explaining how citizens should be raised to live well under the laws. Having covered how a person should treat parents, friends and the state, he turns to the kind of character that leads to a noble life.
For gods and people alike, truth is the first of all good things. If you want a happy life, start living by it from childhood.
Of all the goods, for gods and men alike, truth stands first. Thereof let every man partake from his earliest days, if he purposes to become blessed and happy, that so he may live his life as a true man so long as possible.
The Athenian Stranger speaking, in Plato's Laws. Plato, Laws 730b–c, translated by R. G. Bury (1926)
What was going on: In a letter said to be Plato's (his authorship is disputed), the writer turns to his own youth. Next he tells of a revolution that put Thirty men in charge with no one to answer to.
Why it matters: Plato's youthful hope of a public life is known from the Seventh Letter, the longest of his letters and considered the most important, though its authenticity has been disputed.
When I was young I felt what many others feel: I thought that as soon as I was my own master, I'd go straight into public life.
In the days of my youth my experience was the same as that of many others. I thought that as soon as I should become my own master I would immediately enter into public life.
Seventh Letter; authorship disputed. Plato, Letters 7.324b–c, translated by R. G. Bury (1929)
What was going on: In a letter credited to Plato, though its authorship is disputed, the writer recalls his youth, when the Thirty took power in Athens. Some of them were people he knew and they invited him to join, so he watched what they did, including trying to force Socrates to help seize a citizen for execution.
Why it matters:Socrates stayed in Athens under the Thirty; the public came to associate him with them, which may have contributed to his eventual death sentence.
In no time these men made people miss the old government, and worst of all was how they treated my old friend Socrates, whom I would readily call the most just man alive.
And indeed I saw how these men within a short time caused men to look back on the former government as a golden age; and above all how they treated my aged friend Socrates, whom I would hardly scruple to call the most just of men then living,
Seventh Letter; authorship disputed. Plato, Letters 7.324d–e, translated by R. G. Bury (1929)
What was going on: In a letter said to be Plato's, though its authorship is disputed, the writer looks back on Athens after the Thirty fell and exiles returned. Men in power then took his friend Socrates to court for impiety, and he was condemned and killed.
Why it matters: The prosecution of Socrates put an end to Plato's plans for a political career.
Then, by bad luck, some powerful men took our friend Socrates to court on an unholy charge, the one he deserved least of anyone.
But, as ill-luck would have it, certain men of authority summoned our comrade Socrates before the law-courts, laying a charge against him which was most unholy, and which Socrates of all men least deserved;
Seventh Letter; authorship disputed. Plato, Letters 7.325b, translated by R. G. Bury (1929)
What was going on: In a letter said to be Plato's (scholars dispute who wrote it), the writer looks back on his early wish to enter politics in Athens. He describes laws and customs being corrupted fast, and trusted friends being hard to find.
At first I badly wanted to go into politics. But watching everything lurch in every direction, I ended up dizzy.
Consequently, although at first I was filled with an ardent desire to engage in public affairs, when I considered all this and saw how things were shifting about anyhow in all directions, I finally became dizzy;
Seventh Letter; authorship disputed. Plato, Letters 7.325d–e, translated by R. G. Bury (1929)
What was going on: In the same disputed letter, the writer says he once longed for a public career but grew dizzy watching things shift in every direction, and came to see every state as badly governed. He says he held this view when he first arrived in Italy and Sicily.
People's troubles won't end until true philosophers take power, or until, by some gift of the gods, the people in power truly become philosophers.
Wherefore the classes of mankind (I said) will have no cessation from evils until either the class of those who are right and true philosophers attains political supremacy, or else the class of those who hold power in the States becomes, by some dispensation of Heaven, really philosophic.
Seventh Letter; authorship disputed. Plato, Letters 7.326a–b, translated by R. G. Bury (1929)
What was going on: In a letter credited to Plato, though its authorship is disputed, the writer says others have written about the subjects he studies most seriously, and that he is told a man he once taught has too. He says such writers cannot understand those subjects at all.
Why it matters: Here the Seventh Letter, which many scholars reject as Plato's, voices his so-called unwritten doctrine, that nothing of importance should be committed to writing.
I have never written a book on this and never will. It can't be put in words; after long work on it, it lights up in the mind all at once, like a spark.
There does not exist, nor will there ever exist, any treatise of mine dealing therewith. For it does not at all admit of verbal expression like other studies, but, as a result of continued application to the subject itself and communion therewith, it is brought to birth in the soul on a sudden, as light that is kindled by a leaping spark, and thereafter it nourishes itself.
Seventh Letter; authorship disputed. Plato, Letters 7.341c–d, translated by R. G. Bury (1929)
What was going on: In a letter said to be Plato's, though many doubt he wrote it, the writer warns that written teachings always get out, so it is safer to learn by heart. Right after, he asks the reader to read the letter over and then burn it.
Why it matters: The Second Letter is the source of this oft-cited remark about Plato's writings, though R. G. Bury argues the letter is almost certainly not by Plato.
I have never written anything on these subjects, and there is no book by Plato. The works under my name belong to a Socrates made handsome and young.
For this reason I myself have never yet written anything on these subjects, and no treatise by Plato exists or will exist, but those which now bear his name belong to a Socrates become fair and young.
Second Letter; authorship disputed, widely thought not by Plato. Plato, Letters 2.314c, translated by R. G. Bury (1929)
What was going on:Diogenes Laertius, writing centuries later, collects stories of Diogenes the Cynic mocking people in Athens. In this one, Diogenes answers Plato's definition by bringing a plucked fowl into the lecture room.
Plato defined a human as an animal with two legs and no feathers, and people applauded.
Plato had defined Man as an animal, biped and featherless, and was applauded.
As Diogenes Laertius tells it, centuries later. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 6.40, translated by R. D. Hicks (1925)
What was going on:Diogenes Laertius, writing centuries later, collects stories of Diogenes the Cynic mocking Plato. In this one, Plato had invited friends who came from Dionysius, and Diogenes walked over his carpets, saying he was trampling on Plato's vanity.
You show off a lot of pride, Diogenes, by acting like you have none.
Plato’s reply was, How much pride you expose to view, Diogenes, by seeming not to be proud.
As Diogenes Laertius tells it, centuries later. Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 6.26, translated by R. D. Hicks (1925)
