Status Updates From Protagoras/Meno

Finished Protagoras. Notes and glossary are illuminating. Nice idiom except for the poetry, in which I prefer David Horan's as far as that aspect is concerned. We'll see if I have time after finishing this book to compare with Horan's translation before a review. Until then, off to the dialouge Meno.

By a thin margin due to the lack of slang and increased formality, I like David Horan's translation of the poetry more. I only saw the poetry sections of Horan's so I'm yet to compare the entire dialouge.

https://www.platonicfoundation.org/tr...

That being said the English runs fine, and the notes are good with Beresford's (Penguin).

I like the translator's idiom, however, translating Prometheus and Epimetheus as Thixahead and Thinxtoolate felt a bit off. Perhaps Thinks-ahead, or Promethus-god of forethought. Also the poetry felt like strange modern slang, so I'll compare those bits with David Horan's translation.
Oxford and Wikipedia's summaries were helpful.

https://www.platonicfoundation.org/tr...

As suggested by the translator I finished reading Protagoras without the notes and am reading it again with them. The notes are interesting indeed, and I'm glad I wasn't bogged down by them for the first reading.

Wonderful introductions and translators note. I don't know Greek, but it at times feels parallel to how Sujato or Minford would speak on translation. Translates into English idiom, and doesn't use Latinised or translator jargon that only those who know Greek would understand. I know it says the first reading can skip the notes, but I feel so ever tempted to read them on my first reading nonetheless.

Good and evil

“Pleasure’s are evil as they end in Pain and Pains are goods because they end in pleasures. Thus pleasure is seen to be the only good”.

So… everything is technically good evil???

Done with meno (listened to Meno twice technically). Now onto Mr. Protagoras!

Plato writes with almost bricklike conviction in Protagoras. It's something you need to focus on; read it like you are reading a math problem. There is a very logical pathway that the syllogisms follow, and whilst helpful in the context of comprehension, which was his intention, it lacks a human touch. It reduces the argumentative condition of a person almost to a robotic nature.

This is something I hope to revisit.