The Sportsman [30]
eu eiponti pithetai}.
[7] Al. "in true sophistic style." The writer seems to say: "I lack subtlety of expression (nor is that at all my object); what I do aim at is to trace with some exactness, to present with the lucidity appropriate to them, certain thoughts demanded by persons well educated in the school of virtue."
Nor am I singular in thus reproaching the modern type of sophist (not the true philosopher, be it understood); it is a general reproach that the wisdom he professes consists in word-subtleties, not in ideas.[8] Certainly it does not escape my notice that an orderly sequence of ideas adds beauty to the composition:[9] I mean it will be easy to find fault with what is written incorrectly.[10] Nevertheless, I warrant it is written in this fashion with an eye to rectitude, to make the reader wise and good, not more sophistical. For I would wish my writings not to seem but rather to be useful. I would have them stand the test of ages in their blamelessness.[11]
[8] {onomasi}, "in names"; {noemasi}, "thoughts and ideas."
[9] Or, "I am alive to the advantage to be got from methodic, orderly expression artistically and morally."
[10] This passage, since H. Estienne (Stephanus) first wrote against it "huic loco meae conjecturae succumbunt," has been a puzzle to all commentators. The words run: {ou lanthanei de me oti kalos kai exes gegraphthai} [{gegraptai} in the margin of one MS.] {radion gar estai autois takhu me orthos mempsasthai' kaitoi gegraptai ge outos k.t.l.} For {takhu me orthos} (1) {takhu ti me orthos}, (2) {to} (or {ta}) {me orthos}, have been suggested. It is not clear whether {autois} = {tois sophistais} (e.g. "it will be easy for these people to lay a finger at once on blots, however unfairly"), or = {tois suggrammasi} (sc. my(?) compositions; so {auta}, S. 7 below, {ou gar dokein auta boulomai k.t.l.}) (e.g. "since it will be easy offhand to find fault with them incorrectly") [or if {ta me orthos}, "what is incorrect in them"]. I append the three translations of Gail, Lenz, and Talbot. "Je sais combien il est avantageux de presenter des ouvrages methodiquement ecrits; aussi par le meme sera-t-il plus facile de prouver aux sophistes leur futilite!" {radion gar estai} [sub. {emoi}] {mempsasthai outois takhu (to) me} (sous-entendu) {gegraphthai orthos} (Gail). "Zwar entgeht mir nicht, dass es schon say die Worte kunstvoll zu ordnen, denn leichter wird ihnen sonst, schnell, aber mit Unrecht zu tadeln" (Lenz). "Aussi leur sera-t-il facile de me reprocher d'ecrire vite et sans ordre" (Talbot). As if {takhu me orthos} were the reproachful comment of the sophist on the author's treatise.
[11] i.e. "the arguments to be blameless at once and irrefutable for all time."
That is my point of view. The sophist has quite another--words with him are for the sake of deception, writing for personal gain; to benefit any other living soul at all is quite beside his mark. There never was nor is there now a sage among them to whom the title "wise" could be applied. No! the appellation "sophist" suffices for each and all, which among men of common sense[12] sounds like a stigma. My advice then is to mistrust the sonorous catch-words[13] of the sophist, and not to despise the reasoned conclusions[14] of the philosopher; for the sophist is a hunter after the rich and young, the philosopher is the common friend of all; he neither honours nor despises the fortunes of men.
[12] L. Dind. cf. Eur. "Heracl." 370, {tou tauta kalos an eie} | {para g' eu phronousin}.
[13] {paraggelmata}. Cf. Aesch. "Ag." 480, "telegraph"; Lys. 121. 32; Dem. 569. 1; "words of command"; Dion. H. "De Comp." 248, "instructions, precepts."
[14] {enthumemata}.
Nor would I have you envy or imitate those either who recklessly pursue the path of self-aggrandisement,[15] whether in private or in public life; but consider well[16] that the best of men,[17] the true nobility, are discovered by their virtues;[18]
[7] Al. "in true sophistic style." The writer seems to say: "I lack subtlety of expression (nor is that at all my object); what I do aim at is to trace with some exactness, to present with the lucidity appropriate to them, certain thoughts demanded by persons well educated in the school of virtue."
Nor am I singular in thus reproaching the modern type of sophist (not the true philosopher, be it understood); it is a general reproach that the wisdom he professes consists in word-subtleties, not in ideas.[8] Certainly it does not escape my notice that an orderly sequence of ideas adds beauty to the composition:[9] I mean it will be easy to find fault with what is written incorrectly.[10] Nevertheless, I warrant it is written in this fashion with an eye to rectitude, to make the reader wise and good, not more sophistical. For I would wish my writings not to seem but rather to be useful. I would have them stand the test of ages in their blamelessness.[11]
[8] {onomasi}, "in names"; {noemasi}, "thoughts and ideas."
[9] Or, "I am alive to the advantage to be got from methodic, orderly expression artistically and morally."
[10] This passage, since H. Estienne (Stephanus) first wrote against it "huic loco meae conjecturae succumbunt," has been a puzzle to all commentators. The words run: {ou lanthanei de me oti kalos kai exes gegraphthai} [{gegraptai} in the margin of one MS.] {radion gar estai autois takhu me orthos mempsasthai' kaitoi gegraptai ge outos k.t.l.} For {takhu me orthos} (1) {takhu ti me orthos}, (2) {to} (or {ta}) {me orthos}, have been suggested. It is not clear whether {autois} = {tois sophistais} (e.g. "it will be easy for these people to lay a finger at once on blots, however unfairly"), or = {tois suggrammasi} (sc. my(?) compositions; so {auta}, S. 7 below, {ou gar dokein auta boulomai k.t.l.}) (e.g. "since it will be easy offhand to find fault with them incorrectly") [or if {ta me orthos}, "what is incorrect in them"]. I append the three translations of Gail, Lenz, and Talbot. "Je sais combien il est avantageux de presenter des ouvrages methodiquement ecrits; aussi par le meme sera-t-il plus facile de prouver aux sophistes leur futilite!" {radion gar estai} [sub. {emoi}] {mempsasthai outois takhu (to) me} (sous-entendu) {gegraphthai orthos} (Gail). "Zwar entgeht mir nicht, dass es schon say die Worte kunstvoll zu ordnen, denn leichter wird ihnen sonst, schnell, aber mit Unrecht zu tadeln" (Lenz). "Aussi leur sera-t-il facile de me reprocher d'ecrire vite et sans ordre" (Talbot). As if {takhu me orthos} were the reproachful comment of the sophist on the author's treatise.
[11] i.e. "the arguments to be blameless at once and irrefutable for all time."
That is my point of view. The sophist has quite another--words with him are for the sake of deception, writing for personal gain; to benefit any other living soul at all is quite beside his mark. There never was nor is there now a sage among them to whom the title "wise" could be applied. No! the appellation "sophist" suffices for each and all, which among men of common sense[12] sounds like a stigma. My advice then is to mistrust the sonorous catch-words[13] of the sophist, and not to despise the reasoned conclusions[14] of the philosopher; for the sophist is a hunter after the rich and young, the philosopher is the common friend of all; he neither honours nor despises the fortunes of men.
[12] L. Dind. cf. Eur. "Heracl." 370, {tou tauta kalos an eie} | {para g' eu phronousin}.
[13] {paraggelmata}. Cf. Aesch. "Ag." 480, "telegraph"; Lys. 121. 32; Dem. 569. 1; "words of command"; Dion. H. "De Comp." 248, "instructions, precepts."
[14] {enthumemata}.
Nor would I have you envy or imitate those either who recklessly pursue the path of self-aggrandisement,[15] whether in private or in public life; but consider well[16] that the best of men,[17] the true nobility, are discovered by their virtues;[18]