The Reproach of the Certain Treatise
Read the full text in our reader
Socrates — … εἴτε Λυσίας ἤ τις ἄλλος πώποτε ἔγραψεν ἢ γράψει ἰδίᾳ ἢ δημοσίᾳ νόμους τιθείς, σύγγραμμα πολιτικὸν γράφων καὶ μεγάλην τινὰ ἐν αὐτῷ βεβαιότητα ἡγούμενος καὶ σαφήνειαν, οὕτω μὲν ὄνειδος τῷ γράφοντι, εἴτε τίς φησιν εἴτε μή.
The last topic returns to the first. The dialogue began with Phaedrus smuggling a written speech of Lysias under his cloak, and with the sneer that a man who writes is a mere 'speech-writer'; now Socrates settles what is really shameful about it. It is not the act of writing. It is writing 'laws' or a 'political treatise' (syngramma politikon) — whether by Lysias or anyone, in private or in public — while 'believing there is some great certainty and clarity in it,' megalēn tina bebaiotēta … kai saphēneian. That belief, Socrates says, is the reproach (oneidos) to the writer, 'whether anyone says so or not' — the disgrace is real in the nature of the thing, independent of anyone's opinion, because (the next line finishes) to be ignorant of justice and injustice, waking and dreaming, cannot escape being genuinely disgraceful, even if the whole crowd applauds.
Socrates turns from whether writing is an art to whether it is fine or shameful — reviving the 'reproach to Lysias' that opened this whole movement. The verdict: if Lysias, or anyone, writes laws or a political treatise believing his text holds great certainty and clarity, that belief is a reproach to him — whether or not anyone ever says so.
The word that fixes the point is <em>oneidos</em>, reproach — the very word thrown at speech-writers at the start of this movement, now turned precisely. What earns the reproach is not committing words to a page but the illusion that a page can hold what only a knowing soul can hold: <em>bebaiotēs</em> and <em>saphēneia</em>, certainty and clarity. A written law or treatise looks fixed and clear — that is exactly its danger — and the writer who mistakes that look for the real thing has confused the token of knowledge with knowledge, the same error the whole myth of Theuth diagnosed. Note where Socrates aims the charge: not at poetry or love-speeches but at <em>laws</em> and the <em>syngramma politikon</em>, the political treatise. This is deliberately close to the bone, because Plato is himself the author of the two longest political treatises in Greek — the <em>Republic</em> and, at the end of his life, the <em>Laws</em>. He is not exempting himself; he is stating the condition under which his own writing would be a disgrace: if he ever mistook it for a finished, certain, self-sufficient deposit of truth rather than a prompt to living inquiry. And the phrase 'whether anyone says so or not' does real philosophical work. It plants the reproach in the nature of the case, not in reputation — the same move the <em>Gorgias</em> makes when it argues that doing wrong is worse than suffering it <em>whatever</em> the crowd thinks. Shame here is objective: it attaches to ignorance of justice 'in truth,' <em>tē alētheia</em>, and no amount of applause from 'the whole mob' can lift it. The critique of writing has quietly become a critique of every claim to final authority that has not first passed through the living examination of dialectic.
Read the full commentary — and tap any word for its dictionary entry — in the interlinear reader.
Open Phaedrus 277d in the full reader
Always open passages in the reader
You are reading a page of the Phaedrus — the whole book is free in our interlinear reader.
The Great Library Project presses the classics in their original languages, glossed word by word — free to read, always. Browse the whole library.
Also on our shelves:
Phaedrus 277d — The Great Library Project interlinear edition · greatlibraryproject.com/book/phaedrus/277d/