The Plato Paradigm

Ivor Ludlam: A Critical Analysis of Plato’s Hippias Minor

Click here for a structural diagram, summary, and full account of the dialogue.

Traditional View

• The dialogue’s claim to fame is the paradox that the good man is bad on purpose.
• Much of the dialogue deals with literary criticism rather than philosophical issues.
• Socrates and Hippias are to be compared with Achilles and Odysseus, but it is unclear who is who.
• Plato is promoting lying, or telling the truth. Again, it is unclear which.

This Analysis

• The dialogue dramatizes three aspects of the concept of Ability.
• Ability sensed by the Many is automatically assumed by them to be good.
• Eudicus represents social ability, which may be used for good or bad ends. He appears to the Many to be good.
• Hippias represents technical ability, which may be used for good or bad ends. He appears to the Many to be good.
• Socrates represents dialectical ability, which may be used only for good ends. The Many cannot sense dialectical ability, and they regard Socrates as harmful.
• Achilles and Odysseus are not to be identified with Socrates and Hippias.
• The mistreatment of Homeric poetry is to be compared with the mistreatment of Platonic dialogues, evidently already a phenomenon worthy of attention at the time of writing this dialogue.