The aristocrat Callicles is not at all impressed or convinced by Socrates's sophistry; and this is probably a first in Plato's dialogues. Socrates ends his arguments and the dialogue by threatening Callicles with the eternal judgment and hell. I suspect that Nietzsche loved this dialogue – as Callicles is prefiguring his philosophy and moreover directly dismisses Socrates and everything that the Corrupter of the Greek's Youth stood for.

Very painful to ready to dialogue technics used. But some good insight and view of the ancient GREC live.
Funny anecdote : got a conversation with an American woman working in Philadelphia about GREC philosophy in the airport

One of the better dialogues in that it manages to raise most of the big issues of virtue and citizenship in way which does not feel to rushed or overly contrived. It's the first dialogue I've read which actually made me smirk when Socrates offered a witty retort or a brilliant condemnation of someone else's views. to someone. It's also a lot of fun to hate on Callicles

Μη μπερδεύεστε, το ένα αστεράκι είναι μπόνους για τις παραπομπές στην ηθική και τον εσχατολογικό μύθο. Τρία ήθελα να του βάλω.

Plato's outstanding dialogue on politics, the good life, and how to - or how and why not to - participate in a political system.

أنا أفضل أن أستخدم قيثارة غير متوافقة الاوتار وكلها نشاز، أو أن أكون رئيساً لفرقة مغنين غير منتظمين، أو أن أجد نفسي غير متفق ومعارض لجميع الناس، عن أن أكون مختلفاً مع نفسي وحدها ومعارضاً لها.

Digər dialoqlarında olduğu kimi burda da Sokratın adından verib öz fikirlərini. Sokratın öz əsəri olmadığından Platonun əsərlərində verilənlər Sokratın yoxsa Platonun öz fikirləridir məlum deyil, yüz illərdir müzakirə mövzusudur. Məncə, Platonun gözündən Sokratdır. Yəni həm Sokratdır, həm də Platon.

Platonun ritorika sənətinə yanaşma tərzi digər əsərlərində olduğu kimi: dürüst və haqq yolunda gedildiyi zaman doğrudur. Əslində o ritorikanı heç sənət olaraq qəbul etmir, çünki ona görə əsas olan bir işi layiqincə yerinə yetirməkdir, onun haqqında gözəl danışmaq yox. Natiq peşəsində bacarıqsız olduğu halda asanlıqla gözəl nitqiylə başqasını aldada bilər. Qısaca sözdə yox, əməldə üstün olmaqdadır mərifət :)

لا استشعر وجود سقراط الحقيقي في هذه المحاورة ، ربما لم يحالف أفلاطون الحظ في تصويره هنا .. و معتقدش برده ان جورجياس نفسه كان بالسذاجة ديه اللي افلاطون صوره بيها ... المحاورة تشعبت موضوعاتها لدرجة التشتيت و انا شخصيا تهت اكتر من مرة ... التحليل المرفق مع نص المحاورة المترجم سيء و الهوامش بالكاد ترقى لدرجة المقبولة.. في المجمل الكتاب لا يفيد بشيء غير بعض المعلومات عن المعتقدات اليونانية اللي بنستشفها من النص بالاضافة لتوضيح موقف افلاطون من السفسطائيين

First time reading something for a university discussion! (Meaning my first university discussion, not my first time reading something for that purpose

3.5 ⭐️!

This book is a masterpiece. It includes a critical text, and a line-by-line philological commentary. But even the reader without Greek will learn an enormous amount about Plato and related topics by reading it alongside a translation -- just skip all the entries dealing with purely philological matters.

It is often said that the best commentary on Aristotle is Aristotle. Hence, important commentaries on Aristotle spend most of their time quoting (in Greek) other passages from Aristotle. The same is true for Plato - and probably for all philosophers. So keep a copy of the translated works handy and whenever Dodds or anyone cites a passage or refers to a passage, follow up the reference.

The best translation of the collected works remains E. Hamilton, Cairns Lord -- not Cooper. By a mile.

Gorgias by Plato
Gorgeous Gorgias in some parts, but not overwhelming in others

Plato and Socrates are two titans of human thought, thinkers that have had an enormous impact and contribution to the development of mankind, with brilliant ideas that have shaped the Western democracy.

Nevertheless, I was not all that happy with Gorgias.

First of all, I have been on the wrong side of the arguments, if not throughout, at least to begin with and for large parts.
Socrates appeared to be too belligerent, maybe in the audio version that I heard he appears more violent.
Granted, his interlocutors made me think that dialectical dialogue as I knew it may have given way to a locker room exchange of rude words.

Of course this is just the view of a dilettante, with inclination to sophism that actually proves that Socrates is right.

The vehement crucifixion of the rhetoric and then sophist occupations are too virulent for my taste and ultimately wrong

-tYes I get the picture
-tRhetoric can be and is used by malevolent men to evil purpose
-tTrump comes to mind

But still, even if that can be the case, to dismiss a useful skill is not worthy of the wisest man of the ancient world...

-tSure, the argument that philosophy is worthier than rhetoric is powerful, but to annihilate the latter is wrong


The ethics and morality of Socrates are impeccable

-tHe argues that it is better to suffer injustice than to inflict it
-tBetter die than do something wrong

Many years ago, I have first read some of the ideas of Plato, once in a while as presented by Socrates in the dialogues.
The issue of death stayed in my mind

-tYou are not afraid of death Socrates?
-tNo
-tWhat is the reason
-tI do not know about it
-tSo
-tNobody has come back from the other side to inform us about it
-tYes, it is true
-tTherefore, to be afraid of it would be to pretend to know something about death
-tContinue…
-tAnd I never say that I know something that I do not know

And indeed, Socrates came to the conclusion that he was declared the wisest man of the Ancient world because he never claimed to know anything

-t“I know that I know nothing”

Taking his quote, I know nothing about Gorgias.
At least I did not take it the “right, good” way and I have sided with the bad, ugly aspect of the heated argument.