Farmer and plants

Use in the book

The farmer is the first test of the companion’s definition of a lover of gain. At 225b Socrates imagines a man planting something he knows to be worth nothing while expecting gain when it has grown. The reference to its later growth makes this more than an exchange of finished possessions. The farmer must judge a present input by an expected outcome, allowing for the process through which its value would be realised.

The companion initially evades the particular case: the lover of gain thinks he should gain from everything. Socrates therefore asks who knows the worth of plants and their appropriate time and place. The answer, a farmer, assigns the relevant judgment to a recognised expert. When the example returns at 226a, the companion denies that such a knowledgeable farming man would think he gained from his worthless plant. This assent supplies the pattern for horseman, pilot and the remaining practitioners.

The argument does not show that every apparently worthless plant remains worthless under cultivation. Its hypothesis is stronger: the practitioner already knows that the plant is worthless in the circumstances relevant to the proposed gain. Conversely, the example does not directly address a seller who knows a plant is bad but hopes to persuade someone else to buy it. The companion’s moral complaint about unscrupulous gain is being tested through knowledgeable cultivation and its results. Whether that is an adequate interpretation of his complaint is part of the pressure the example creates.

Plants do not return as an explicit example. Their functional valuation nevertheless anticipates 231e, where something of worth is explained as worth possessing and then as beneficial. The country people educated through Hipparchus’ Herms at 228d should not simply be identified with this farmer: the later passage concerns an audience’s location, not its members’ agricultural competence.

Places to read

1. 225bφυτεύων γεωργὸς ἀνὴρ — The first concrete claimant to gain is a farmer engaged in planting.
2. 225c–d2ἐπιστήμων περὶ φυτῶν τῆς ἀξίας — Knowledge of plants’ worth is assigned to the farmer.
3. 226aγεωργικὸν ἄνδρα γιγνόμενον — The resumed example describes a man possessing agricultural competence.

Translation in this edition

The edition distinguishes “a farmer” from “a farming man.” Its apparatus reports geōrgos in T against geōrgikos in B at 225b5; the printed noun is therefore a textual choice, while the adjective appears in the later question. At 226a4 Burnet prints Stephanus’ phyteuei against phyteuein in B and T. The translation “the plant he is planting” follows that finite verb. Neither report warrants treating the alternative wording as a different species of agricultural worker.

Use in the book

The agricultural example follows the doctor and trainer. Socrates asks whom they would consult about the sowing of seeds and how much is moderate; all agree on the farmer. A second practical domain supports the idea that a beneficial amount is not self-evident to just anyone. It depends on the kind of activity and on someone able to judge it.

The next question fuses agriculture with the earlier body-soul analogy: whom should they ask about planting and sowing subjects of learning in a soul, both how many and what kind are moderate? The addition of “what kind” is decisive. The issue is not solved by reducing the number of lessons. A smaller selection can still be inappropriate if chosen for reputation rather than benefit.

This is where all become perplexed. The metaphor has not supplied the educator it makes imaginable. The absence can be productive: the dialogue has converted a confident slogan about much learning into a question about the knowledge required to guide learning well. Socrates then tries another way by asking which subjects a philosopher should learn.

The opening’s school setting makes the image particularly pointed, but no one identifies Dionysius as the required cultivator. The text likewise does not state that Socrates alone has the missing expertise. A reader may see his questioning as a form of cultivation; that is an interpretation of what he does, not an answer explicitly offered in this exchange.

Places to read

1. 134eπερὶ σπερμάτων σπορᾶς ὁπόσον μέτριον — The literal case asks about the measured amount of seed to sow.
2. 134eτὸν γεωργὸν ὡμολογοῦμεν — The interlocutors agree on the farmer.
3. 134eφυτεύσεώς τε καὶ σπορᾶς — Planting and sowing become a joint metaphor for education.

Translation in this edition

The edition translates both planting and sowing and preserves the double question “how many and what kind.” Its apparatus reports B’s plural spermatōn beside T’s singular spermatos, while the edited text has the plural. The difference should not be made to carry an invented distinction between species of seed. More important for the argument is the passage from a readily named farmer to an unnamed judge of learning.

Use in the book

Farming and gardening occur beside one another, but they do different work. Agricultural writings are accepted as agricultural laws in a single exchange (316e). Gardens then receive a fuller treatment: writings and lawful usages concern their working; these belong to gardeners; gardeners know how to “rule” gardens. The verb prepares for the move to ruling cities, while the practical object prevents “rule” from meaning political office throughout the sequence.

The farmer returns after the definition of law has been reaffirmed (317d). This time there is no discussion of a treatise. Socrates asks who knows how to distribute seeds on soil. The competent farmer distributes to each soil the seeds due to it, and his laws and distributions are right. The case gives actual content to distribution: recipient, material, and fit can all be named.

“Each soil” is important. The model does not simply require putting the same seed everywhere. It combines a stable standard of knowledgeable correctness with differentiated treatment of recipients. This does not settle the companion's entire objection about different peoples and changing laws; Socrates does not explicitly apply the difference between soils to political circumstances. It does show that sameness of knowledge and rightness need not mean an identical allocation to every object.

The city analogy should not be elaborated into an unstated theory that citizens are plants or that political education is cultivation. The text's actual steps are more specific: writings can embody field-specific rules; a skilled practitioner can govern an activity; a distributor gives what is fitting to the recipient. Those are substantial connections without an additional botanical allegory.

Places to read

1. 316eτὰ γεωργικὰ συγγράμματα γεωργικοὶ νόμοι — Agricultural writings are admitted as laws of farming
2. 316eτὰ περὶ κήπων ἐργασίας συγγράμματα καὶ νόμιμα — Gardens supply a practical subject for writings and lawful usages
3. 316eΤῶν ἐπισταμένων κήπων ἄρχειν — Gardening becomes an example of knowledgeable rule
4. 317dδιανεῖμαι ἐπὶ γῇ τὰ σπέρματα — The farmer's expertise is tested through distributing seeds
5. 317dτὰ ἄξια σπέρματα ἑκάστῃ γῇ διανέμει — Distribution is differentiated according to each soil
6. 317dὉ γεωργὸς ἄρα νομεὺς ἀγαθὸς τούτων — The farmer receives the broader designation “good distributor”

Translation in this edition

The translation uses “farming” and “gardening,” preserving the two related fields. It renders gē as “soil” in the allocation example and axia as “due,” so that the fit of the seeds to each recipient is visible. The ordinary agricultural nouns should not be entered as specialized political technical terms merely because Socrates uses them in an analogy.

Farmer — γεωργός (geōrgos)

γεωργός (geōrgos)

Farmer. The practitioner who knows how to distribute seeds on soil, matching the seed to each recipient soil. Attested: Γεωργός (317d). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.

Gardeners — κηπουρός (kēpouros)

κηπουρός (kēpouros)

Gardeners. Practitioners who know how to work and direct gardens; the companion names them as the owners of the relevant writings and usages. Attested: Κηπουρῶν (316e). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.

Gardens — κῆπος (kēpos)

κῆπος (kēpos)

Gardens. Cultivated gardens, the objects both of work and of the competent direction attributed to gardeners. Attested: κήπων (316e). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.

Of gardening — κηπουρικός (kēpourikos)

κηπουρικός (kēpourikos)

Of gardening. Pertaining to gardening; the adjective identifies the practical domain of the laws under discussion. Attested: Κηπουρικοὶ (316e). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.

On farming — γεωργικός (geōrgikos)

γεωργικός (geōrgikos)

On farming. Agricultural, qualifying the writings that Socrates asks the companion to acknowledge as laws of farming. Attested: γεωργικὰ (316e). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.

Seeds — σπέρμα (sperma)

σπέρμα (sperma)

Seeds. Actual agricultural seeds, the material allocated by the farmer. The dialogue does not make them an explicit allegory for citizens or political teachings. Attested: σπέρματα (317d). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.

Soil — γῆ (gē)

γῆ (gē)

Soil. The soil on which seeds are distributed; “each soil” makes the recipient-specific character of the farmer’s task explicit. Attested: γῇ (317d). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.

Working — ἐργασία (ergasia)

ἐργασία (ergasia)

Working. Practical work or cultivation, here the working of gardens that forms the subject of writings and lawful usages. Attested: ἐργασίας (316e). Farming gardens and differentiated cultivation.