ἀλλὰ μέντοι αἰσχρόν γε εἰ μέν τις σε λέγοντα καὶ συμβουλεύοντα περὶ σιτίων ὅτι βέλτιον τόδε τοῦδε καὶ νῦν καὶ τοσοῦτον, ἔπειτα ἐρωτήσειεν ‘τί τὸ ἄμεινον λέγεις, ὦ Ἀλκιβιάδη;’ περὶ μὲν τούτων ἔχειν εἰπεῖν ὅτι τὸ ὑγιεινότερον, καίτοι οὐ προσποιῇ γε ἰατρὸς εἶναι: περὶ δὲ οὗ προσποιῇ ἐπιστήμων εἶναι καὶ συμβουλεύσεις ἀνιστάμενος ὡς εἰδώς, τούτου δ᾽, ὡς ἔοικας, πέρι ἐρωτηθεὶς ἐὰν μὴ ἔχῃς εἰπεῖν, οὐκ αἰσχύνῃ; ἢ οὐκ αἰσχρὸν φανεῖται;
It is shameful if someone, while you advised him about food, saying which one is better than which, and at what time and in what quantity, then asked you “What do you mean by ‘better’, oh Alcibiades?” that you should answer about these that it is more wholesome, even if you do not pretend to be a physician. On the other hand, about that which you pretend to be knowledgeable, and concerning what you will stand up and give advice, as someone who knows, you seem if asked about this, if unable to answer, not to be ashamed.
My translation is different than Loeb’s because I make περὶ μὲν τούτων ἔχειν εἰπεῖν ὅτι τὸ ὑγιεινότερον depend upon αἰσχρόν. The Loeb translation breaks up the connection and makes it an independent statement. So, which translation is more correct?