If I’m right here ανάγκη is the subject of δοκει, εἰπεῖν τὸν Σωκράτη, ἀντὶ τοῦ εἰκότος εἰ ἀνάγκη οὕτως, τὸ ἐπιθυμοῦν ἐπιθυμεῖν οὗ ἐνδεές ἐστιν, ἢ μὴ [200b] ἐπιθυμεῖν, ἐὰν μὴ ἐνδεὲς ᾖ. ἐμοὶ μὲν γὰρ θαυμαστῶς δοκεῖ, ὦ Ἀγάθων, ὡς ἀνάγκη εἶναι·
I wonder how you arrive at that conclusion. Unless you explain your understanding of the passage you will get no more answers from me.
The following
σοὶ δὲ πῶς;
implies πῶς δοκεῖ σοι ὡς ἀνάγκη εἶναι ἢ εἰκός;
The πῶς and ὡς point us back to the former part of the passage that you quoted. The section of Smyth that I have given the hyperlink for has something to say about when there has been a previous mention of a word.
I think the complete phrase would be: ἐμοὶ μὲν γὰρ θαυμαστῶς δοκεῖ, ὦ Ἀγάθων, ὡς ἀνάγκη (εστι τούτο) ειναι. Am I right now?
Perhaps you could verbalise your understanding of the syntax or present it diagrammatically. Which function of which ὡς are you working with?
It wonderfully seems how necessary it is that it should be so. I was confused with the absence of the predicate of ανάγκη which seems to be an elliptical εστι.
That rendering of yours has a wonderful poetic feel to it. The absence of any reference to anything allows us to freely imagine what it is saying.
Are you meaning to construct the ὡς phrase with θαυμαστῶς, or the εἶναι with δοκεῖ?
Ως with θαυμαστως: θαυμαστως δοκει ως ανάγκη εστί. Είναι depends on the elliptical predicate of ανάγκη, εστι.
There is no elliptical predicate.
If we take out the discourse level stuff and the θαυμαστῶς … ὡς then the basic structure is ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ ἀνάγκη εἶναι· I’m assuming that is not challenging, but if it is the Smyth reference will explain why it is not ἀνάγκην.
Let me ask about your understanding of the logic of what is being said. Does a weak man necessarily want to be strong or is being weak a necessary precondition for wanting to be strong? You can think of ἀνάγκη as “necessary precondition” in this context if that makes things easier for you.
The θαυμαστῶς … ὡς is added for emphasis. Although it can be rendered by “without doubt” etc. , I think it is something like I have heard people add “abso-f..ing-lutely” to what they say to emphasis a point, with the wow factor in English coming from the lexical infix and in Greek from the choice of word root.
So my final understanding is that ανάγκη is the predicate noun in the nominative that goes with είναι. So the complete phrase is τούτο μοι δοκει ανάγκη είναι.
Nothing is affirmed in that phrase. S. is not making a point, he is addressing Agathon’s choice of words. There is no previous point that can be summarized and restated in a τοῦτο.
My final understanding is that S. makes it clear that Agathon should have said οὐκ ἔχων ὡς ἀνάγκῃ γε. a few lines earlier. He makes the point strongly using θαυμαστῶς - “it is so necessary that it would leave you amazed at how necessary it is”.
Is that the way you see this aside in the conversation working?
So what is the grammatical subject of δοκει then?
In that construction, the subject (actor) is grammaticalised in the dative.
The other way to say that is to say that there is an impersonal construction and a substantive verb.
4 freq. impers., δοκεῖ μοι it seems to me, methinks, ὥς μοι δοκεῖ εἶναι ἄριστα Il. 12.215; ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ as I think, A. Th. 369, etc.; τὸ σοὶ δοκοῦν your opinion, Pl. R. 487d: freq. in inf. in parenth. clause, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκέειν to my thinking, Hdt. 9.113; δοκέειν ἐμοί Id. 1.172; ἀλλʼ, ἐμοὶ δοκεῖν, τάχʼ εἴσει A. Pers. 246, etc.; without μοι, X. An. 4.5.1.
Then ανάγκη is the subject of the infinitive είναι. This would be wrong however, therefore as Smyth says in 1983 this is a personal construction with δοκει, ανάγκη being the subject.
Do you agree that there is a difference between,
“The fruit seems good.” (based on sensory input) and
“The fruit seems good.” (a way of thinking),
where one is an appraisal and the other is an opinion?
In the first case, the speaker is directing the hearer’s attention to something, while in the second, the speaker is temporarily, directing attention to themself.
Your proposal to read this as personal puts it in the phrase structure, rather than in the discourse structure around the phrase structure. The grammar is the same, but where attention is expected is different. The following question suggests that attention should be given to the people, not only the subject matter. The whole aside is about addressing the person, in effect.
Furthermore, if ἀνάγκη is put with δοκεῖ, then what does εἶναι go with?
σκόπει δή, εἰπεῖν τὸν Σωκράτη, ἀντὶ τοῦ εἰκότος εἰ ἀνάγκη οὕτως, τὸ ἐπιθυμοῦν ἐπιθυμεῖν οὗ ἐνδεές ἐστιν, ἢ μὴ ἐπιθυμεῖν, ἐὰν μὴ ἐνδεὲς ᾖ; ἐμοὶ μὲν γὰρ θαυμαστῶς δοκεῖ, ὦ Ἀγάθων, ὡς ἀνάγκη εἶναι: σοὶ δὲ πῶς;
κἀμοί, φάναι, δοκεῖ.
As mentioned before, there is an idiom in this passage, See the adverb with ὡς and a finite verb in 173c earlier:
καὶ γὰρ ἔγωγε καὶ ἄλλως, ὅταν μέν τινας περὶ φιλοσοφίας λόγους ἢ αὐτὸς ποιῶμαι ἢ ἄλλων ἀκούω, χωρὶς τοῦ οἴεσθαι ὠφελεῖσθαι ὑπερφυῶς ὡς χαίρω
This same thing is going on with:
θαυμαστῶς…ὡς ἀνάγκη
“incredible what a necessity it is”
Now, δοκεῖ clearly isn’t a simple interjection or “methinks” here. It is answered by κἀμοὶ δοκεῖ. If we didn’t have the unusual adverb + ὡς construction, I would expect δοκεῖ ἀνάγκην εἶναι. However, the ὡς appears to be enough to disrupt the accusative with infinitive. Anacoluthon? However, maybe I’m missing something obvious.
As I said Smyth 1983 explains it all.
Which part if that?
1983
The personal constructions δοκῶ, ἔοικα ( cross2089 c), δέω are regular instead of δοκεῖ, ἔοικε it seems, δεῖ it lacks (much or little). So with φαίνομαι for φαίνεται.δοκῶ γάρ μοι ἄδυνατος εἶναι for I seem to be unable P. R. 368b, δοκοῦμέν μοι καθῆσθαι it seems to me that we are encamped X. A. 1.3.12, νῦν γε ἡμῶν ἔοικας βασιλεὺς εἶναι now at least you seem to be our king X. C. 1.4.6, πολλοῦ δέω ἐγὼ ὑπὲρ ἐμαυτοῦ ἀπολογεῖσθαι I am far from speaking in my own defence P. A. 30d, μι_κροῦ ἐδέησεν Κύπρον ἅπα_σαν κατασχεῖν he almost (lacked a little) occupied the whole of Cyprus I. 9.62, εὖ σὺ λέγειν φαίνει you seem to speak well Ar. Nub. 403.
a. δοκεῖ μοί τινα ἐλθεῖν for δοκεῖ τίς μοι ἐλθεῖν it seems to me that some one came is very rare. δοκεῖ meaning it seems good, it is decreed always takes the infinitive ( cross1984, cross1991). δοκῶ believe has the construction of 1992 c. Cp. cross1998.
The a part