I call attention to this sentence as a fair specimen of the grounds upon which the Platonic critics proceed when they strike dialogues out of the Platonic Canon. If there be anything wanting in it which is required for what they consider a proper setting forth of the argument--if there be anything which they would desire to see omitted or otherwise illustrated--this is with them a reason for deciding that it is not Plato's work. That is, if there be any defects in it of any kind, it cannot be admitted as Plato's work;--_his genuine works have no defects_. I protest altogether against this _ratio decidendi_. If I acknowledged it and applied it consistently I should strike out every dialogue in the Canon. Certainly, the presumption in favour of the Catalogue of Thrasyllus must be counted as _nil_, if it will not outweigh such feeble counter-arguments as these. One reason given by Stallbaum for considering the Erastæ as spurious is, that the Sophists are not derided in it. "Quis est igitur, qui Platonem sibi persuadeat illos non fuisse castigaturum, et omnino non significaturum, quinam illi essent, adversus quos hanc disputationem instituisset?" It is strange to be called on by learned men to strike out all dialogues from the Canon in which there is no derision of the Sophists. Such derision exists already in excess: we hear until we are tired how mean it is to receive money for lecturing. Again, Stallbaum says that the persons whose opinions are here attacked are not specified by name. But who are the [Greek: ei)dô=n phi/loi], attacked in the Sophistês? They are not specified by name, and critics differ as to the persons intended. CHAPTER XVII. ION. [Side-note: Ion. Persons of the dialogue. Difference of opinion among modern critics as to its genuineness.] The dialogue called Ion is carried on between Sokrates and the Ephesian rhapsode Ion. It is among those disallowed by Ast, first faintly defended, afterwards disallowed, by Schleiermacher,[1] and treated contemptuously by both. Subsequent critics, Hermann,[2] Stallbaum, Steinhart, consider it as genuine, yet as an inferior production, of little worth, and belonging to Plato's earliest years. [Footnote 1: Schleiermacher, Einleit. zum Ion, p. 261-266; Ast, Leben und Schriften des Platon, p. 406.] [Footnote 2: K. F. Hermann, Gesch. und Syst. der Plat. Phil. pp. 437-438; Steinhart, Einleitung, p. 15.] [Side-note: Rhapsodes as a class in Greece. They competed for prizes at the festivals. Ion has been triumphant.]