Without a doubt, (he answered).
Soc. And by things right and just you know what sort of things are meant?
What the laws ordain (he answered).
Soc. It would seem to follow that they who do what the laws ordain both do what is right and just and what they ought? (16)
(16) "What they should and must."
Euth. I see no alternative.
Soc. But then, he who does what is just and right is upright and just? (17)
(17) This proposition, as Kuhner argues (ad loc.), is important as
being the middle term of the double syllogism (A and B)—
A. Those who do what the law demands concerning men do what is
just and right.
Those who do what is just and right are righteous and just.
Ergo—Those who do what the law demands concerning men are
righteous and just.
B. Those who know what is just and right ought (and are bound,
cf. above, III. ix. 4) to do also what is just and right.
Those who do what is just and right are righteous and just.
Ergo—Righteous and Just ({dikaioi}) may be defined as "Those
who know what the law demands (aliter things right and just)
concerning men."
I should say so myself (he answered).
Soc. And should you say that any one obeys the laws without knowing what the laws ordain?