distinction is seen as a consequence of their fathers’neglect of their own education. Whereas
Lysimachus and Melesias feel shame in front of their sons, they do not take any responsibility for
this and instead“blame our fathers for allowing us to take things easy when we were growing up,
while they were busy with other people’s affairs”(179c–d). In making this argument Lysimachus
and Melesias unwittingly introduce a central concern of theLachesas a whole: the rift between
public service and the proper cultivation of one’s own, or philosophy.^37
The question one needs to consider here is how one should interpret the introduction of this
topic and the figure of Lysimachus who is almost exclusively responsible for its introduction.
Lysimachus is aware of this tension (it is his formulation) and a remedy for the rift is sought in the
advice of two prominent generals (179e). Sprague suggests that in recognizing the problem and
seeking expert advice for a solution, that Lysimachus and Melesias embody the correct view of
Socratic ignorance (not thinking that they know things they do not know).^38 If correct, then it is
possible to view the contribution of Lysimachus and Melesias to the first half of theLachesas
situatingthequestionofcouragewithinalarger contextofquestionsabouteducationandvirtue.^39 For
thisargumenttohold,itmustnecessarilybethecasethatLysimachusandMelesiasactandspeakfrom
a position of conviction. Is this the case, or does Plato employ the two for a different purpose?
The dialog format requires the reader to be mindful of the possibility that Plato employs literary
devices for larger, philosophic ends. Plato is especially fond of irony and this raises the possibility
that his presentation of Lysimachus and Melesias as being philosophically predisposed is done
ironically.^40 If so, this would have the effect of introducing a comic element into how one should
interpret the function of these characters. Tessitore makes the case for a comic reading of theLaches
and of Lysimachus and Melesias in particular.^41 According to this reading, the promising philo-
sophic start detailed above is undercut by what Plato reveals about these characters.
Lysimachus is shown to be unqualified for philosophic inquiry. Over the course of his interaction
with Socrates, Plato reveals that Lysimachus is unable to recognize the presence of the very expert
he seeks for his son as it is Socrates who“is always spending his time in places where young men
engage in any study of noble pursuit of the sort [he is] looking for”(180c). This failure–combined
with his inability to recognize Socrates’expertise (180d–e) and his asking Socrates to take his
place in the conversation (189c–d)–leads Tessitore to conclude that Lysimachus is“an unlikely
candidate for philosophic inquiry.”^42 This conclusion serves as the source of the ironically
comic ending of the dialog where it is only Lysimachus who invites Socrates to continue the dialog
the next day (201b–c). By assigning the correct response to the experience ofaporiato the figure
least qualified to undertake and sustain philosophic inquiry, Plato provides a comic treatment of
philosophy that frames the rest of the dialog.
If the comic reading is correct, one must consider the question of why Plato would choose to
undermine the image of philosophy found in the exoteric reading? As suggested by Tessitore, the
comic frame of philosophy in the wrong hands shifts the attention of both the interlocutors and the
reader to philosophy in the right hands. As the discussion ofelenchusin the previous section
reminds us, theelenticquality of the Socratic method is only observable in the figure of Socrates.
Thus, one must come to terms with the role of Socrates to grasp the understanding of philosophy in
the right hands.
The Role of Socrates in the First Half of the Laches
When Socrates first enters the conversation, the interlocutors are in the midst of discussing who an
appropriate instructor would be for the sons of Lysimachus and Melesias. Whereas Lysimachus and
Melesias have grounds for consulting the two generals, their faith is quickly called into question
when Laches says that he is“astonished”that he and Nicias were asked when Socrates is present
(180c). Far from being recognition of Socrates as the most qualified person to ask given the
subject matter, Laches’recommendation of Socrates represents an effort on his part to escape the
The Courage of the Socratic Method 99