Dialogue

 1 Phileb|         unattended with pain. Few philosophers will deny that a degree
 2 Phileb|     certain ‘surly or fastidious’ philosophers, as he terms them, who defined
 3 Phileb|       atomists, who were physical philosophers, were not enemies of pleasure.
 4 Phileb|       fuller records of those old philosophers, we should probably find
 5 Phileb|         lord of the universe? All philosophers will say the first, and
 6 Phileb|         there are certain natural philosophers who will not admit a third
 7 Phileb|      pleasures; which, unlike the philosophers of whom I was speaking,
 8 Phileb|          is affirmed by ingenious philosophers to be a generation; they
 9 Phileb|      binding, or theoretically by philosophers. And, borrowing the analogy
10 Phileb|         occupied the attention of philosophers. ‘Is pleasure an evil? a
11 Phileb|  corresponding pains. The ancient philosophers were fond of asking, in
12 Phileb|  principle has been acceptable to philosophers, but the better part of
13 Phileb|         truth. The systems of all philosophers require the criticism of ‘
14 Phileb|     morals? Chiefly to this,—that philosophers have not always distinguished
15 Phileb|      dependent on the theories of philosophers: we know what our duties
16 Phileb|        one among many theories of philosophers. It may be compared with
17 Phileb|         only from the presocratic philosophers, but from Socrates himself.~
18 Phileb| differences between the two great philosophers would be out of place here.
19 Phileb|          of the same thought ‘All philosophers are agreed that mind is
20 Phileb|     chance expression to which if philosophers had attended they would
21 Phileb|         answer is easy, since all philosophers assert with one voice that
22 Phileb|       into an alliance with these philosophers and follow in the track
23 Phileb|          Do not certain ingenious philosophers teach this doctrine, and
24 Phileb|      whether the art as pursed by philosophers, or as pursued by non-philosophers,