Paragraph

 1 4 |    knowledge". Again, "Evils are good: for what needs to be is
 2 4 |          for what needs to be is good, and evils must needs be".
 3 4 |         the other hand we say of good things as well that they "
 4 5 |          Or again, where part is good and part bad, "is the whole
 5 5 |          part bad, "is the whole good or bad?" For whichever he
 6 5 |         to say that something is good which is not good, or not
 7 5 |   something is good which is not good, or not good which is good,
 8 5 |        which is not good, or not good which is good, is to make
 9 5 |       good, or not good which is good, is to make a false statement.
10 6 |         definition ought to hold good of "refutation" too, except
11 12|        any definite subject is a good bait for these purposes:
12 20|      Piraeus": and again, "Can a good man who is a cobbler be
13 20|    cobbler be bad?" "No." "But a good man may be a bad cobbler:
14 20|         bad cobbler: therefore a good cobbler will be bad." Again, "
15 20|        the knowledge of which is good, are good things to learn,
16 20|  knowledge of which is good, are good things to learn, aren't
17 20|   knowledge, however, of evil is good: therefore evil is a good
18 20|        good: therefore evil is a good thing to know." "Yes. But,
19 20|        the knowledge of evils is good." Again, "Is it true to
20 24|         whereas in the case of a good thing, to be good is not
21 24|      case of a good thing, to be good is not the same as to be
22 24|          something "of evils" is good"; for wisdom is a "knowledge "
23 24|    phrase "Something of evils is good"." Perhaps, but not with
24 24|       suppose that "A servant is good of the wicked"; though perhaps
25 24|       there: for a thing may be "good" and be "X's" without being
26 24|      being at the same time "X's good". Nor is the saying that "
27 25|          Is health, or wealth, a good thing?" "Yes." "But to the
28 25|        use it aright it is not a good thing: therefore it is both
29 25|      thing: therefore it is both good and not good." "Is health,
30 25|          it is both good and not good." "Is health, or political
31 25|    health, or political power, a good thing?" "Yes. "But sometimes
32 25| sometimes it is not particularly good: therefore the same thing
33 25| therefore the same thing is both good and not good to the same
34 25|       thing is both good and not good to the same man." Or rather
35 25|          prevent a thing, though good absolutely, being not good
36 25|       good absolutely, being not good to a particular man, or
37 25|         particular man, or being good to a particular man, and
38 25|      particular man, and yet not good or here. "Is that which
39 25|        of, he would not wish the good: therefore the good is an
40 25|          the good: therefore the good is an evil." But that is
41 25|       the same thing to say "The good is an evil" and "to get
42 25|           and "to get rid of the good is an evil". Likewise also
43 25|         what is evil but what is good; for to acquire something
44 25|         for to acquire something good is good. Also, disease is
45 25|        acquire something good is good. Also, disease is an evil
46 30|       arguments: Supposing to be good and B evil, you will, if
47 30|         it is true to call these good, and that it is true to
48 30|    likewise to call them neither good nor evil (for each of them
49 30|          same thing will be both good and evil and neither good
50 30|        good and evil and neither good nor evil. Also, since everything
51 30| themselves. Moreover, if what is good becomes evil while what
52 30|       evil while what is evil is good, then they must both become
53 32|       thought not to be speaking good Greek, any more than if
54 33|       and the merchant." Is he a Good enough-King?" "No, indeed;