I’m not sure how to take this, the lady Philosophy is speaking to Boethius:
"Philosophy has never thought it right to leave the innocent man alone on his journey. Should I fear to face my accusers, as though their enmity were something new? Do you suppose that this is the first time wisdom has been attacked and endangered by wicked men? We fought against such rashness and folly long ago, even before the time of our disciple Plato. And in Plato’s own time, his master Socrates, with my help, merited the victory of an unjust death. Afterwards, the inept schools of Epicureans, Stoics and others, each seeking its own interests, tried to steal the inheritance of Socrates and to possess me (in spite of my protests and struggles), as though I were the spoils of their quarreling. they tore this robe which I had woven with my own hands and, having ripped off some little pieces of it, went away supposing that they possessed me wholly. Then, when traces of my garments were seen on some of them, they were rashly to be my friends, and they were therefore condemned by the error of the profane mob." (Consolation, p. 5)
It would appear, and I can well understand, that the single branch of philosophy in its purest form as directly from Plato is what Boethius (as writer) is solely defending and advocating. This is fine, so long as one agrees with the principles. I was just a bit surprised, I suppose, that philosophy in all its schools of thought would not be represented despite their difference in theory.
This would lead me to contemplate the effect of era in which writings are read, as well as one’s personal philosophies regarding acceptance or openmindedness of thought. But then again, how openminded am I being when I am immediately judging Boethius’ representation of Philosophy?
The Lost Children: A Charity Anthology
P says: “Should I fear to face my accusers, as though their enmity were something new?”
What should Boethius take from this little lesson? That’s a question you could ask of the passage. (In the dialogue, P is Platonic in the sense that she appears there and not there, whole but not whole. That’s just one issue.) Remember B’s circumstance.
I would take it that he should consider this as another trial, and look back to see what has seen both him and Philosophy–as well as all things in life–through the scene to be able to move onward. We can too easily become overwhelmed, daunted by walls, when all we need do is build a ladder from the experiences of the past as well as learned knowledge to provide the steps up and over. Though Boethius is facing death, is that not but another threshold to cross?