Aristo

For Pyrrho, Aristo, and Erillus have long since been cast aside.

Because these things seemed to Aristo and Pyrrho altogether worth nothing — so that they said there was no difference at all between being in the best health and being most grievously sick — men long ago rightly ceased to argue against them.

Next is explained the difference of things, which if we should say there is none — as Aristo did — all life would be confounded, nor would any office or work of wisdom be found, since among those things which pertain to the leading of life there would be no difference at all, nor would any selection need to be applied.

Their chief, both in authority and in antiquity, the Socratic Aristippus, did not hesitate to call pain the highest evil.

for those of Aristo, Pyrrho, Erillus, and certain others have vanished.

But your Brutus, on the authority of Aristo and Antiochus, does not think this;

And so, for several days, with Heraclitus brought in and several other learned men, among them Antiochus's brother Aristus, and besides Aristo and Dio, to whom he assigned the most weight after his brother, we spent much time in that one discussion.

Free, then, from such mockery is Socrates, free Aristo of Chios, who think that none of these things can be known.

Aristo, who, when he had been a pupil of Zeno, approved in fact those things which that man approved in words — that nothing is good except virtue, nor evil except what is contrary to virtue;

The opinion of his pupil Aristo is in no less great an error, who holds that the shape of god cannot be understood, denies that there is sensation in the gods, and is altogether in doubt whether god is a living being or not.

And if it is true what Aristo of Chios was wont to say — that the philosophers harm their hearers who interpret well-spoken things ill (for prodigals could come out of the school of Aristippus, sour men out of the school of Zeno) — then plainly, if those who had heard them were going to come away vicious, because they interpreted the philosophers' discourse perversely, it were better for the philo …

‘Aristo records the decision of Cassius that a partnership on the terms that one should take all the profits and another bear all the loss, which he called a leonine partnership, is not binding, and Ulpian concurs.

It was thus that Aristo dealt with Labeo, and Pomponius with Sabinus.

If he convicts Aristo of malicious intent, what will it mean?

the third he has not registered, but he is prosecuting Aristo of Alopece for malicious entry.

Yes, says he, for he has registered my name as a debtor unjustly. Of course it is evident that you have a right to satisfaction for this; but then you ought first to give satisfaction and abide by the penalty you have brought on yourself. Or again, for what do you expect to obtain satisfaction? If you are at liberty to do everything that other citizens do, how are you wronged?

and Adimantus, son of Aristo, whose brother is Plato here;