@inbook{10.2307/j.ctt9qdwbf.18,
 ISBN = {9789058679703},
 URL = {http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qdwbf.18},
 abstract = {In hisCommentary on the Alcibiades I, Proclus identifies Socrates with a divine man of knowledge and asserts that his soul imitates the ‘providence of the gods’ insofar as via his ‘forethought for those in need of salvation’ he benefits the less perfect soul of Alcibiades (seeIn Alc. I, 32.10-13). Never failing to notice difficulties with such identifications, though, Proclus pertinently picks up on an important problem regarding the relationship between Socrates’ beneficial providential agency and the provocative idea that Alcibiades was made better in his association with the philosopher. That is, in the pens of many other commentators,},
 author = {Danielle A. Layne},
 booktitle = {Fate, Providence and Moral Responsibility in Ancient, Medieval and Early Modern Thought: Studies in Honour of Carlos Steel},
 pages = {267--290},
 publisher = {Leuven University Press},
 title = {A FATAL OR PROVIDENTIAL AFFAIR?: Socrates and Alcibiades in Proclus’ Commentary on the Alcibiades I},
 volume = {49},
 year = {2014}
}