Socrates leads Lysis by the nose, and Lysis does not object. Socrates "interprets" the poet and the physikoi as claiming that only the similar to the simlar are friends, but if those who are dissimilar in themselves are bad, this means that only the good are friends. Since this doesn't cause Lysis to object, Socrates adds another problem, that the similar add nothing useful to the similar; if another adds nothing useful to oneself, why would one love such a person? The verb phileo (I love) is replaced by agapao (I am affectionate). Agape in modern Greek is the word for love. Philia is now reserved for friendship.

If like is friendly to like, what are we to make of bad people?

The previous section featured a discussion between Socrates and Menexenus asking whether the friend is the loving or the loved. Socrates changes the subject with Lysis to consider whether friends are similar people or opposites,

What was supposed to be an eristic debate designed to embarrass Menexenus turns into an intriguing discussion on friends which leads Lysis to intervene spontaneously and much to his own embarrassment. This is yet again a clear example of Socrates talking to one interlocutor (Menexenus) while his eye is on another (Lysis, and we should not forget Hippothales, although I don't mention him this time).

Treating philos as the beloved friend leads to problems easily demonstrated by Ancient Greek usage.While we do not use Ancient Greek, the underlying problems are common to all.

What was supposed to be an eristic debate has turned into a semi-philosophical enquiry into the nature of a philos ("friend"), being the one who loves or the one being loved, or whether the partners in such a relationsihp in which only one loves are both friends or both not friends. Socrates exploits to confusing effect an ambiguity in the word philos, which as an adjective (its original usage)  is passive ("beloved") but as a nount is the ambiguous "friend".

Socrates begins what should be an eristic debate. There are some attempts to make it look like an eristic debate, but the options provided allow Menexenus to avoid choosing one or other extreme, and the result of the questioning so far is no more than puzzlement over the identify of a friend in a friendship. If one loves, is the lover the friend, or the one loved, or both, or neither? Socrates also confuses love with lust, presumably for the benefit of Hippothales who is still listening.

Lysis asked Socrates to beat Menexenus in eristic debate, but instead, Socrates declares that he is desirous of acquiring a friend or companion, far more than acquiring a quail, a rooster, a horse and dog, the wealth of Darius, or even Darius himself. He claims to have no friends, while Menexenus is the expert on friendship since he and Lysis are such good friends.

Socrates seems to be going ahead with Lysis' request to beat Menexenus in eristic debate. He is taking time to set it up, ensuring that he appears to be the underdog, pretending to complain that Menexenus is sitting with his "teacher" Ctesippus, his slightly older cousin. He also ensures that Menexenus will be the one answering questions, the best way to guarantee eristic victory. At one point in the episode I say that Socrates is not an eristician although he is expert in the use of eristic techniques, since he never actually wants to beat anybody. This is not entirely true, since he does beat Thrasymachus in their eristic debate in Book I of Republic. Dramatically he does this to ensure a long conversation (actually another nine books); paradeigmatically, the "tyrant" (eristician-sophist) must be dramatized being tamed by the "aristocrat" (dialectician). For the pedants, yes, Socrates "beats" Thrasymachus once again in book 9, having been asked in book 2 to defeat the sophist properly. The eristic beating is obviously not what the dialogue is about.

Lysis and Socrates continue to whisper to each other, and Lysis turns the future conversstion away from himself into an eristic match to defeat his friend Menexenus.

Hippothales, hiding close to Lysis and Socrates, becomes the focus of attention. It is unusual in a Platonic dialogue for a non-participant in a conversation to be noticed during the conversation. Socrates even states what he would have said to Hippothales had he made the mistake of speaking out loud. In orher news, Menexenus returns to the conversation.

Socrates uses the answers of Lysis himself to prove (albeit sophistically) that Lysis shouldn't complain about his lowly status iin crafts where he is incompetent, It is not claer to me that Lysis had been complaining about this, since he had earlier explained without a hint of resentment that slaves and hired hands controlled him in varoius crafts because of his (young) age.

Lysis is either a megalomaniac psychopath or possibly a young boy who is not quite grasping. the import of what he is agreeing to. He agrees with Socrtes that he should be entrusted by all and sundry around the world with any technē at which he is considered to be the best. This is a little complicated by Socrates adding himself to the mix. The whole world should entrust Lysis and Socrates together with any technē at which they are the most proficient, and then they would be free to do whatever they desire, and would be masters of others rather than being subjects of others. Lysis seems to be unaware of argumenta ad absurdum.

Under questioning, Lysis has been primed to think that being ruled by slaves and hired professionals in technai where he is incompetent is restrictive, while being entrusted to read and write for his parents, in the technai of reading and writing, where he is competent, is freeing and permits him to do as he desires. To say that Lysis himself actually thought like this before Socrates' questioning is problematic. Even so, Lysis should have begun questioning the notion that being entrusted with technai is freeing when Socrates began talking about making stew for the Great King.

Lysis realizes that he is ruled and restricted by slaves, hired professionals, and his mother, in those arts and crafts (technai) where he does not yet understand. However, his parents allow him to read and write because he understands the technai of reading and writing. Socrates draws out the implication that Lysis will be allowed to do whatever he wants the moment he understands all technai. Under further questioning, Lysis agrees that his father, his neighbour, Athenians in general, should entrust their things to him the moment he is more capable than them.

Even the parents of Lysis restrict his desires to technai where he is competent, but there he is allowed to do whatever he wishes, so Socrates pretends to infer.

Socrates' line of questioning establishes that Lysis is prevented by his parents, who love him very much, from doing whatever he desires. Even slaves are put in charge of him. We should remember that Hippothales is listening to this as a lesson in how to attract rather than repel his lust-obect.

Socrates begins his interrogation of Lysis. He had been considering asking Lysis and Menexenusk, before the latter left, which of them was more just and expert, but now with Lysis alone, Socrates asks him about his parents' treatment of him.

Menexenus leaves the conversation, leaving Lysis at the mercy of Socrates, Ctesippus, and the many onlookers, including Hippothales who still hopes to learn how to speak to his lust object without repelling him.

Stage directions about who sits or stands where for the conversation between Socrates, Menexenus, and Lysis