No Disagreement, There

A fallacy:

1. All and only true philosophers have virtue.
2. Most people are not philosophers.
3. Thus, most people lack virtue entirely.

Why? Take 1. to mean: "A person has virtue to the extent, and only to the extent, that he is a philosopher." Take 2. to mean: "Most people are not very much like philosophers."

Bobonich:
"We saw that in the Phaedo Plato holds that all non-philosophers are radically ethically defective."
Translation, without disagreeement:
"We saw that, in the Phaedo, Plato holds that to the extent that someone is not a philosopher, to that extent he is is radically, ethically defective.

Bobonich:
"The fundamental failure of non-philosophers is epistemic: they do not grasp what is genuinely fine or good and do not appreciate the genuine good-making and fine-making features of people, actions, and things."
Translation without disagreement:
"The fundamental failure of non-philosophers is epistemic: people are not philosophers precisely insofar as they fail to grasp what is genuinely fine or good..."

Bobonich:
"Non-philosopher's beliefs are shot through with confusion and error."
Translation without disagreement:
"Only to the extent that someone is similar to a true philosopher does he avoid confusion and error."

Etc. etc.