438 v Book 6 486e—488d Socrates, Adeimantus “The answer you'd get is that | think what they say is true.” “In that case,’ he asked, ‘how can it be right to say that cities will find no release from their troubles until philosophers, wha we agree are useless to them, become their rulers?” ‘That question calls for an answer by means of an analogy.’ ‘Something you've never been much in the habit of using, of course.” ‘I see. First you let me in for proving something which is extremely difficult to prove, Then you make fun of me. Well, if you need any further proof of how firmly I cling to analogies, then listen to this one. ‘The best of the philosophers find themselves, vis-d-vis their cities, in a situation so awkward that there is nothing in the world like it. ‘To construct. an analogy in their defence, you have to draw on a number of sources, like painters painting composite creatures — half-goat, half-deer — and things like that. Imagine some ships, or one ship, and a state of affairs on board something like this 4 There’sthe shipowner, larger and stronger than everyonein theship, but somewhat deaf and rather short-sighted, with a knowledge of sailing to match his eyesight. The sailors are quarreling among themselves over captain »f the ship, each one thinking that he ought to be captain, though he has never learnt that skill, nor can he point to the person wha taught him or a time when he was learning it. On top of which they say it can’t be taught. In fact they're prepared to cut to pieces anyone who say it can. The shipowner himself is always surrounded by them. They beg him and do everything they can to make him hand over the tiller to them. Sometimes, if other people can persuade him and they can’t, they kill those others or throw them overboard. Then they immobilise their worthy shipowner with drugs or drink or by some other means, and take control of the ship, helping themselves to what it is carrying. Drinking and feasting, they sail in the way you'd expect people like that to sail. More than that, if someone is good at finding them ways of persuading or compelling the shipowner to let them take control, they call him a real seaman, a real captain, and say he really knows about ships. Anyone who can’t do this they treat with contempt, calling him useless. They don’t even begin to understand that if he is to be truly fit to take command of a ship a real ship’s captain must of necessity be thoroughly familiar with the ‘The comparison seems to be intended as an image of the Athenian democracy, in which the authority of the people (the shipowner/captain) is subverted by those leading figures on the political stage (the crew) who know best how to secure the people's compliance with their own designs. ‘The metaphor of the ship of state was common in Greek poetry. gte Socrates, Adeimantus The Republic seasons of the year, the stars in the sky, the winds, and everything to do with his art. As for Low he is going to steer the ship — regardless of whether anyone wants him to or not — they do not regard this as an addi- tional skill or study which can be acquired over and above the art of being a ship’s captain.’ If this is the situation on board, don’t you think the person who is genuinely equipped to be captain will be called a stargazer, a chatterer, of no use to them, by those who sail in ships with this kind of crew?” ‘Absolutely,’ Adeimantus replied. ‘I don’t imagine you need to have the similarity with the attitude of cities towards true philosophers spelled out in detail. You can probably see what I’m getting at.” ‘Indeed I can.” ‘So your first response to this character who expresses surprise that philosophers are not treated with respect in cities might be to suggest this analogy to him. You might try to persuade him that it would be far more surprising if they were treated with respect.” ‘[ will suggest it,’ he said. “Yes, and you can also suggest to him that what he says is true. To the majority of people the best of those doing philosophy are useless. You must point out to him, however, that the blame for their uselessness lies not with the philosophers, but with those whe make no use of them. It is unnatural for the captain to beg the sailors to come under his command, or for the man to go to the rich man’s door. Whoever dreamed up that saying was wrong.* The truth is that neither a rich man who is ill nor a poor man who is ill has any choice but to go to the doctor’s door, and that anyone who wants to be ruled has no choice but to go to the door of the person who knows how to rule. It’s not up to the ruler, if he really is any good, to beg those he is ruling to be ruled. You won’t go far wrong if you compare our present political leaders to sailors of the kind we have just described, and the people described by politicians as useless star- gazers to true ship’s captains.” ‘Quite right,” he said. “For these reasons, and under these conditions, it is not easy to value the best way of life — not with all those people following a completely different 5 ‘The sense of the Greek is unclear. It could also mean, for example, ‘Nor do they accept the possibility that, along with the artof navigation, he could gain, by instruc- tion or practice, the skill to keep control of the helm whether anyone wants him to ar not.” Simonides is reported to have said that men are found at the courts of the ri better to be rich than wise, because wise 192o 499 Book 6 488e-ggob Socrates, Adeimantus way 0: sophy is provided by those who claim they are following this way of life. You said about them that the opponent of philosophy would describe most of those who go in for it as villains, while the best were useless. And Tagreed that you were right, didn’t I?” “Yes,” ‘Well, then, have we explained the reason why the good ones are useless?" “We have. Very clearly.” ‘Do you want us to go on to explain why it’s inevitable that most of those who go in for philosophy will turn out to be villains? Shall we try and demonstrate, if we can, that philosophy is not to blame for this either?" “Yes, please.” “Let’s begin our discussion by reminding ourselves of the point where we were describing the nature which anyone who was going to be an out- standing individual must necessarily be born with.” He was guided, if you recall, in the first place by the truth, which he had to follow in every way, in all circumstances. Otherwise he would be a charlatan, and wholly our of touch with true philosophy.” “Yes, that is what we said.” ‘Isn't this one characteristic which runs completely counter to the opinions normally held about him?” “Yes, completely,’ he said ‘Won't it be reasonable for us to defend him by saying that it was, after all, the nature of the true lover of learning to keep struggling towards But by far the greatest and most powerful objection to philo- what is, and that he did not waste time on what opinion sees, in each case, as many? Never losing his edge, never abandoning his passion, he kept on going until he had grasped the nature of what each thing itself is with that part of his soul — the part akin to it - which is equipped to grasp this kind of thing. And it was only when he used this part of his soul to get close to and be intimate with what really is, so engendering understanding and truth, that he found knowledge, true life, nourishment, and relief from the pains of the soul’s childbirth? ‘That will be the most reasonable defence imaginable,’ he said. ‘Very well. Will a love of falsehood form any part of this person's char- acter? Or its exact opposite — a hatred of falsehood?" 4850-4870. 193