You are on page 1of 277

The Republic By Plato Translated by Benjamin Jowett ---------------------------------------------------------------------THE INTRO !

"TION The Republic o# Plato is the lon$est o# his wor%s with the e&ception o# the 'aws( and is certainly the $reatest o# them) There are nearer approaches to modern metaphysics in the Philebus and in the *ophist+ the Politicus or *tatesman is more ideal+ the #orm and institutions o# the *tate are more clearly drawn out in the 'aws+ as wor%s o# art( the *ymposium and the Prota$oras are o# hi$her e&cellence) But no other ialo$ue o# Plato has the same lar$eness o# ,iew and the same per#ection o# style+ no other shows an e-ual %nowled$e o# the world( or contains more o# those thou$hts which are new as well as old( and not o# one a$e only but o# all) Nowhere in Plato is there a deeper irony or a $reater wealth o# humor or ima$ery( or more dramatic power) Nor in any other o# his writin$s is the attempt made to interwea,e li#e and speculation( or to connect politics with philosophy) The Republic is the centre around which the other ialo$ues may be $rouped+ here philosophy reaches the hi$hest point to which ancient thin%ers e,er attained) Plato amon$ the .ree%s( li%e Bacon amon$ the moderns( was the #irst who concei,ed a method o# %nowled$e( althou$h neither o# them always distin$uished the bare outline or #orm #rom the substance o# truth+ and both o# them had to be content with an abstraction o# science which was not yet reali/ed) He was the $reatest metaphysical $enius whom the world has seen+ and in him( more than in any other ancient thin%er( the $erms o# #uture %nowled$e are contained) The sciences o# lo$ic and psycholo$y( which ha,e supplied so many instruments o# thou$ht to a#ter-a$es( are based upon the analyses o# *ocrates and Plato) The principles o# de#inition( the law o# contradiction( the #allacy o# ar$uin$ in a circle( the distinction between the essence and accidents o# a thin$ or notion( between means and ends( between causes and conditions+ also the di,ision o# the mind into the rational( concupiscent( and irascible elements( or o# pleasures and desires into necessary and unnecessary --these and other $reat #orms o# thou$ht are all o# them to be #ound in the Republic( and were probably #irst in,ented by Plato) The $reatest o# all lo$ical truths( and the one o# which writers on philosophy are most apt to lose si$ht( the di##erence between words and thin$s( has been most strenuously insisted on by him( althou$h he has not always a,oided the con#usion o# them in his own writin$s) But he does not bind up truth in lo$ical #ormulae( --lo$ic is still ,eiled in metaphysics+ and the science which he ima$ines to 0contemplate all truth and all e&istence0 is ,ery unli%e the doctrine o# the syllo$ism which 1ristotle claims to ha,e disco,ered) Neither must we #or$et that the Republic is but the third part o# a still lar$er desi$n which was to ha,e included an ideal history o# 1thens( as well as a political and physical philosophy) The #ra$ment

o# the "ritias has $i,en birth to a world-#amous #iction( second only in importance to the tale o# Troy and the le$end o# 1rthur+ and is said as a #act to ha,e inspired some o# the early na,i$ators o# the si&teenth century) This mythical tale( o# which the subject was a history o# the wars o# the 1thenians a$ainst the Island o# 1tlantis( is supposed to be #ounded upon an un#inished poem o# *olon( to which it would ha,e stood in the same relation as the writin$s o# the lo$o$raphers to the poems o# Homer) It would ha,e told o# a stru$$le #or 'iberty( intended to represent the con#lict o# Persia and Hellas) 2e may jud$e #rom the noble commencement o# the Timaeus( #rom the #ra$ment o# the "ritias itsel#( and #rom the third boo% o# the 'aws( in what manner Plato would ha,e treated this hi$h ar$ument) 2e can only $uess why the $reat desi$n was abandoned+ perhaps because Plato became sensible o# some incon$ruity in a #ictitious history( or because he had lost his interest in it( or because ad,ancin$ years #orbade the completion o# it+ and we may please oursel,es with the #ancy that had this ima$inary narrati,e e,er been #inished( we should ha,e #ound Plato himsel# sympathi/in$ with the stru$$le #or Hellenic independence( sin$in$ a hymn o# triumph o,er 3arathon and *alamis( perhaps ma%in$ the re#lection o# Herodotus where he contemplates the $rowth o# the 1thenian empire--0How bra,e a thin$ is #reedom o# speech( which has made the 1thenians so #ar e&ceed e,ery other state o# Hellas in $reatness40 or( more probably( attributin$ the ,ictory to the ancient $ood order o# 1thens and to the #a,or o# 1pollo and 1thene) 1$ain( Plato may be re$arded as the 0captain0 56arhche$o/67 or leader o# a $oodly band o# #ollowers+ #or in the Republic is to be #ound the ori$inal o# "icero6s e Republica( o# *t) 1u$ustine6s "ity o# .od( o# the !topia o# *ir Thomas 3ore( and o# the numerous other ima$inary *tates which are #ramed upon the same model) The e&tent to which 1ristotle or the 1ristotelian school were indebted to him in the Politics has been little reco$ni/ed( and the reco$nition is the more necessary because it is not made by 1ristotle himsel#) The two philosophers had more in common than they were conscious o#+ and probably some elements o# Plato remain still undetected in 1ristotle) In En$lish philosophy too( many a##inities may be traced( not only in the wor%s o# the "ambrid$e Platonists( but in $reat ori$inal writers li%e Ber%eley or "olerid$e( to Plato and his ideas) That there is a truth hi$her than e&perience( o# which the mind bears witness to hersel#( is a con,iction which in our own $eneration has been enthusiastically asserted( and is perhaps $ainin$ $round) O# the .ree% authors who at the Renaissance brou$ht a new li#e into the world Plato has had the $reatest in#luence) The Republic o# Plato is also the #irst treatise upon education( o# which the writin$s o# 3ilton and 'oc%e( Rousseau( Jean Paul( and .oethe are the le$itimate descendants) 'i%e ante or Bunyan( he has a re,elation o# another li#e+ li%e Bacon( he is pro#oundly impressed with the un unity o# %nowled$e+ in the early "hurch he e&ercised a real in#luence on theolo$y( and at the Re,i,al o# 'iterature on politics) E,en the #ra$ments o# his words when 0repeated at second-hand0 ha,e in all a$es ra,ished the hearts o# men( who ha,e seen re#lected in them their own hi$her nature) He is the #ather o# idealism in philosophy( in politics( in literature) 1nd many o# the latest conceptions o# modern thin%ers and statesmen( such as the unity o# %nowled$e( the rei$n

o# law( and the e-uality o# the se&es( ha,e been anticipated in a dream by him) 1r$ument The ar$ument o# the Republic is the search a#ter Justice( the nature o# which is #irst hinted at by "ephalus( the just and blameless old man --then discussed on the basis o# pro,erbial morality by *ocrates and Polemarchus --then caricatured by Thrasymachus and partially e&plained by *ocrates --reduced to an abstraction by .laucon and 1deimantus( and ha,in$ become in,isible in the indi,idual reappears at len$th in the ideal *tate which is constructed by *ocrates) The #irst care o# the rulers is to be education( o# which an outline is drawn a#ter the old Hellenic model( pro,idin$ only #or an impro,ed reli$ion and morality( and more simplicity in music and $ymnastic( a manlier strain o# poetry( and $reater harmony o# the indi,idual and the *tate) 2e are thus led on to the conception o# a hi$her *tate( in which 0no man calls anythin$ his own(0 and in which there is neither 0marryin$ nor $i,in$ in marria$e(0 and 0%in$s are philosophers0 and 0philosophers are %in$s+0 and there is another and hi$her education( intellectual as well as moral and reli$ious( o# science as well as o# art( and not o# youth only but o# the whole o# li#e) *uch a *tate is hardly to be reali/ed in this world and would -uic%ly de$enerate) To the per#ect ideal succeeds the $o,ernment o# the soldier and the lo,er o# honor( this a$ain declinin$ into democracy( and democracy into tyranny( in an ima$inary but re$ular order ha,in$ not much resemblance to the actual #acts) 2hen 0the wheel has come #ull circle0 we do not be$in a$ain with a new period o# human li#e+ but we ha,e passed #rom the best to the worst( and there we end) The subject is then chan$ed and the old -uarrel o# poetry and philosophy which had been more li$htly treated in the earlier boo%s o# the Republic is now resumed and #ou$ht out to a conclusion) Poetry is disco,ered to be an imitation thrice remo,ed #rom the truth( and Homer( as well as the dramatic poets( ha,in$ been condemned as an imitator( is sent into banishment alon$ with them) 1nd the idea o# the *tate is supplemented by the re,elation o# a #uture li#e) The di,ision into boo%s( li%e all similar di,isions( is probably later than the a$e o# Plato) The natural di,isions are #i,e in number+ --587 Boo% I and the #irst hal# o# Boo% II down to the para$raph be$innin$( 0I had always admired the $enius o# .laucon and 1deimantus(0 which is introductory+ the #irst boo% containin$ a re#utation o# the popular and sophistical notions o# justice( and concludin$( li%e some o# the earlier ialo$ues( without arri,in$ at any de#inite result) To this is appended a restatement o# the nature o# justice accordin$ to common opinion( and an answer is demanded to the -uestion --2hat is justice( stripped o# appearances9 The second di,ision 5:7 includes the remainder o# the second and the whole o# the third and #ourth boo%s( which are mainly occupied with the construction o# the #irst *tate and the #irst education) The third di,ision 5;7 consists o# the #i#th( si&th( and se,enth boo%s( in which philosophy rather than justice is the subject o# in-uiry( and the second *tate is constructed on principles o# communism and ruled by philosophers( and the contemplation o# the idea o# $ood

ta%es the place o# the social and political ,irtues) In the ei$hth and ninth boo%s 5<7 the per,ersions o# *tates and o# the indi,iduals who correspond to them are re,iewed in succession+ and the nature o# pleasure and the principle o# tyranny are #urther analy/ed in the indi,idual man) The tenth boo% 5=7 is the conclusion o# the whole( in which the relations o# philosophy to poetry are #inally determined( and the happiness o# the citi/ens in this li#e( which has now been assured( is crowned by the ,ision o# another) Or a more $eneral di,ision into two parts may be adopted+ the #irst 5Boo%s I - I>7 containin$ the description o# a *tate #ramed $enerally in accordance with Hellenic notions o# reli$ion and morality( while in the second 5Boo%s > - ?7 the Hellenic *tate is trans#ormed into an ideal %in$dom o# philosophy( o# which all other $o,ernments are the per,ersions) These two points o# ,iew are really opposed( and the opposition is only ,eiled by the $enius o# Plato) The Republic( li%e the Phaedrus( is an imper#ect whole+ the hi$her li$ht o# philosophy brea%s throu$h the re$ularity o# the Hellenic temple( which at last #ades away into the hea,ens) 2hether this imper#ection o# structure arises #rom an enlar$ement o# the plan+ or #rom the imper#ect reconcilement in the writer6s own mind o# the stru$$lin$ elements o# thou$ht which are now #irst brou$ht to$ether by him+ or( perhaps( #rom the composition o# the wor% at di##erent times --are -uestions( li%e the similar -uestion about the Iliad and the Odyssey( which are worth as%in$( but which cannot ha,e a distinct answer) In the a$e o# Plato there was no re$ular mode o# publication( and an author would ha,e the less scruple in alterin$ or addin$ to a wor% which was %nown only to a #ew o# his #riends) There is no absurdity in supposin$ that he may ha,e laid his labors aside #or a time( or turned #rom one wor% to another+ and such interruptions would be more li%ely to occur in the case o# a lon$ than o# a short writin$) In all attempts to determine the chronolo$ical he order o# the Platonic writin$s on internal e,idence( this uncertainty about any sin$le ialo$ue bein$ composed at one time is a disturbin$ element( which must be admitted to a##ect lon$er wor%s( such as the Republic and the 'aws( more than shorter ones) But( on the other hand( the seemin$ discrepancies o# the Republic may only arise out o# the discordant elements which the philosopher has attempted to unite in a sin$le whole( perhaps without bein$ himsel# able to reco$ni/e the inconsistency which is ob,ious to us) @or there is a jud$ment o# a#ter a$es which #ew $reat writers ha,e e,er been able to anticipate #or themsel,es) They do not percei,e the want o# connection in their own writin$s( or the $aps in their systems which are ,isible enou$h to those who come a#ter them) In the be$innin$s o# literature and philosophy( amid the #irst e##orts o# thou$ht and lan$ua$e( more inconsistencies occur than now( when the paths o# speculation are well worn and the meanin$ o# words precisely de#ined) @or consistency( too( is the $rowth o# time+ and some o# the $reatest creations o# the human mind ha,e been wantin$ in unity) Tried by this test( se,eral o# the Platonic ialo$ues( accordin$ to our modern ideas( appear to be de#ecti,e( but the de#iciency is no proo# that they were composed at di##erent times or by di##erent hands) 1nd the supposition that the Republic was written uninterruptedly and by a continuous e##ort is in some de$ree con#irmed by the numerous re#erences #rom one part o# the wor%

to another) The second title( 0"oncernin$ Justice(0 is not the one by which the Republic is -uoted( either by 1ristotle or $enerally in anti-uity( and( li%e the other second titles o# the Platonic ialo$ues( may there#ore be assumed to be o# later date) 3or$enstern and others ha,e as%ed whether the de#inition o# justice( which is the pro#essed aim( or the construction o# the *tate is the principal ar$ument o# the wor%) The answer is( that the two blend in one( and are two #aces o# the same truth+ #or justice is the order o# the *tate( and the *tate is the ,isible embodiment o# justice under the conditions o# human society) The one is the soul and the other is the body( and the .ree% ideal o# the *tate( as o# the indi,idual( is a #air mind in a #air body) In He$elian phraseolo$y the *tate is the reality o# which justice is the ideal) Or( described in "hristian lan$ua$e( the %in$dom o# .od is within( and yet de,elops into a "hurch or e&ternal %in$dom+ 0the house not made with hands( eternal in the hea,ens(0 is reduced to the proportions o# an earthly buildin$) Or( to use a Platonic ima$e( justice and the *tate are the warp and the woo# which run throu$h the whole te&ture) 1nd when the constitution o# the *tate is completed( the conception o# justice is not dismissed( but reappears under the same or di##erent names throu$hout the wor%( both as the inner law o# the indi,idual soul( and #inally as the principle o# rewards and punishments in another li#e) The ,irtues are based on justice( o# which common honesty in buyin$ and sellin$ is the shadow( and justice is based on the idea o# $ood( which is the harmony o# the world( and is re#lected both in the institutions o# *tates and in motions o# the hea,enly bodies) The Timaeus( which ta%es up the political rather than the ethical side o# the Republic( and is chie#ly occupied with hypotheses concernin$ the outward world( yet contains many indications that the same law is supposed to rei$n o,er the *tate( o,er nature( and o,er man) Too much( howe,er( has been made o# this -uestion both in ancient and in modern times) There is a sta$e o# criticism in which all wor%s( whether o# nature or o# art( are re#erred to desi$n) Now in ancient writin$s( and indeed in literature $enerally( there remains o#ten a lar$e element which was not comprehended in the ori$inal desi$n) @or the plan $rows under the author6s hand+ new thou$hts occur to him in the act o# writin$+ he has not wor%ed out the ar$ument to the end be#ore he be$ins) The reader who see%s to #ind some one idea under which the whole may be concei,ed( must necessarily sei/e on the ,a$uest and most $eneral) Thus *tallbaum( who is dissatis#ied with the ordinary e&planations o# the ar$ument o# the Republic( ima$ines himsel# to ha,e #ound the true ar$ument 0in the representation o# human li#e in a *tate per#ected by justice and $o,erned accordin$ to the idea o# $ood)0 There may be some use in such $eneral descriptions( but they can hardly be said to e&press the desi$n o# the writer) The truth is( that we may as well spea% o# many desi$ns as o# one+ nor need anythin$ be e&cluded #rom the plan o# a $reat wor% to which the mind is naturally led by the association o# ideas( and which does not inter#ere with the $eneral purpose) 2hat %ind or de$ree o# unity is to be sou$ht a#ter in a buildin$( in the plastic arts( in poetry( in prose( is

a problem which has to be determined relati,ely to the subject-matter) To Plato himsel#( the in-uiry 0what was the intention o# the writer(0 or 0what was the principal ar$ument o# the Republic0 would ha,e been hardly intelli$ible( and there#ore had better be at once dismissed) Is not the Republic the ,ehicle o# three or #our $reat truths which( to Plato6s own mind( are most naturally represented in the #orm o# the *tate9 Just as in the Jewish prophets the rei$n o# 3essiah( or 0the day o# the 'ord(0 or the su##erin$ *er,ant or people o# .od( or the 0*un o# ri$hteousness with healin$ in his win$s0 only con,ey( to us at least( their $reat spiritual ideals( so throu$h the .ree% *tate Plato re,eals to us his own thou$hts about di,ine per#ection( which is the idea o# $ood --li%e the sun in the ,isible world+ --about human per#ection( which is justice --about education be$innin$ in youth and continuin$ in later years --about poets and sophists and tyrants who are the #alse teachers and e,il rulers o# man%ind --about 0the world0 which is the embodiment o# them --about a %in$dom which e&ists nowhere upon earth but is laid up in hea,en to be the pattern and rule o# human li#e) No such inspired creation is at unity with itsel#( any more than the clouds o# hea,en when the sun pierces throu$h them) E,ery shade o# li$ht and dar%( o# truth( and o# #iction which is the ,eil o# truth( is allowable in a wor% o# philosophical ima$ination) It is not all on the same plane+ it easily passes #rom ideas to myths and #ancies( #rom #acts to #i$ures o# speech) It is not prose but poetry( at least a $reat part o# it( and ou$ht not to be jud$ed by the rules o# lo$ic or the probabilities o# history) The writer is not #ashionin$ his ideas into an artistic whole+ they ta%e possession o# him and are too much #or him) 2e ha,e no need there#ore to discuss whether a *tate such as Plato has concei,ed is practicable or not( or whether the outward #orm or the inward li#e came #irst into the mind o# the writer) @or the practicability o# his ideas has nothin$ to do with their truth+ and the hi$hest thou$hts to which he attains may be truly said to bear the $reatest 0mar%s o# desi$n0 --justice more than the e&ternal #rame-wor% o# the *tate( the idea o# $ood more than justice) The $reat science o# dialectic or the or$ani/ation o# ideas has no real content+ but is only a type o# the method or spirit in which the hi$her %nowled$e is to be pursued by the spectator o# all time and all e&istence) It is in the #i#th( si&th( and se,enth boo%s that Plato reaches the 0summit o# speculation(0 and these( althou$h they #ail to satis#y the re-uirements o# a modern thin%er( may there#ore be re$arded as the most important( as they are also the most ori$inal( portions o# the wor%) It is not necessary to discuss at len$th a minor -uestion which has been raised by Boec%h( respectin$ the ima$inary date at which the con,ersation was held 5the year <88 B) ") which is proposed by him will do as well as any other7+ #or a writer o# #iction( and especially a writer who( li%e Plato( is notoriously careless o# chronolo$y( only aims at $eneral probability) 2hether all the persons mentioned in the Republic could e,er ha,e met at any one time is not a di##iculty which would ha,e occurred to an 1thenian readin$ the wor% #orty years later( or to Plato himsel# at the time o# writin$ 5any more than to *ha%espeare respectin$ one o# his own dramas7+ and need not $reatly

trouble us now) Aet this may be a -uestion ha,in$ no answer 0which is still worth as%in$(0 because the in,esti$ation shows that we can not ar$ue historically #rom the dates in Plato+ it would be useless there#ore to waste time in in,entin$ #ar-#etched reconcilements o# them in order a,oid chronolo$ical di##iculties( such( #or e&ample( as the conjecture o# ") @) Hermann( that .laucon and 1deimantus are not the brothers but the uncles o# Plato( or the #ancy o# *tallbaum that Plato intentionally le#t anachronisms indicatin$ the dates at which some o# his ialo$ues were written) "haracters The principal characters in the Republic are "ephalus( Polemarchus( Thrasymachus( *ocrates( .laucon( and 1deimantus) "ephalus appears in the introduction only( Polemarchus drops at the end o# the #irst ar$ument( and Thrasymachus is reduced to silence at the close o# the #irst boo%) The main discussion is carried on by *ocrates( .laucon( and 1deimantus) 1mon$ the company are 'ysias 5the orator7 and Euthydemus( the sons o# "ephalus and brothers o# Polemarchus( an un%nown "harmantides --these are mute auditors+ also there is "leitophon( who once interrupts( where( as in the ialo$ue which bears his name( he appears as the #riend and ally o# Thrasymachus) "ephalus( the patriarch o# house( has been appropriately en$a$ed in o##erin$ a sacri#ice) He is the pattern o# an old man who has almost done with li#e( and is at peace with himsel# and with all man%ind) He #eels that he is drawin$ nearer to the world below( and seems to lin$er around the memory o# the past) He is ea$er that *ocrates should come to ,isit him( #ond o# the poetry o# the last $eneration( happy in the consciousness o# a well-spent li#e( $lad at ha,in$ escaped #rom the tyranny o# youth#ul lusts) His lo,e o# con,ersation( his a##ection( his indi##erence to riches( e,en his $arrulity( are interestin$ traits o# character) He is not one o# those who ha,e nothin$ to say( because their whole mind has been absorbed in ma%in$ money) Aet he ac%nowled$es that riches ha,e the ad,anta$e o# placin$ men abo,e the temptation to dishonesty or #alsehood) The respect#ul attention shown to him by *ocrates( whose lo,e o# con,ersation( no less than the mission imposed upon him by the Oracle( leads him to as% -uestions o# all men( youn$ and old ali%e( should also be noted) 2ho better suited to raise the -uestion o# justice than "ephalus( whose li#e mi$ht seem to be the e&pression o# it9 The moderation with which old a$e is pictured by "ephalus as a ,ery tolerable portion o# e&istence is characteristic( not only o# him( but o# .ree% #eelin$ $enerally( and contrasts with the e&a$$eration o# "icero in the e *enectute) The e,enin$ o# li#e is described by Plato in the most e&pressi,e manner( yet with the #ewest possible touches) 1s "icero remar%s 5Ep) ad 1ttic) i,) 8B7( the a$ed "ephalus would ha,e been out o# place in the discussion which #ollows( and which he could neither ha,e understood nor ta%en part in without a ,iolation o# dramatic propriety) His 0son and heir0 Polemarchus has the #ran%ness and impetuousness o# youth+ he is #or detainin$ *ocrates by #orce in the openin$ scene( and will not 0let him o##0 on the subject o# women and children) 'i%e

"ephalus( he is limited in his point o# ,iew( and represents the pro,erbial sta$e o# morality which has rules o# li#e rather than principles+ and he -uotes *imonides as his #ather had -uoted Pindar) But a#ter this he has no more to say+ the answers which he ma%es are only elicited #rom him by the dialectic o# *ocrates) He has not yet e&perienced the in#luence o# the *ophists li%e .laucon and 1deimantus( nor is he sensible o# the necessity o# re#utin$ them+ he belon$s to the pre-*ocratic or pre-dialectical a$e) He is incapable o# ar$uin$( and is bewildered by *ocrates to such a de$ree that he does not %now what he is sayin$) He is made to admit that justice is a thie#( and that the ,irtues #ollow the analo$y o# the arts) @rom his brother 'ysias we learn that he #ell a ,ictim to the Thirty Tyrants( but no allusion is here made to his #ate( nor to the circumstance that "ephalus and his #amily were o# *yracusan ori$in( and had mi$rated #rom Thurii to 1thens) The 0"halcedonian $iant(0 Thrasymachus( o# whom we ha,e already heard in the Phaedrus( is the personi#ication o# the *ophists( accordin$ to Plato6s conception o# them( in some o# their worst characteristics) He is ,ain and blusterin$( re#usin$ to discourse unless he is paid( #ond o# ma%in$ an oration( and hopin$ thereby to escape the ine,itable *ocrates+ but a mere child in ar$ument( and unable to #oresee that the ne&t 0mo,e0 5to use a Platonic e&pression7 will 0shut him up)0 He has reached the sta$e o# #ramin$ $eneral notions( and in this respect is in ad,ance o# "ephalus and Polemarchus) But he is incapable o# de#endin$ them in a discussion( and ,ainly tries to co,er his con#usion in banter and insolence) 2hether such doctrines as are attributed to him by Plato were really held either by him or by any other *ophist is uncertain+ in the in#ancy o# philosophy serious errors about morality mi$ht easily $row up --they are certainly put into the mouths o# spea%ers in Thucydides+ but we are concerned at present with Plato6s description o# him( and not with the historical reality) The ine-uality o# the contest adds $reatly to the humor o# the scene) The pompous and empty *ophist is utterly helpless in the hands o# the $reat master o# dialectic( who %nows how to touch all the sprin$s o# ,anity and wea%ness in him) He is $reatly irritated by the irony o# *ocrates( but his noisy and imbecile ra$e only lays him more and more open to the thrusts o# his assailant) His determination to cram down their throats( or put 0bodily into their souls0 his own words( elicits a cry o# horror #rom *ocrates) The state o# his temper is -uite as worthy o# remar% as the process o# the ar$ument) Nothin$ is more amusin$ than his complete submission when he has been once thorou$hly beaten) 1t #irst he seems to continue the discussion with reluctance( but soon with apparent $ood-will( and he e,en testi#ies his interest at a later sta$e by one or two occasional remar%s) 2hen attac%ed by .laucon he is humorously protected by *ocrates 0as one who has ne,er been his enemy and is now his #riend)0 @rom "icero and Cuintilian and #rom 1ristotle6s Rhetoric we learn that the *ophist whom Plato has made so ridiculous was a man o# note whose writin$s were preser,ed in later a$es) The play on his name which was made by his contemporary Herodicus( 0thou wast e,er bold in battle(0 seems to show that the description o# him is not de,oid o# ,erisimilitude) 2hen Thrasymachus has been silenced( the two principal respondents(

.laucon and 1deimantus( appear on the sceneD here( as in .ree% tra$edy( three actors are introduced) 1t #irst si$ht the two sons o# 1riston may seem to wear a #amily li%eness( li%e the two #riends *immias and "ebes in the Phaedo) But on a nearer e&amination o# them the similarity ,anishes( and they are seen to be distinct characters) .laucon is the impetuous youth who can 0just ne,er ha,e enou$h o# #echtin$0 5c#) the character o# him in ?en) 3em) iii) B7+ the man o# pleasure who is ac-uainted with the mysteries o# lo,e+ the 0ju,enis -ui $audet canibus(0 and who impro,es the breed o# animals+ the lo,er o# art and music who has all the e&periences o# youth#ul li#e) He is #ull o# -uic%ness and penetration( piercin$ easily below the clumsy platitudes o# Thrasymachus to the real di##iculty+ he turns out to the li$ht the seamy side o# human li#e( and yet does not lose #aith in the just and true) It is .laucon who sei/es what may be termed the ludicrous relation o# the philosopher to the world( to whom a state o# simplicity is 0a city o# pi$s(0 who is always prepared with a jest when the ar$ument o##ers him an opportunity( and who is e,er ready to second the humor o# *ocrates and to appreciate the ridiculous( whether in the connoisseurs o# music( or in the lo,ers o# theatricals( or in the #antastic beha,ior o# the citi/ens o# democracy) His wea%nesses are se,eral times alluded to by *ocrates( who( howe,er( will not allow him to be attac%ed by his brother 1deimantus) He is a soldier( and( li%e 1deimantus( has been distin$uished at the battle o# 3e$ara) The character o# 1deimantus is deeper and $ra,er( and the pro#ounder objections are commonly put into his mouth) .laucon is more demonstrati,e( and $enerally opens the $ame) 1deimantus pursues the ar$ument #urther) .laucon has more o# the li,eliness and -uic% sympathy o# youth+ 1deimantus has the maturer jud$ment o# a $rown-up man o# the world) In the second boo%( when .laucon insists that justice and injustice shall be considered without re$ard to their conse-uences( 1deimantus remar%s that they are re$arded by man%ind in $eneral only #or the sa%e o# their conse-uences+ and in a similar ,ein o# re#lection he ur$es at the be$innin$ o# the #ourth boo% that *ocrates #alls in ma%in$ his citi/ens happy( and is answered that happiness is not the #irst but the second thin$( not the direct aim but the indirect conse-uence o# the $ood $o,ernment o# a *tate) In the discussion about reli$ion and mytholo$y( 1deimantus is the respondent( but .laucon brea%s in with a sli$ht jest( and carries on the con,ersation in a li$hter tone about music and $ymnastic to the end o# the boo%) It is 1deimantus a$ain who ,olunteers the criticism o# common sense on the *ocratic method o# ar$ument( and who re#uses to let *ocrates pass li$htly o,er the -uestion o# women and children) It is 1deimantus who is the respondent in the more ar$umentati,e( as .laucon in the li$hter and more ima$inati,e portions o# the ialo$ue) @or e&ample( throu$hout the $reater part o# the si&th boo%( the causes o# the corruption o# philosophy and the conception o# the idea o# $ood are discussed with 1deimantus) Then .laucon resumes his place o# principal respondent+ but he has a di##iculty in apprehendin$ the hi$her education o# *ocrates( and ma%es some #alse hits in the course o# the discussion) Once more 1deimantus returns with the allusion to his brother .laucon whom he compares to the contentious *tate+ in the ne&t boo% he is a$ain superseded( and .laucon continues to the end)

Thus in a succession o# characters Plato represents the successi,e sta$es o# morality( be$innin$ with the 1thenian $entleman o# the olden time( who is #ollowed by the practical man o# that day re$ulatin$ his li#e by pro,erbs and saws+ to him succeeds the wild $enerali/ation o# the *ophists( and lastly come the youn$ disciples o# the $reat teacher( who %now the sophistical ar$uments but will not be con,inced by them( and desire to $o deeper into the nature o# thin$s) These too( li%e "ephalus( Polemarchus( Thrasymachus( are clearly distin$uished #rom one another) Neither in the Republic( nor in any other ialo$ue o# Plato( is a sin$le character repeated) The delineation o# *ocrates in the Republic is not wholly consistent) In the #irst boo% we ha,e more o# the real *ocrates( such as he is depicted in the 3emorabilia o# ?enophon( in the earliest ialo$ues o# Plato( and in the 1polo$y) He is ironical( pro,o%in$( -uestionin$( the old enemy o# the *ophists( ready to put on the mas% o# *ilenus as well as to ar$ue seriously) But in the si&th boo% his enmity towards the *ophists abates+ he ac%nowled$es that they are the representati,es rather than the corrupters o# the world) He also becomes more do$matic and constructi,e( passin$ beyond the ran$e either o# the political or the speculati,e ideas o# the real *ocrates) In one passa$e Plato himsel# seems to intimate that the time had now come #or *ocrates( who had passed his whole li#e in philosophy( to $i,e his own opinion and not to be always repeatin$ the notions o# other men) There is no e,idence that either the idea o# $ood or the conception o# a per#ect *tate were comprehended in the *ocratic teachin$( thou$h he certainly dwelt on the nature o# the uni,ersal and o# #inal causes 5cp) ?en) 3em) i) <+ Phaedo EF7+ and a deep thin%er li%e him in his thirty or #orty years o# public teachin$( could hardly ha,e #alled to touch on the nature o# #amily relations( #or which there is also some positi,e e,idence in the 3emorabilia 53em) i) :( =8 #oll)7 The *ocratic method is nominally retained+ and e,ery in#erence is either put into the mouth o# the respondent or represented as the common disco,ery o# him and *ocrates) But any one can see that this is a mere #orm( o# which the a##ectation $rows wearisome as the wor% ad,ances) The method o# in-uiry has passed into a method o# teachin$ in which by the help o# interlocutors the same thesis is loo%ed at #rom ,arious points o# ,iew) The nature o# the process is truly characteri/ed by .laucon( when he describes himsel# as a companion who is not $ood #or much in an in,esti$ation( but can see what he is shown( and may( perhaps( $i,e the answer to a -uestion more #luently than another) Neither can we be absolutely certain that( *ocrates himsel# tau$ht the immortality o# the soul( which is un%nown to his disciple .laucon in the Republic+ nor is there any reason to suppose that he used myths or re,elations o# another world as a ,ehicle o# instruction( or that he would ha,e banished poetry or ha,e denounced the .ree% mytholo$y) His #a,orite oath is retained( and a sli$ht mention is made o# the daemonium( or internal si$n( which is alluded to by *ocrates as a phenomenon peculiar to himsel#) 1 real element o# *ocratic teachin$(

which is more prominent in the Republic than in any o# the other ialo$ues o# Plato( is the use o# e&ample and illustration 56taphorhti%a auto prhospherhonte/67D 0'et us apply the test o# common instances)0 0Aou(0 says 1deimantus( ironically( in the si&th boo%( 0are so unaccustomed to spea% in ima$es)0 1nd this use o# e&amples or ima$es( thou$h truly *ocratic in ori$in( is enlar$ed by the $enius o# Plato into the #orm o# an alle$ory or parable( which embodies in the concrete what has been already described( or is about to be described( in the abstract) Thus the #i$ure o# the ca,e in Boo% >II is a recapitulation o# the di,isions o# %nowled$e in Boo% >I) The composite animal in Boo% I? is an alle$ory o# the parts o# the soul) The noble captain and the ship and the true pilot in Boo% >I are a #i$ure o# the relation o# the people to the philosophers in the *tate which has been described) Other #i$ures( such as the do$ in the second( third( and #ourth boo%s( or the marria$e o# the portionless maiden in the si&th boo%( or the drones and wasps in the ei$hth and ninth boo%s( also #orm lin%s o# connection in lon$ passa$es( or are used to recall pre,ious discussions) Plato is most true to the character o# his master when he describes him as 0not o# this world)0 1nd with this representation o# him the ideal *tate and the other parado&es o# the Republic are -uite in accordance( thou$h they can not be shown to ha,e been speculations o# *ocrates) To him( as to other $reat teachers both philosophical and reli$ious( when they loo%ed upward( the world seemed to be the embodiment o# error and e,il) The common sense o# man%ind has re,olted a$ainst this ,iew( or has only partially admitted it) 1nd e,en in *ocrates himsel# the sterner jud$ment o# the multitude at times passes into a sort o# ironical pity or lo,e) 3en in $eneral are incapable o# philosophy( and are there#ore at enmity with the philosopher+ but their misunderstandin$ o# him is una,oidableD #or they ha,e ne,er seen him as he truly is in his own ima$e+ they are only ac-uainted with arti#icial systems possessin$ no nati,e #orce o# truth --words which admit o# many applications) Their leaders ha,e nothin$ to measure with( and are there#ore i$norant o# their own stature) But they are to be pitied or lau$hed at( not to be -uarrelled with+ they mean well with their nostrums( i# they could only learn that they are cuttin$ o## a Hydra6s head) This moderation towards those who are in error is one o# the most characteristic #eatures o# *ocrates in the Republic) In all the di##erent representations o# *ocrates( whether o# ?enophon or Plato( and the di##erences o# the earlier or later ialo$ues( he always retains the character o# the unwearied and disinterested see%er a#ter truth( without which he would ha,e ceased to be *ocrates) 'ea,in$ the characters we may now analy/e the contents o# the Republic( and then proceed to consider 587 The $eneral aspects o# this Hellenic ideal o# the *tate( 5:7 The modern li$hts in which the thou$hts o# Plato may be read) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG I *ocrates - .'1!"ON

I went down yesterday to the Piraeus with .laucon the son o# 1riston( that I mi$ht o##er up my prayers to the $oddess+ and also because I wanted to see in what manner they would celebrate the #esti,al( which was a new thin$) I was deli$hted with the procession o# the inhabitants+ but that o# the Thracians was e-ually( i# not more( beauti#ul) 2hen we had #inished our prayers and ,iewed the spectacle( we turned in the direction o# the city+ and at that instant Polemarchus the son o# "ephalus chanced to catch si$ht o# us #rom a distance as we were startin$ on our way home( and told his ser,ant to run and bid us wait #or him) The ser,ant too% hold o# me by the cloa% behind( and saidD Polemarchus desires you to wait) I turned round( and as%ed him where his master was) There he is( said the youth( comin$ a#ter you( i# you will only wait) "ertainly we will( said .laucon+ and in a #ew minutes Polemarchus appeared( and with him 1deimantus( .laucon6s brother( Niceratus the son o# Nicias( and se,eral others who had been at the procession) *ocrates - PO'E31R"H!* - .'1!"ON - 1 EI31NT!* Polemarchus said to meD I percei,e( *ocrates( that you and our companion are already on your way to the city) Aou are not #ar wron$( I said) But do you see( he rejoined( how many we are9 O# course) 1nd are you stron$er than all these9 #or i# not( you will ha,e to remain where you are) 3ay there not be the alternati,e( I said( that we may persuade you to let us $o9 But can you persuade us( i# we re#use to listen to you9 he said) "ertainly not( replied .laucon) Then we are not $oin$ to listen+ o# that you may be assured) 1deimantus addedD Has no one told you o# the torch-race on horsebac% in honour o# the $oddess which will ta%e place in the e,enin$9 2ith horses4 I repliedD That is a no,elty) 2ill horsemen carry torches and pass them one to another durin$ the race9 Aes( said Polemarchus( and not only so( but a #esti,al will he celebrated at ni$ht( which you certainly ou$ht to see) 'et us rise soon a#ter supper and see this #esti,al+ there will be a $atherin$ o# youn$ men( and we will ha,e a $ood tal%) *tay then( and do not be per,erse) .laucon saidD I suppose( since you insist( that we must) >ery $ood( I replied)

.laucon - "EPH1'!* - *O"R1TE* 1ccordin$ly we went with Polemarchus to his house+ and there we #ound his brothers 'ysias and Euthydemus( and with them Thrasymachus the "halcedonian( "harmantides the Paeanian( and "leitophon the son o# 1ristonymus) There too was "ephalus the #ather o# Polemarchus( whom I had not seen #or a lon$ time( and I thou$ht him ,ery much a$ed) He was seated on a cushioned chair( and had a $arland on his head( #or he had been sacri#icin$ in the court+ and there were some other chairs in the room arran$ed in a semicircle( upon which we sat down by him) He saluted me ea$erly( and then he saidD -Aou don6t come to see me( *ocrates( as o#ten as you ou$htD I# I were still able to $o and see you I would not as% you to come to me) But at my a$e I can hardly $et to the city( and there#ore you should come o#tener to the Piraeus) @or let me tell you( that the more the pleasures o# the body #ade away( the $reater to me is the pleasure and charm o# con,ersation) o not then deny my re-uest( but ma%e our house your resort and %eep company with these youn$ men+ we are old #riends( and you will be -uite at home with us) I repliedD There is nothin$ which #or my part I li%e better( "ephalus( than con,ersin$ with a$ed men+ #or I re$ard them as tra,ellers who ha,e $one a journey which I too may ha,e to $o( and o# whom I ou$ht to en-uire( whether the way is smooth and easy( or ru$$ed and di##icult) 1nd this is a -uestion which I should li%e to as% o# you who ha,e arri,ed at that time which the poets call the 6threshold o# old a$e6 --Is li#e harder towards the end( or what report do you $i,e o# it9 I will tell you( *ocrates( he said( what my own #eelin$ is) 3en o# my a$e #loc% to$ether+ we are birds o# a #eather( as the old pro,erb says+ and at our meetin$s the tale o# my ac-uaintance commonly is --I cannot eat( I cannot drin%+ the pleasures o# youth and lo,e are #led awayD there was a $ood time once( but now that is $one( and li#e is no lon$er li#e) *ome complain o# the sli$hts which are put upon them by relations( and they will tell you sadly o# how many e,ils their old a$e is the cause) But to me( *ocrates( these complainers seem to blame that which is not really in #ault) @or i# old a$e were the cause( I too bein$ old( and e,ery other old man( would ha,e #elt as they do) But this is not my own e&perience( nor that o# others whom I ha,e %nown) How well I remember the a$ed poet *ophocles( when in answer to the -uestion( How does lo,e suit with a$e( *ophocles( --are you still the man you were9 Peace( he replied+ most $ladly ha,e I escaped the thin$ o# which you spea%+ I #eel as i# I had escaped #rom a mad and #urious master) His words ha,e o#ten occurred to my mind since( and they seem as $ood to me now as at the time when he uttered them) @or certainly old a$e has a $reat sense o# calm and #reedom+ when the passions rela& their hold( then( as *ophocles says( we are #reed #rom the $rasp not o# one mad master only( but o# many) The truth is( *ocrates( that these re$rets( and also the complaints about relations( are to be attributed to the same cause( which is not old a$e( but men6s characters and tempers+ #or he who is o# a

calm and happy nature will hardly #eel the pressure o# a$e( but to him who is o# an opposite disposition youth and a$e are e-ually a burden) I listened in admiration( and wantin$ to draw him out( that he mi$ht $o on --Aes( "ephalus( I saidD but I rather suspect that people in $eneral are not con,inced by you when you spea% thus+ they thin% that old a$e sits li$htly upon you( not because o# your happy disposition( but because you are rich( and wealth is well %nown to be a $reat com#orter) Aou are ri$ht( he replied+ they are not con,incedD and there is somethin$ in what they say+ not( howe,er( so much as they ima$ine) I mi$ht answer them as Themistocles answered the *eriphian who was abusin$ him and sayin$ that he was #amous( not #or his own merits but because he was an 1thenianD 6I# you had been a nati,e o# my country or I o# yours( neither o# us would ha,e been #amous)6 1nd to those who are not rich and are impatient o# old a$e( the same reply may be made+ #or to the $ood poor man old a$e cannot be a li$ht burden( nor can a bad rich man e,er ha,e peace with himsel#) 3ay I as%( "ephalus( whether your #ortune was #or the most part inherited or ac-uired by you9 1c-uired4 *ocrates+ do you want to %now how much I ac-uired9 In the art o# ma%in$ money I ha,e been midway between my #ather and $rand#atherD #or my $rand#ather( whose name I bear( doubled and trebled the ,alue o# his patrimony( that which he inherited bein$ much what I possess now+ but my #ather 'ysanias reduced the property below what it is at presentD and I shall be satis#ied i# I lea,e to these my sons not less but a little more than I recei,ed) That was why I as%ed you the -uestion( I replied( because I see that you are indi##erent about money( which is a characteristic rather o# those who ha,e inherited their #ortunes than o# those who ha,e ac-uired them+ the ma%ers o# #ortunes ha,e a second lo,e o# money as a creation o# their own( resemblin$ the a##ection o# authors #or their own poems( or o# parents #or their children( besides that natural lo,e o# it #or the sa%e o# use and pro#it which is common to them and all men) 1nd hence they are ,ery bad company( #or they can tal% about nothin$ but the praises o# wealth) That is true( he said) Aes( that is ,ery true( but may I as% another -uestion9 2hat do you consider to be the $reatest blessin$ which you ha,e reaped #rom your wealth9 One( he said( o# which I could not e&pect easily to con,ince others) @or let me tell you( *ocrates( that when a man thin%s himsel# to be near death( #ears and cares enter into his mind which he ne,er had be#ore+ the tales o# a world below and the punishment which is e&acted there o# deeds done here were once a lau$hin$ matter to him( but now he is tormented with the thou$ht that they may be trueD either #rom the wea%ness o# a$e( or because he is now drawin$ nearer to that other place( he has a clearer ,iew o# these thin$s+ suspicions and alarms

crowd thic%ly upon him( and he be$ins to re#lect and consider what wron$s he has done to others) 1nd when he #inds that the sum o# his trans$ressions is $reat he will many a time li%e a child start up in his sleep #or #ear( and he is #illed with dar% #orebodin$s) But to him who is conscious o# no sin( sweet hope( as Pindar charmin$ly says( is the %ind nurse o# his a$eD Hope( he says( cherishes the soul o# him who li,es in justice and holiness and is the nurse o# his a$e and the companion o# his journey+ --hope which is mi$htiest to sway the restless soul o# man) How admirable are his words4 1nd the $reat blessin$ o# riches( I do not say to e,ery man( but to a $ood man( is( that he has had no occasion to decei,e or to de#raud others( either intentionally or unintentionally+ and when he departs to the world below he is not in any apprehension about o##erin$s due to the $ods or debts which he owes to men) Now to this peace o# mind the possession o# wealth $reatly contributes+ and there#ore I say( that( settin$ one thin$ a$ainst another( o# the many ad,anta$es which wealth has to $i,e( to a man o# sense this is in my opinion the $reatest) 2ell said( "ephalus( I replied+ but as concernin$ justice( what is it9 --to spea% the truth and to pay your debts --no more than this9 1nd e,en to this are there not e&ceptions9 *uppose that a #riend when in his ri$ht mind has deposited arms with me and he as%s #or them when he is not in his ri$ht mind( ou$ht I to $i,e them bac% to him9 No one would say that I ou$ht or that I should be ri$ht in doin$ so( any more than they would say that I ou$ht always to spea% the truth to one who is in his condition) Aou are -uite ri$ht( he replied) But then( I said( spea%in$ the truth and payin$ your debts is not a correct de#inition o# justice) "ephalus - *O"R1TE* - PO'E31R"H!* Cuite correct( *ocrates( i# *imonides is to be belie,ed( said Polemarchus interposin$) I #ear( said "ephalus( that I must $o now( #or I ha,e to loo% a#ter the sacri#ices( and I hand o,er the ar$ument to Polemarchus and the company) Is not Polemarchus your heir9 I said) To be sure( he answered( and went away lau$hin$ to the sacri#ices) *ocrates - PO'E31R"H!* Tell me then( O thou heir o# the ar$ument( what did *imonides say( and accordin$ to you truly say( about justice9 He said that the repayment o# a debt is just( and in sayin$ so he appears to me to be ri$ht)

I should be sorry to doubt the word o# such a wise and inspired man( but his meanin$( thou$h probably clear to you( is the re,erse o# clear to me) @or he certainly does not mean( as we were now sayin$ that I ou$ht to return a return a deposit o# arms or o# anythin$ else to one who as%s #or it when he is not in his ri$ht senses+ and yet a deposit cannot be denied to be a debt) True) Then when the person who as%s me is not in his ri$ht mind I am by no means to ma%e the return9 "ertainly not) 2hen *imonides said that the repayment o# a debt was justice( he did not mean to include that case9 "ertainly not+ #or he thin%s that a #riend ou$ht always to do $ood to a #riend and ne,er e,il) Aou mean that the return o# a deposit o# $old which is to the injury o# the recei,er( i# the two parties are #riends( is not the repayment o# a debt( --that is what you would ima$ine him to say9 Aes) 1nd are enemies also to recei,e what we owe to them9 To be sure( he said( they are to recei,e what we owe them( and an enemy( as I ta%e it( owes to an enemy that which is due or proper to him --that is to say( e,il) *imonides( then( a#ter the manner o# poets( would seem to ha,e spo%en dar%ly o# the nature o# justice+ #or he really meant to say that justice is the $i,in$ to each man what is proper to him( and this he termed a debt) That must ha,e been his meanin$( he said) By hea,en4 I replied+ and i# we as%ed him what due or proper thin$ is $i,en by medicine( and to whom( what answer do you thin% that he would ma%e to us9 He would surely reply that medicine $i,es dru$s and meat and drin% to human bodies) 1nd what due or proper thin$ is $i,en by coo%ery( and to what9 *easonin$ to #ood) 1nd what is that which justice $i,es( and to whom9 I#( *ocrates( we are to be $uided at all by the analo$y o# the precedin$ instances( then justice is the art which $i,es $ood to #riends and e,il to enemies) That is his meanin$ then9 I thin% so) 1nd who is best able to do $ood to his #riends and e,il to his enemies

in time o# sic%ness9 The physician) Or when they are on a ,oya$e( amid the perils o# the sea9 The pilot) 1nd in what sort o# actions or with a ,iew to what result is the just man most able to do harm to his enemy and $ood to his #riends9 In $oin$ to war a$ainst the one and in ma%in$ alliances with the other) But when a man is well( my dear Polemarchus( there is no need o# a physician9 No) 1nd he who is not on a ,oya$e has no need o# a pilot9 No) Then in time o# peace justice will be o# no use9 I am ,ery #ar #rom thin%in$ so) Aou thin% that justice may be o# use in peace as well as in war9 Aes) 'i%e husbandry #or the ac-uisition o# corn9 Aes) Or li%e shoema%in$ #or the ac-uisition o# shoes( --that is what you mean9 Aes) 1nd what similar use or power o# ac-uisition has justice in time o# peace9 In contracts( *ocrates( justice is o# use) 1nd by contracts you mean partnerships9 E&actly) But is the just man or the s%il#ul player a more use#ul and better partner at a $ame o# drau$hts9 The s%il#ul player) 1nd in the layin$ o# bric%s and stones is the just man a more use#ul or better partner than the builder9 Cuite the re,erse) Then in what sort o# partnership is the just man a better partner than the harp-player( as in playin$ the harp the harp-player is certainly a better partner than the just man9 In a money partnership) Aes( Polemarchus( but surely not in the use o# money+ #or you do not want a just man to be your counsellor the purchase or sale o# a horse+ a man who is %nowin$ about horses would be better #or that( would he not9 "ertainly)

1nd when you want to buy a ship( the shipwri$ht or the pilot would be better9 True) Then what is that joint use o# sil,er or $old in which the just man is to be pre#erred9 2hen you want a deposit to be %ept sa#ely) Aou mean when money is not wanted( but allowed to lie9 Precisely) That is to say( justice is use#ul when money is useless9 That is the in#erence) 1nd when you want to %eep a prunin$-hoo% sa#e( then justice is use#ul to the indi,idual and to the state+ but when you want to use it( then the art o# the ,ine-dresser9 "learly) 1nd when you want to %eep a shield or a lyre( and not to use them( you would say that justice is use#ul+ but when you want to use them( then the art o# the soldier or o# the musician9 "ertainly) 1nd so o# all the other thin$s+ --justice is use#ul when they are useless( and useless when they are use#ul9 That is the in#erence) Then justice is not $ood #or much) But let us consider this #urther pointD Is not he who can best stri%e a blow in a bo&in$ match or in any %ind o# #i$htin$ best able to ward o## a blow9 "ertainly) 1nd he who is most s%il#ul in pre,entin$ or escapin$ #rom a disease is best able to create one9 True) 1nd he is the best $uard o# a camp who is best able to steal a march upon the enemy9 "ertainly) Then he who is a $ood %eeper o# anythin$ is also a $ood thie#9 That( I suppose( is to be in#erred) Then i# the just man is $ood at %eepin$ money( he is $ood at stealin$ it) That is implied in the ar$ument) Then a#ter all the just man has turned out to be a thie#) 1nd this is a lesson which I suspect you must ha,e learnt out o# Homer+ #or he( spea%in$ o# 1utolycus( the maternal $rand#ather o# Odysseus( who is a #a,ourite o# his( a##irms that He was e&cellent abo,e all men in the#t and perjury) 1nd so( you and

Homer and *imonides are a$reed that justice is an art o# the#t+ to be practised howe,er 6#or the $ood o# #riends and #or the harm o# enemies(6 --that was what you were sayin$9 No( certainly not that( thou$h I do not now %now what I did say+ but I still stand by the latter words) 2ell( there is another -uestionD By #riends and enemies do we mean those who are so really( or only in seemin$9 *urely( he said( a man may be e&pected to lo,e those whom he thin%s $ood( and to hate those whom he thin%s e,il) Aes( but do not persons o#ten err about $ood and e,ilD many who are not $ood seem to be so( and con,ersely9 That is true) Then to them the $ood will be enemies and the e,il will be their #riends9 True) 1nd in that case they will be ri$ht in doin$ $ood to the e,il and e,il to the $ood9 "learly) But the $ood are just and would not do an injustice9 True) Then accordin$ to your ar$ument it is just to injure those who do no wron$9 Nay( *ocrates+ the doctrine is immoral) Then I suppose that we ou$ht to do $ood to the just and harm to the unjust9 I li%e that better) But see the conse-uenceD --3any a man who is i$norant o# human nature has #riends who are bad #riends( and in that case he ou$ht to do harm to them+ and he has $ood enemies whom he ou$ht to bene#it+ but( i# so( we shall be sayin$ the ,ery opposite o# that which we a##irmed to be the meanin$ o# *imonides) >ery true( he saidD and I thin% that we had better correct an error into which we seem to ha,e #allen in the use o# the words 6#riend6 and 6enemy)6 2hat was the error( Polemarchus9 I as%ed) 2e assumed that he is a #riend who seems to be or who is thou$ht $ood) 1nd how is the error to be corrected9 2e should rather say that he is a #riend who is( as well as seems( $ood+ and that he who seems only( and is not $ood( only seems to be and is not a #riend+ and o# an enemy the same may be said) Aou would ar$ue that the $ood are our #riends and the bad our enemies9

Aes) 1nd instead o# sayin$ simply as we did at #irst( that it is just to do $ood to our #riends and harm to our enemies( we should #urther sayD It is just to do $ood to our #riends when they are $ood and harm to our enemies when they are e,il9 Aes( that appears to me to be the truth) But ou$ht the just to injure any one at all9 !ndoubtedly he ou$ht to injure those who are both wic%ed and his enemies) 2hen horses are injured( are they impro,ed or deteriorated9 The latter) eteriorated( that is to say( in the $ood -ualities o# horses( not o# do$s9 Aes( o# horses) 1nd do$s are deteriorated in the $ood -ualities o# do$s( and not o# horses9 O# course) 1nd will not men who are injured be deteriorated in that which is the proper ,irtue o# man9 "ertainly) 1nd that human ,irtue is justice9 To be sure) Then men who are injured are o# necessity made unjust9 That is the result) But can the musician by his art ma%e men unmusical9 "ertainly not) Or the horseman by his art ma%e them bad horsemen9 Impossible) 1nd can the just by justice ma%e men unjust( or spea%in$ $eneral can the $ood by ,irtue ma%e them bad9 1ssuredly not) 1ny more than heat can produce cold9 It cannot) Or drou$ht moisture9 "learly not) Nor can the $ood harm any one9 Impossible) 1nd the just is the $ood9 "ertainly) Then to injure a #riend or any one else is not the act o# a just man( but o# the opposite( who is the unjust9 I thin% that what you say is -uite true( *ocrates) Then i# a man says that justice consists in the repayment o# debts( and that $ood is the debt which a man owes to his #riends( and e,il the debt which he owes to his enemies( --to say this is not wise+

#or it is not true( i#( as has been clearly shown( the injurin$ o# another can be in no case just) I a$ree with you( said Polemarchus) Then you and I are prepared to ta%e up arms a$ainst any one who attributes such a sayin$ to *imonides or Bias or Pittacus( or any other wise man or seer9 I am -uite ready to do battle at your side( he said) *hall I tell you whose I belie,e the sayin$ to be9 2hose9 I belie,e that Periander or Perdiccas or ?er&es or Ismenias the Theban( or some other rich and mi$hty man( who had a $reat opinion o# his own power( was the #irst to say that justice is 6doin$ $ood to your #riends and harm to your enemies)6 3ost true( he said) Aes( I said+ but i# this de#inition o# justice also brea%s down( what other can be o##ered9 *e,eral times in the course o# the discussion Thrasymachus had made an attempt to $et the ar$ument into his own hands( and had been put down by the rest o# the company( who wanted to hear the end) But when Polemarchus and I had done spea%in$ and there was a pause( he could no lon$er hold his peace+ and( $atherin$ himsel# up( he came at us li%e a wild beast( see%in$ to de,our us) 2e were -uite panic-stric%en at the si$ht o# him) *ocrates - PO'E31R"H!* - THR1*A31"H!* He roared out to the whole companyD 2hat #olly) *ocrates( has ta%en possession o# you all9 1nd why( sillybillies( do you %noc% under to one another9 I say that i# you want really to %now what justice is( you should not only as% but answer( and you should not see% honour to yoursel# #rom the re#utation o# an opponent( but ha,e your own answer+ #or there is many a one who can as% and cannot answer) 1nd now I will not ha,e you say that justice is duty or ad,anta$e or pro#it or $ain or interest( #or this sort o# nonsense will not do #or me+ I must ha,e clearness and accuracy) I was panic-stric%en at his words( and could not loo% at him without tremblin$) Indeed I belie,e that i# I had not #i&ed my eye upon him( I should ha,e been struc% dumbD but when I saw his #ury risin$( I loo%ed at him #irst( and was there#ore able to reply to him) Thrasymachus( I said( with a -ui,er( don6t be hard upon us) Polemarchus and I may ha,e been $uilty o# a little mista%e in the ar$ument( but I can assure you that the error was not intentional) I# we were see%in$ #or a piece o# $old( you would not ima$ine that we were 6%noc%in$ under to one another(6 and so losin$ our chance o# #indin$ it) 1nd why( when we are see%in$ #or justice( a thin$ more precious than many pieces o# $old( do you say that we are wea%ly yieldin$ to one another and not doin$ our utmost to $et at the truth9 Nay( my $ood #riend(

we are most willin$ and an&ious to do so( but the #act is that we cannot) 1nd i# so( you people who %now all thin$s should pity us and not be an$ry with us) How characteristic o# *ocrates4 he replied( with a bitter lau$h+ --that6s your ironical style4 id I not #oresee --ha,e I not already told you( that whate,er he was as%ed he would re#use to answer( and try irony or any other shu##le( in order that he mi$ht a,oid answerin$9 Aou are a philosopher( Thrasymachus( I replied( and well %now that i# you as% a person what numbers ma%e up twel,e( ta%in$ care to prohibit him whom you as% #rom answerin$ twice si&( or three times #our( or si& times two( or #our times three( 6#or this sort o# nonsense will not do #or me(6 --then ob,iously( that is your way o# puttin$ the -uestion( no one can answer you) But suppose that he were to retort( 6Thrasymachus( what do you mean9 I# one o# these numbers which you interdict be the true answer to the -uestion( am I #alsely to say some other number which is not the ri$ht one9 --is that your meanin$96 -How would you answer him9 Just as i# the two cases were at all ali%e4 he said) 2hy should they not be9 I replied+ and e,en i# they are not( but only appear to be so to the person who is as%ed( ou$ht he not to say what he thin%s( whether you and I #orbid him or not9 I presume then that you are $oin$ to ma%e one o# the interdicted answers9 I dare say that I may( notwithstandin$ the dan$er( i# upon re#lection I appro,e o# any o# them) But what i# I $i,e you an answer about justice other and better( he said( than any o# these9 2hat do you deser,e to ha,e done to you9 one to me4 --as becomes the i$norant( I must learn #rom the wise --that is what I deser,e to ha,e done to me) 2hat( and no payment4 a pleasant notion4 I will pay when I ha,e the money( I replied) *ocrates - THR1*A31"H!* - .'1!"ON But you ha,e( *ocrates( said .lauconD and you( Thrasymachus( need be under no an&iety about money( #or we will all ma%e a contribution #or *ocrates) Aes( he replied( and then *ocrates will do as he always does --re#use to answer himsel#( but ta%e and pull to pieces the answer o# some one else) 2hy( my $ood #riend( I said( how can any one answer who %nows( and says that he %nows( just nothin$+ and who( e,en i# he has some #aint notions o# his own( is told by a man o# authority not to utter them9 The natural thin$ is( that the spea%er should be some one li%e yoursel#

who pro#esses to %now and can tell what he %nows) 2ill you then %indly answer( #or the edi#ication o# the company and o# mysel# 9 .laucon and the rest o# the company joined in my re-uest and Thrasymachus( as any one mi$ht see( was in reality ea$er to spea%+ #or he thou$ht that he had an e&cellent answer( and would distin$uish himsel#) But at #irst he to insist on my answerin$+ at len$th he consented to be$in) Behold( he said( the wisdom o# *ocrates+ he re#uses to teach himsel#( and $oes about learnin$ o# others( to whom he ne,er e,en says than% you) That I learn o# others( I replied( is -uite true+ but that I am un$rate#ul I wholly deny) 3oney I ha,e none( and there#ore I pay in praise( which is all I ha,eD and how ready I am to praise any one who appears to me to spea% well you will ,ery soon #ind out when you answer+ #or I e&pect that you will answer well) 'isten( then( he said+ I proclaim that justice is nothin$ else than the interest o# the stron$er) 1nd now why do you not me9 But o# course you won6t) 'et me #irst understand you( I replied) justice( as you say( is the interest o# the stron$er) 2hat( Thrasymachus( is the meanin$ o# this9 Aou cannot mean to say that because Polydamas( the pancratiast( is stron$er than we are( and #inds the eatin$ o# bee# conduci,e to his bodily stren$th( that to eat bee# is there#ore e-ually #or our $ood who are wea%er than he is( and ri$ht and just #or us9 That6s abominable o# you( *ocrates+ you ta%e the words in the sense which is most dama$in$ to the ar$ument) Not at all( my $ood sir( I said+ I am tryin$ to understand them+ and I wish that you would be a little clearer) 2ell( he said( ha,e you ne,er heard that #orms o# $o,ernment di##er+ there are tyrannies( and there are democracies( and there are aristocracies9 Aes( I %now) 1nd the $o,ernment is the rulin$ power in each state9 "ertainly) 1nd the di##erent #orms o# $o,ernment ma%e laws democratical( aristocratical( tyrannical( with a ,iew to their se,eral interests+ and these laws( which are made by them #or their own interests( are the justice which they deli,er to their subjects( and him who trans$resses them they punish as a brea%er o# the law( and unjust) 1nd that is what I mean when I say that in all states there is the same principle o# justice( which is the interest o# the $o,ernment+ and as the $o,ernment must be supposed to ha,e power( the only reasonable conclusion is( that e,erywhere there is one principle o# justice( which is the interest o# the stron$er) Now I understand you( I said+ and whether you are ri$ht or not I will try to disco,er) But let me remar%( that in de#inin$ justice you ha,e

yoursel# used the word 6interest6 which you #orbade me to use) It is true( howe,er( that in your de#inition the words 6o# the stron$er6 are added) 1 small addition( you must allow( he said) .reat or small( ne,er mind about thatD we must #irst en-uire whether what you are sayin$ is the truth) Now we are both a$reed that justice is interest o# some sort( but you $o on to say 6o# the stron$er6+ about this addition I am not so sure( and must there#ore consider #urther) Proceed) I will+ and #irst tell me( to obey their rulers9 o you admit that it is just or subjects

I do) But are the rulers o# states absolutely in#allible( or are they sometimes liable to err9 To be sure( he replied( they are liable to err) Then in ma%in$ their laws they may sometimes ma%e them ri$htly( and sometimes not9 True) 2hen they ma%e them ri$htly( they ma%e them a$reeably to their interest+ when they are mista%en( contrary to their interest+ you admit that9 Aes) 1nd the laws which they ma%e must be obeyed by their subjects( --and that is what you call justice9 oubtless) Then justice( accordin$ to your ar$ument( is not only obedience to the interest o# the stron$er but the re,erse9 2hat is that you are sayin$9 he as%ed) I am only repeatin$ what you are sayin$( I belie,e) But let us considerD Ha,e we not admitted that the rulers may be mista%en about their own interest in what they command( and also that to obey them is justice9 Has not that been admitted9 Aes) Then you must also ha,e ac%nowled$ed justice not to be #or the interest o# the stron$er( when the rulers unintentionally command thin$s to be done which are to their own injury) @or i#( as you say( justice is the obedience which the subject renders to their commands( in that case( O wisest o# men( is there any escape #rom the conclusion that the wea%er are commanded to do( not what is #or the interest( but what is #or the injury o# the stron$er9 Nothin$ can be clearer( *ocrates( said Polemarchus) *ocrates - "'EITOPHON - PO'E31R"H!* - THR1*A31"H!*

Aes( said "leitophon( interposin$( i# you are allowed to be his witness) But there is no need o# any witness( said Polemarchus( #or Thrasymachus himsel# ac%nowled$es that rulers may sometimes command what is not #or their own interest( and that #or subjects to obey them is justice) Aes( Polemarchus( --Thrasymachus said that #or subjects to do what was commanded by their rulers is just) Aes( "leitophon( but he also said that justice is the interest o# the stron$er( and( while admittin$ both these propositions( he #urther ac%nowled$ed that the stron$er may command the wea%er who are his subjects to do what is not #or his own interest+ whence #ollows that justice is the injury -uite as much as the interest o# the stron$er) But( said "leitophon( he meant by the interest o# the stron$er what the stron$er thou$ht to be his interest( --this was what the wea%er had to do+ and this was a##irmed by him to be justice) Those were not his words( rejoined Polemarchus) *ocrates - THR1*A31"H!* Ne,er mind( I replied( i# he now says that they are( let us accept his statement) Tell me( Thrasymachus( I said( did you mean by justice what the stron$er thou$ht to be his interest( whether really so or not9 "ertainly not( he said) o you suppose that I call him who is mista%en the stron$er at the time when he is mista%en9 Aes( I said( my impression was that you did so( when you admitted that the ruler was not in#allible but mi$ht be sometimes mista%en) Aou ar$ue li%e an in#ormer( *ocrates) o you mean( #or e&ample( that he who is mista%en about the sic% is a physician in that he is mista%en9 or that he who errs in arithmetic or $rammar is an arithmetician or $rammarian at the me when he is ma%in$ the mista%e( in respect o# the mista%e9 True( we say that the physician or arithmetician or $rammarian has made a mista%e( but this is only a way o# spea%in$+ #or the #act is that neither the $rammarian nor any other person o# s%ill e,er ma%es a mista%e in so #ar as he is what his name implies+ they none o# them err unless their s%ill #ails them( and then they cease to be s%illed artists) No artist or sa$e or ruler errs at the time when he is what his name implies+ thou$h he is commonly said to err( and I adopted the common mode o# spea%in$) But to be per#ectly accurate( since you are such a lo,er o# accuracy( we should say that the ruler( in so #ar as he is the ruler( is unerrin$( and( bein$ unerrin$( always commands that which is #or his own interest+ and the subject is re-uired to e&ecute his commands+ and there#ore( as I said at #irst and now repeat( justice is the interest o# the stron$er)

Indeed( Thrasymachus( and do I really appear to you to ar$ue li%e an in#ormer9 "ertainly( he replied) 1nd you suppose that I as% these -uestions with any desi$n o# injurin$ you in the ar$ument9 Nay( he replied( 6suppose6 is not the word --I %now it+ but you will be #ound out( and by sheer #orce o# ar$ument you will ne,er pre,ail) I shall not ma%e the attempt( my dear man+ but to a,oid any misunderstandin$ occurrin$ between us in #uture( let me as%( in what sense do you spea% o# a ruler or stron$er whose interest( as you were sayin$( he bein$ the superior( it is just that the in#erior should e&ecute --is he a ruler in the popular or in the strict sense o# the term9 In the strictest o# all senses( he said) 1nd now cheat and play the in#ormer i# you can+ I as% no -uarter at your hands) But you ne,er will be able( ne,er) 1nd do you ima$ine( I said( that I am such a madman as to try and cheat( Thrasymachus9 I mi$ht as well sha,e a lion) 2hy( he said( you made the attempt a minute a$o( and you #ailed) Enou$h( I said( o# these ci,ilities) It will be better that I should as% you a -uestionD Is the physician( ta%en in that strict sense o# which you are spea%in$( a healer o# the sic% or a ma%er o# money9 1nd remember that I am now spea%in$ o# the true physician) 1 healer o# the sic%( he replied) 1nd the pilot --that is to say( the true pilot --is he a captain o# sailors or a mere sailor9 1 captain o# sailors) The circumstance that he sails in the ship is not to be ta%en into account+ neither is he to be called a sailor+ the name pilot by which he is distin$uished has nothin$ to do with sailin$( but is si$ni#icant o# his s%ill and o# his authority o,er the sailors) >ery true( he said) Now( I said( e,ery art has an interest9 "ertainly) @or which the art has to consider and pro,ide9 Aes( that is the aim o# art) 1nd the interest o# any art is the per#ection o# it --this and nothin$ else9 2hat do you mean9 I mean what I may illustrate ne$ati,ely by the e&ample o# the body) *uppose you were to as% me whether the body is sel#-su##icin$ or has wants( I should replyD "ertainly the body has wants+ #or the body may be ill and re-uire to be cured( and has there#ore interests to

which the art o# medicine ministers+ and this is the ori$in and intention o# medicine( as you will ac%nowled$e) 1m I not ri$ht9 Cuite ri$ht( he replied) But is the art o# medicine or any other art #aulty or de#icient in any -uality in the same way that the eye may be de#icient in si$ht or the ear #ail o# hearin$( and there#ore re-uires another art to pro,ide #or the interests o# seein$ and hearin$ --has art in itsel#( I say( any similar liability to #ault or de#ect( and does e,ery art re-uire another supplementary art to pro,ide #or its interests( and that another and another without end9 Or ha,e the arts to loo% only a#ter their own interests9 Or ha,e they no need either o# themsel,es or o# another9 --ha,in$ no #aults or de#ects( they ha,e no need to correct them( either by the e&ercise o# their own art or o# any other+ they ha,e only to consider the interest o# their subject-matter) @or e,ery art remains pure and #aultless while remainin$ true --that is to say( while per#ect and unimpaired) Ta%e the words in your precise sense( and tell me whether I am not ri$ht)0 Aes( clearly) Then medicine does not consider the interest o# medicine( but the interest o# the body9 True( he said) Nor does the art o# horsemanship consider the interests o# the art o# horsemanship( but the interests o# the horse+ neither do any other arts care #or themsel,es( #or they ha,e no needs+ they care only #or that which is the subject o# their art9 True( he said) But surely( Thrasymachus( the arts are the superiors and rulers o# their own subjects9 To this he assented with a $ood deal o# reluctance) Then( I said( no science or art considers or enjoins the interest o# the stron$er or superior( but only the interest o# the subject and wea%er9 He made an attempt to contest this proposition also( but #inally ac-uiesced) Then( I continued( no physician( in so #ar as he is a physician( considers his own $ood in what he prescribes( but the $ood o# his patient+ #or the true physician is also a ruler ha,in$ the human body as a subject( and is not a mere money-ma%er+ that has been admitted9 Aes) 1nd the pilot li%ewise( in the strict sense o# the term( is a ruler o# sailors and not a mere sailor9 That has been admitted) 1nd such a pilot and ruler will pro,ide and prescribe #or the interest o# the sailor who is under him( and not #or his own or the ruler6s interest9

He $a,e a reluctant 6Aes)6 Then( I said( Thrasymachus( there is no one in any rule who( in so #ar as he is a ruler( considers or enjoins what is #or his own interest( but always what is #or the interest o# his subject or suitable to his art+ to that he loo%s( and that alone he considers in e,erythin$ which he says and does) 2hen we had $ot to this point in the ar$ument( and e,ery one saw that the de#inition o# justice had been completely upset( Thrasymachus( instead o# replyin$ to me( saidD Tell me( *ocrates( ha,e you $ot a nurse9 2hy do you as% such a -uestion( I said( when you ou$ht rather to be answerin$9 Because she lea,es you to sni,el( and ne,er wipes your noseD she has not e,en tau$ht you to %now the shepherd #rom the sheep) 2hat ma%es you say that9 I replied) Because you #ancy that the shepherd or neatherd #attens o# tends the sheep or o&en with a ,iew to their own $ood and not to the $ood o# himsel# or his master+ and you #urther ima$ine that the rulers o# states( i# they are true rulers( ne,er thin% o# their subjects as sheep( and that they are not studyin$ their own ad,anta$e day and ni$ht) Oh( no+ and so entirely astray are you in your ideas about the just and unjust as not e,en to %now that justice and the just are in reality another6s $ood+ that is to say( the interest o# the ruler and stron$er( and the loss o# the subject and ser,ant+ and injustice the opposite+ #or the unjust is lord o,er the truly simple and justD he is the stron$er( and his subjects do what is #or his interest( and minister to his happiness( which is ,ery #ar #rom bein$ their own) "onsider #urther( most #oolish *ocrates( that the just is always a loser in comparison with the unjust) @irst o# all( in pri,ate contractsD where,er the unjust is the partner o# the just you will #ind that( when the partnership is dissol,ed( the unjust man has always more and the just less) *econdly( in their dealin$s with the *tateD when there is an income ta&( the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount o# income+ and when there is anythin$ to be recei,ed the one $ains nothin$ and the other much) Obser,e also what happens when they ta%e an o##ice+ there is the just man ne$lectin$ his a##airs and perhaps su##erin$ other losses( and $ettin$ nothin$ out o# the public( because he is just+ moreo,er he is hated by his #riends and ac-uaintance #or re#usin$ to ser,e them in unlaw#ul ways) But all this is re,ersed in the case o# the unjust man) I am spea%in$( as be#ore( o# injustice on a lar$e scale in which the ad,anta$e o# the unjust is more apparent+ and my meanin$ will be most clearly seen i# we turn to that hi$hest #orm o# injustice in which the criminal is the happiest o# men( and the su##erers or those who re#use to do injustice are the most miserable --that is to say tyranny( which by #raud and #orce ta%es away the property o# others( not little by little but wholesale+ comprehendin$ in one( thin$s sacred as well as pro#ane( pri,ate and public+ #or which acts o# wron$( i# he were detected perpetratin$

any one o# them sin$ly( he would be punished and incur $reat dis$race --they who do such wron$ in particular cases are called robbers o# temples( and man-stealers and bur$lars and swindlers and thie,es) But when a man besides ta%in$ away the money o# the citi/ens has made sla,es o# them( then( instead o# these names o# reproach( he is termed happy and blessed( not only by the citi/ens but by all who hear o# his ha,in$ achie,ed the consummation o# injustice) @or man%ind censure injustice( #earin$ that they may be the ,ictims o# it and not because they shrin% #rom committin$ it) 1nd thus( as I ha,e shown( *ocrates( injustice( when on a su##icient scale( has more stren$th and #reedom and mastery than justice+ and( as I said at #irst( justice is the interest o# the stron$er( whereas injustice is a man6s own pro#it and interest) Thrasymachus( when he had thus spo%en( ha,in$( li%e a bathman( delu$ed our ears with his words( had a mind to $o away) But the company would not let him+ they insisted that he should remain and de#end his position+ and I mysel# added my own humble re-uest that he would not lea,e us) Thrasymachus( I said to him( e&cellent man( how su$$esti,e are your remar%s4 1nd are you $oin$ to run away be#ore you ha,e #airly tau$ht or learned whether they are true or not9 Is the attempt to determine the way o# man6s li#e so small a matter in your eyes --to determine how li#e may be passed by each one o# us to the $reatest ad,anta$e9 1nd do I di##er #rom you( he said( as to the importance o# the en-uiry9 Aou appear rather( I replied( to ha,e no care or thou$ht about us( Thrasymachus --whether we li,e better or worse #rom not %nowin$ what you say you %now( is to you a matter o# indi##erence) Prithee( #riend( do not %eep your %nowled$e to yoursel#+ we are a lar$e party+ and any bene#it which you con#er upon us will be amply rewarded) @or my own part I openly declare that I am not con,inced( and that I do not belie,e injustice to be more $ain#ul than justice( e,en i# uncontrolled and allowed to ha,e #ree play) @or( $rantin$ that there may be an unjust man who is able to commit injustice either by #raud or #orce( still this does not con,ince me o# the superior ad,anta$e o# injustice( and there may be others who are in the same predicament with mysel#) Perhaps we may be wron$+ i# so( you in your wisdom should con,ince us that we are mista%en in pre#errin$ justice to injustice) 1nd how am I to con,ince you( he said( i# you are not already con,inced by what I ha,e just said+ what more can I do #or you9 2ould you ha,e me put the proo# bodily into your souls9 Hea,en #orbid4 I said+ I would only as% you to be consistent+ or( i# you chan$e( chan$e openly and let there be no deception) @or I must remar%( Thrasymachus( i# you will recall what was pre,iously said( that althou$h you be$an by de#inin$ the true physician in an e&act sense( you did not obser,e a li%e e&actness when spea%in$ o# the shepherd+ you thou$ht that the shepherd as a shepherd tends the sheep not with a ,iew to their own $ood( but li%e a mere diner or ban-ueter with a ,iew to the pleasures o# the table+ or( a$ain( as a trader #or sale in the mar%et( and not as a shepherd) Aet surely

the art o# the shepherd is concerned only with the $ood o# his subjects+ he has only to pro,ide the best #or them( since the per#ection o# the art is already ensured whene,er all the re-uirements o# it are satis#ied) 1nd that was what I was sayin$ just now about the ruler) I concei,ed that the art o# the ruler( considered as ruler( whether in a state or in pri,ate li#e( could only re$ard the $ood o# his #loc% or subjects+ whereas you seem to thin% that the rulers in states( that is to say( the true rulers( li%e bein$ in authority) Thin%4 Nay( I am sure o# it) Then why in the case o# lesser o##ices do men ne,er ta%e them willin$ly without payment( unless under the idea that they $o,ern #or the ad,anta$e not o# themsel,es but o# others9 'et me as% you a -uestionD 1re not the se,eral arts di##erent( by reason o# their each ha,in$ a separate #unction9 1nd( my dear illustrious #riend( do say what you thin%( that we may ma%e a little pro$ress) Aes( that is the di##erence( he replied) 1nd each art $i,es us a particular $ood and not merely a $eneral one --medicine( #or e&ample( $i,es us health+ na,i$ation( sa#ety at sea( and so on9 Aes( he said) 1nd the art o# payment has the special #unction o# $i,in$ payD but we do not con#use this with other arts( any more than the art o# the pilot is to be con#used with the art o# medicine( because the health o# the pilot may be impro,ed by a sea ,oya$e) Aou would not be inclined to say( would you( that na,i$ation is the art o# medicine( at least i# we are to adopt your e&act use o# lan$ua$e9 "ertainly not) Or because a man is in $ood health when he recei,es pay you would not say that the art o# payment is medicine9 I should say not) Nor would you say that medicine is the art o# recei,in$ pay because a man ta%es #ees when he is en$a$ed in healin$9 "ertainly not) 1nd we ha,e admitted( I said( that the $ood o# each art is specially con#ined to the art9 Aes) Then( i# there be any $ood which all artists ha,e in common( that is to be attributed to somethin$ o# which they all ha,e the common use9 True( he replied) 1nd when the artist is bene#ited by recei,in$ pay the ad,anta$e is $ained by an additional use o# the art o# pay( which is not the art pro#essed by him9 He $a,e a reluctant assent to this)

Then the pay is not deri,ed by the se,eral artists #rom their respecti,e arts) But the truth is( that while the art o# medicine $i,es health( and the art o# the builder builds a house( another art attends them which is the art o# pay) The ,arious arts may be doin$ their own business and bene#itin$ that o,er which they preside( but would the artist recei,e any bene#it #rom his art unless he were paid as well9 I suppose not) But does he there#ore con#er no bene#it when he wor%s #or nothin$9 "ertainly( he con#ers a bene#it) Then now( Thrasymachus( there is no lon$er any doubt that neither arts nor $o,ernments pro,ide #or their own interests+ but( as we were be#ore sayin$( they rule and pro,ide #or the interests o# their subjects who are the wea%er and not the stron$er --to their $ood they attend and not to the $ood o# the superior) 1nd this is the reason( my dear Thrasymachus( why( as I was just now sayin$( no one is willin$ to $o,ern+ because no one li%es to ta%e in hand the re#ormation o# e,ils which are not his concern without remuneration) @or( in the e&ecution o# his wor%( and in $i,in$ his orders to another( the true artist does not re$ard his own interest( but always that o# his subjects+ and there#ore in order that rulers may be willin$ to rule( they must be paid in one o# three modes o# paymentD money( or honour( or a penalty #or re#usin$) *ocrates - .'1!"ON 2hat do you mean( *ocrates9 said .laucon) The #irst two modes o# payment are intelli$ible enou$h( but what the penalty is I do not understand( or how a penalty can be a payment) Aou mean that you do not understand the nature o# this payment which to the best men is the $reat inducement to rule9 O# course you %now that ambition and a,arice are held to be( as indeed they are( a dis$race9 >ery true) 1nd #or this reason( I said( money and honour ha,e no attraction #or them+ $ood men do not wish to be openly demandin$ payment #or $o,ernin$ and so to $et the name o# hirelin$s( nor by secretly helpin$ themsel,es out o# the public re,enues to $et the name o# thie,es) 1nd not bein$ ambitious they do not care about honour) 2here#ore necessity must be laid upon them( and they must be induced to ser,e #rom the #ear o# punishment) 1nd this( as I ima$ine( is the reason why the #orwardness to ta%e o##ice( instead o# waitin$ to be compelled( has been deemed dishonourable) Now the worst part o# the punishment is that he who re#uses to rule is liable to be ruled by one who is worse than himsel#) 1nd the #ear o# this( as I concei,e( induces the $ood to ta%e o##ice( not because they would( but because they cannot help --not under the idea that they are $oin$ to ha,e any bene#it or enjoyment themsel,es( but as a necessity( and because they are not able to commit the tas% o# rulin$ to any one who is better than themsel,es( or indeed as $ood) @or there is reason to thin% that i# a city were composed entirely

o# $ood men( then to a,oid o##ice would be as much an object o# contention as to obtain o##ice is at present+ then we should ha,e plain proo# that the true ruler is not meant by nature to re$ard his own interest( but that o# his subjects+ and e,ery one who %new this would choose rather to recei,e a bene#it #rom another than to ha,e the trouble o# con#errin$ one) *o #ar am I #rom a$reein$ with Thrasymachus that justice is the interest o# the stron$er) This latter -uestion need not be #urther discussed at present+ but when Thrasymachus says that the li#e o# the unjust is more ad,anta$eous than that o# the just( his new statement appears to me to be o# a #ar more serious character) 2hich o# us has spo%en truly9 1nd which sort o# li#e( .laucon( do you pre#er9 I #or my part deem the li#e o# the just to be the more ad,anta$eous( he answered) id you hear all the ad,anta$es o# the unjust which Thrasymachus was rehearsin$9 Aes( I heard him( he replied( but he has not con,inced me) Then shall we try to #ind some way o# con,incin$ him( i# we can( that he is sayin$ what is not true9 3ost certainly( he replied) I#( I said( he ma%es a set speech and we ma%e another recountin$ all the ad,anta$es o# bein$ just( and he answers and we rejoin( there must be a numberin$ and measurin$ o# the $oods which are claimed on either side( and in the end we shall want jud$es to decide+ but i# we proceed in our en-uiry as we lately did( by ma%in$ admissions to one another( we shall unite the o##ices o# jud$e and ad,ocate in our own persons) >ery $ood( he said) 1nd which method do I understand you to pre#er9 I said) That which you propose) 2ell( then( Thrasymachus( I said( suppose you be$in at the be$innin$ and answer me) Aou say that per#ect injustice is more $ain#ul than per#ect justice9 *ocrates - .'1!"ON - THR1*A31"H!* Aes( that is what I say( and I ha,e $i,en you my reasons) 1nd what is your ,iew about them9 2ould you call one o# them ,irtue and the other ,ice9 "ertainly) I suppose that you would call justice ,irtue and injustice ,ice9 2hat a charmin$ notion4 *o li%ely too( seein$ that I a##irm injustice to be pro#itable and justice not)

2hat else then would you say9 The opposite( he replied) 1nd would you call justice ,ice9 No( I would rather say sublime simplicity) Then would you call injustice mali$nity9 No+ I would rather say discretion) 1nd do the unjust appear to you to be wise and $ood9 Aes( he said+ at any rate those o# them who are able to be per#ectly unjust( and who ha,e the power o# subduin$ states and nations+ but perhaps you ima$ine me to be tal%in$ o# cutpurses) E,en this pro#ession i# undetected has ad,anta$es( thou$h they are not to be compared with those o# which I was just now spea%in$) I do not thin% that I misapprehend your meanin$( Thrasymachus( I replied+ but still I cannot hear without ama/ement that you class injustice with wisdom and ,irtue( and justice with the opposite) "ertainly I do so class them) Now( I said( you are on more substantial and almost unanswerable $round+ #or i# the injustice which you were maintainin$ to be pro#itable had been admitted by you as by others to be ,ice and de#ormity( an answer mi$ht ha,e been $i,en to you on recei,ed principles+ but now I percei,e that you will call injustice honourable and stron$( and to the unjust you will attribute all the -ualities which were attributed by us be#ore to the just( seein$ that you do not hesitate to ran% injustice with wisdom and ,irtue) Aou ha,e $uessed most in#allibly( he replied) Then I certainly ou$ht not to shrin% #rom $oin$ throu$h with the ar$ument so lon$ as I ha,e reason to thin% that you( Thrasymachus( are spea%in$ your real mind+ #or I do belie,e that you are now in earnest and are not amusin$ yoursel# at our e&pense) I may be in earnest or not( but what is that to you9 --to re#ute the ar$ument is your business) >ery true( I said+ that is what I ha,e to doD But will you be so $ood as answer yet one more -uestion9 oes the just man try to $ain any ad,anta$e o,er the just9 @ar otherwise+ i# he did would not be the simple( amusin$ creature which he is) 1nd would he try to $o beyond just action9 He would not) 1nd how would he re$ard the attempt to $ain an ad,anta$e o,er the unjust+ would that be considered by him as just or unjust9 He would thin% it just( and would try to $ain the ad,anta$e+ but he would not be able) 2hether he would or would not be able( I said( is not to the point)

3y -uestion is only whether the just man( while re#usin$ to ha,e more than another just man( would wish and claim to ha,e more than the unjust9 Aes( he would) 1nd what o# the unjust --does he claim to ha,e more than the just man and to do more than is just O# course( he said( #or he claims to ha,e more than all men) 1nd the unjust man will stri,e and stru$$le to obtain more than the unjust man or action( in order that he may ha,e more than all9 True) 2e may put the matter thus( I said --the just does not desire more than his li%e but more than his unli%e( whereas the unjust desires more than both his li%e and his unli%e9 Nothin$( he said( can be better than that statement) 1nd the unjust is $ood and wise( and the just is neither9 .ood a$ain( he said) 1nd is not the unjust li%e the wise and $ood and the just unli%e them9 O# course( he said( he who is o# a certain nature( is li%e those who are o# a certain nature+ he who is not( not) Each o# them( I said( is such as his li%e is9 "ertainly( he replied) >ery $ood( Thrasymachus( I said+ and now to ta%e the case o# the artsD you would admit that one man is a musician and another not a musician9 Aes) 1nd which is wise and which is #oolish9 "learly the musician is wise( and he who is not a musician is #oolish) 1nd he is $ood in as #ar as he is wise( and bad in as #ar as he is #oolish9 Aes) 1nd you would say the same sort o# thin$ o# the physician9 Aes) 1nd do you thin%( my e&cellent #riend( that a musician when he adjusts the lyre would desire or claim to e&ceed or $o beyond a musician in the ti$htenin$ and loosenin$ the strin$s9 I do not thin% that he would) But he would claim to e&ceed the non-musician9 O# course) 1nd what would you say o# the physician9 In prescribin$ meats and drin%s would he wish to $o beyond another physician or beyond the practice o# medicine9

He would not) But he would wish to $o beyond the non-physician9 Aes) 1nd about %nowled$e and i$norance in $eneral+ see whether you thin% that any man who has %nowled$e e,er would wish to ha,e the choice o# sayin$ or doin$ more than another man who has %nowled$e) 2ould he not rather say or do the same as his li%e in the same case9 That( I suppose( can hardly be denied) 1nd what o# the i$norant9 would he not desire to ha,e more than either the %nowin$ or the i$norant9 I dare say) 1nd the %nowin$ is wise9 Aes) 1nd the wise is $ood9 True) Then the wise and $ood will not desire to $ain more than his li%e( but more than his unli%e and opposite9 I suppose so) 2hereas the bad and i$norant will desire to $ain more than both9 Aes) But did we not say( Thrasymachus( that the unjust $oes beyond both his li%e and unli%e9 2ere not these your words9 They were) They were) 1nd you also said that the lust will not $o beyond his li%e but his unli%e9 Aes) Then the just is li%e the wise and $ood( and the unjust li%e the e,il and i$norant9 That is the in#erence) 1nd each o# them is such as his li%e is9 That was admitted) Then the just has turned out to be wise and $ood and the unjust e,il and i$norant) Thrasymachus made all these admissions( not #luently( as I repeat them( but with e&treme reluctance+ it was a hot summer6s day( and the perspiration poured #rom him in torrents+ and then I saw what I had ne,er seen be#ore( Thrasymachus blushin$) 1s we were now a$reed that justice was ,irtue and wisdom( and injustice ,ice and i$norance( I proceeded to another pointD 2ell( I said( Thrasymachus( that matter is now settled+ but were we not also sayin$ that injustice had stren$th+ do you remember9 Aes( I remember( he said( but do not suppose that I appro,e o# what

you are sayin$ or ha,e no answer+ i# howe,er I were to answer( you would be -uite certain to accuse me o# haran$uin$+ there#ore either permit me to ha,e my say out( or i# you would rather as%( do so( and I will answer 6>ery $ood(6 as they say to story-tellin$ old women( and will nod 6Aes6 and 6No)6 "ertainly not( I said( i# contrary to your real opinion) Aes( he said( I will( to please you( since you will not let me spea%) 2hat else would you ha,e9 Nothin$ in the world( I said+ and i# you are so disposed I will as% and you shall answer) Proceed) Then I will repeat the -uestion which I as%ed be#ore( in order that our e&amination o# the relati,e nature o# justice and injustice may be carried on re$ularly) 1 statement was made that injustice is stron$er and more power#ul than justice( but now justice( ha,in$ been identi#ied with wisdom and ,irtue( is easily shown to be stron$er than injustice( i# injustice is i$norance+ this can no lon$er be -uestioned by any one) But I want to ,iew the matter( Thrasymachus( in a di##erent wayD Aou would not deny that a state may be unjust and may be unjustly attemptin$ to ensla,e other states( or may ha,e already ensla,ed them( and may be holdin$ many o# them in subjection9 True( he replied+ and I will add the best and per#ectly unjust state will be most li%ely to do so) I %now( I said( that such was your position+ but what I would #urther consider is( whether this power which is possessed by the superior state can e&ist or be e&ercised without justice) I# you are ri$ht in you ,iew( and justice is wisdom( then only with justice+ but i# I am ri$ht( then without justice) I am deli$hted( Thrasymachus( to see you not only noddin$ assent and dissent( but ma%in$ answers which are -uite e&cellent) That is out o# ci,ility to you( he replied) Aou are ,ery %ind( I said+ and would you ha,e the $oodness also to in#orm me( whether you thin% that a state( or an army( or a band o# robbers and thie,es( or any other $an$ o# e,il-doers could act at all i# they injured one another9 No indeed( he said( they could not) But i# they abstained #rom injurin$ one another( then they mi$ht act to$ether better9 Aes) 1nd this is because injustice creates di,isions and hatreds and #i$htin$( and justice imparts harmony and #riendship+ is not that true( Thrasymachus9

I a$ree( he said( because I do not wish to -uarrel with you) How $ood o# you( I said+ but I should li%e to %now also whether injustice( ha,in$ this tendency to arouse hatred( where,er e&istin$( amon$ sla,es or amon$ #reemen( will not ma%e them hate one another and set them at ,ariance and render them incapable o# common action9 "ertainly) 1nd e,en i# injustice be #ound in two only( will they not -uarrel and #i$ht( and become enemies to one another and to the just They will) 1nd suppose injustice abidin$ in a sin$le person( would your wisdom say that she loses or that she retains her natural power9 'et us assume that she retains her power) Aet is not the power which injustice e&ercises o# such a nature that where,er she ta%es up her abode( whether in a city( in an army( in a #amily( or in any other body( that body is( to be$in with( rendered incapable o# united action by reason o# sedition and distraction+ and does it not become its own enemy and at ,ariance with all that opposes it( and with the just9 Is not this the case9 Aes( certainly) 1nd is not injustice e-ually #atal when e&istin$ in a sin$le person+ in the #irst place renderin$ him incapable o# action because he is not at unity with himsel#( and in the second place ma%in$ him an enemy to himsel# and the just9 Is not that true( Thrasymachus9 Aes) 1nd O my #riend( I said( surely the $ods are just9 .ranted that they are) But i# so( the unjust will be the enemy o# the $ods( and the just will be their #riend9 @east away in triumph( and ta%e your #ill o# the ar$ument+ I will not oppose you( lest I should displease the company) 2ell then( proceed with your answers( and let me ha,e the remainder o# my repast) @or we ha,e already shown that the just are clearly wiser and better and abler than the unjust( and that the unjust are incapable o# common action+ nay in$ at more( that to spea% as we did o# men who are e,il actin$ at any time ,i$orously to$ether( is not strictly true( #or i# they had been per#ectly e,il( they would ha,e laid hands upon one another+ but it is e,ident that there must ha,e been some remnant o# justice in them( which enabled them to combine+ i# there had not been they would ha,e injured one another as well as their ,ictims+ they were but hal# --,illains in their enterprises+ #or had they been whole ,illains( and utterly unjust( they would ha,e been utterly incapable o# action) That( as I belie,e( is the truth o# the matter( and not what you said at #irst) But whether the just ha,e a better and happier li#e than the unjust is a #urther -uestion which we also proposed to consider) I thin% that they ha,e( and #or

the reasons which to ha,e $i,en+ but still I should li%e to e&amine #urther( #or no li$ht matter is at sta%e( nothin$ less than the rule o# human li#e) Proceed) I will proceed by as%in$ a -uestionD 2ould you not say that a horse has some end9 I should) 1nd the end or use o# a horse or o# anythin$ would be that which could not be accomplished( or not so well accomplished( by any other thin$9 I do not understand( he said) 'et me e&plainD "an you see( e&cept with the eye9 "ertainly not) Or hear( e&cept with the ear9 No) These then may be truly said to be the ends o# these or$ans9 They may) But you can cut o## a ,ine-branch with a da$$er or with a chisel( and in many other ways9 O# course) 1nd yet not so well as with a prunin$-hoo% made #or the purpose9 True) 3ay we not say that this is the end o# a prunin$-hoo%9 2e may) Then now I thin% you will ha,e no di##iculty in understandin$ my meanin$ when I as%ed the -uestion whether the end o# anythin$ would be that which could not be accomplished( or not so well accomplished( by any other thin$9 I understand your meanin$( he said( and assent) 1nd that to which an end is appointed has also an e&cellence9 Need I as% a$ain whether the eye has an end9 It has) 1nd has not the eye an e&cellence9 Aes) 1nd the ear has an end and an e&cellence also9 True) 1nd the same is true o# all other thin$s+ they ha,e each o# them an end and a special e&cellence9 That is so) 2ell( and can the eyes #ul#il their end i# they are wantin$ in their own proper e&cellence and ha,e a de#ect instead9 How can they( he said( i# they are blind and cannot see9 Aou mean to say( i# they ha,e lost their proper e&cellence( which

is si$ht+ but I ha,e not arri,ed at that point yet) I would rather as% the -uestion more $enerally( and only en-uire whether the thin$s which #ul#il their ends #ul#il them by their own proper e&cellence( and #all o# #ul#illin$ them by their own de#ect9 "ertainly( he replied) I mi$ht say the same o# the ears+ when depri,ed o# their own proper e&cellence they cannot #ul#il their end9 True) 1nd the same obser,ation will apply to all other thin$s9 I a$ree) 2ell+ and has not the soul an end which nothin$ else can #ul#il9 #or e&ample( to superintend and command and deliberate and the li%e) 1re not these #unctions proper to the soul( and can they ri$htly be assi$ned to any other9 To no other) 1nd is not li#e to be rec%oned amon$ the ends o# the soul9 1ssuredly( he said) 1nd has not the soul an e&cellence also9 Aes) 1nd can she or can she not #ul#il her own ends when depri,ed o# that e&cellence9 *he cannot) Then an e,il soul must necessarily be an e,il ruler and superintendent( and the $ood soul a $ood ruler9 Aes( necessarily) 1nd we ha,e admitted that justice is the e&cellence o# the soul( and injustice the de#ect o# the soul9 That has been admitted) Then the just soul and the just man will li,e well( and the unjust man will li,e ill9 That is what your ar$ument pro,es) 1nd he who li,es well is blessed and happy( and he who li,es ill the re,erse o# happy9 "ertainly) Then the just is happy( and the unjust miserable9 *o be it) But happiness and not misery is pro#itable) O# course) Then( my blessed Thrasymachus( injustice can ne,er be more pro#itable than justice) 'et this( *ocrates( he said( be your entertainment at the Bendidea)

@or which I am indebted to you( I said( now that you ha,e $rown $entle towards me and ha,e le#t o## scoldin$) Ne,ertheless( I ha,e not been well entertained+ but that was my own #ault and not yours) 1s an epicure snatches a taste o# e,ery dish which is successi,ely brou$ht to table( he not ha,in$ allowed himsel# time to enjoy the one be#ore( so ha,e I $one #rom one subject to another without ha,in$ disco,ered what I sou$ht at #irst( the nature o# justice) I le#t that en-uiry and turned away to consider whether justice is ,irtue and wisdom or e,il and #olly+ and when there arose a #urther -uestion about the comparati,e ad,anta$es o# justice and injustice( I could not re#rain #rom passin$ on to that) 1nd the result o# the whole discussion has been that I %now nothin$ at all) @or I %now not what justice is( and there#ore I am not li%ely to %now whether it is or is not a ,irtue( nor can I say whether the just man is happy or unhappy) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG II *ocrates - .'1!"ON 2ith these words I was thin%in$ that I had made an end o# the discussion+ but the end( in truth( pro,ed to be only a be$innin$) @or .laucon( who is always the most pu$nacious o# men( was dissatis#ied at Thrasymachus6 retirement+ he wanted to ha,e the battle out) *o he said to meD *ocrates( do you wish really to persuade us( or only to seem to ha,e persuaded us( that to be just is always better than to be unjust9 I should wish really to persuade you( I replied( i# I could) Then you certainly ha,e not succeeded) 'et me as% you nowD --How would you arran$e $oods --are there not some which we welcome #or their own sa%es( and independently o# their conse-uences( as( #or e&ample( harmless pleasures and enjoyments( which deli$ht us at the time( althou$h nothin$ #ollows #rom them9 I a$ree in thin%in$ that there is such a class( I replied) Is there not also a second class o# $oods( such as %nowled$e( si$ht( health( which are desirable not only in themsel,es( but also #or their results9 "ertainly( I said) 1nd would you not reco$ni/e a third class( such as $ymnastic( and the care o# the sic%( and the physician6s art+ also the ,arious ways o# money-ma%in$ --these do us $ood but we re$ard them as disa$reeable+ and no one would choose them #or their own sa%es( but only #or the sa%e o# some reward or result which #lows #rom them9 There is( I said( this third class also) But why do you as%9 Because I want to %now in which o# the three classes you would place justice9

In the hi$hest class( I replied( --amon$ those $oods which he who would be happy desires both #or their own sa%e and #or the sa%e o# their results) Then the many are o# another mind+ they thin% that justice is to be rec%oned in the troublesome class( amon$ $oods which are to be pursued #or the sa%e o# rewards and o# reputation( but in themsel,es are disa$reeable and rather to be a,oided) I %now( I said( that this is their manner o# thin%in$( and that this was the thesis which Thrasymachus was maintainin$ just now( when he censured justice and praised injustice) But I am too stupid to be con,inced by him) I wish( he said( that you would hear me as well as him( and then I shall see whether you and I a$ree) @or Thrasymachus seems to me( li%e a sna%e( to ha,e been charmed by your ,oice sooner than he ou$ht to ha,e been+ but to my mind the nature o# justice and injustice ha,e not yet been made clear) *ettin$ aside their rewards and results( I want to %now what they are in themsel,es( and how they inwardly wor% in the soul) I# you( please( then( I will re,i,e the ar$ument o# Thrasymachus) 1nd #irst I will spea% o# the nature and ori$in o# justice accordin$ to the common ,iew o# them) *econdly( I will show that all men who practise justice do so a$ainst their will( o# necessity( but not as a $ood) 1nd thirdly( I will ar$ue that there is reason in this ,iew( #or the li#e o# the unjust is a#ter all better #ar than the li#e o# the just --i# what they say is true( *ocrates( since I mysel# am not o# their opinion) But still I ac%nowled$e that I am perple&ed when I hear the ,oices o# Thrasymachus and myriads o# others dinnin$ in my ears+ and( on the other hand( I ha,e ne,er yet heard the superiority o# justice to injustice maintained by any one in a satis#actory way) I want to hear justice praised in respect o# itsel#+ then I shall be satis#ied( and you are the person #rom whom I thin% that I am most li%ely to hear this+ and there#ore I will praise the unjust li#e to the utmost o# my power( and my manner o# spea%in$ will indicate the manner in which I desire to hear you too praisin$ justice and censurin$ injustice) 2ill you say whether you appro,e o# my proposal9 Indeed I do+ nor can I ima$ine any theme about which a man o# sense would o#tener wish to con,erse) I am deli$hted( he replied( to hear you say so( and shall be$in by spea%in$( as I proposed( o# the nature and ori$in o# justice) .laucon They say that to do injustice is( by nature( $ood+ to su##er injustice( e,il+ but that the e,il is $reater than the $ood) 1nd so when men ha,e both done and su##ered injustice and ha,e had e&perience o# both( not bein$ able to a,oid the one and obtain the other( they thin% that they had better a$ree amon$ themsel,es to ha,e neither+ hence there arise laws and mutual co,enants+ and that which is ordained by law

is termed by them law#ul and just) This they a##irm to be the ori$in and nature o# justice+ --it is a mean or compromise( between the best o# all( which is to do injustice and not be punished( and the worst o# all( which is to su##er injustice without the power o# retaliation+ and justice( bein$ at a middle point between the two( is tolerated not as a $ood( but as the lesser e,il( and honoured by reason o# the inability o# men to do injustice) @or no man who is worthy to be called a man would e,er submit to such an a$reement i# he were able to resist+ he would be mad i# he did) *uch is the recei,ed account( *ocrates( o# the nature and ori$in o# justice) Now that those who practise justice do so in,oluntarily and because they ha,e not the power to be unjust will best appear i# we ima$ine somethin$ o# this %indD ha,in$ $i,en both to the just and the unjust power to do what they will( let us watch and see whither desire will lead them+ then we shall disco,er in the ,ery act the just and unjust man to be proceedin$ alon$ the same road( #ollowin$ their interest( which all natures deem to be their $ood( and are only di,erted into the path o# justice by the #orce o# law) The liberty which we are supposin$ may be most completely $i,en to them in the #orm o# such a power as is said to ha,e been possessed by .y$es the ancestor o# "roesus the 'ydian) 1ccordin$ to the tradition( .y$es was a shepherd in the ser,ice o# the %in$ o# 'ydia+ there was a $reat storm( and an earth-ua%e made an openin$ in the earth at the place where he was #eedin$ his #loc%) 1ma/ed at the si$ht( he descended into the openin$( where( amon$ other mar,els( he beheld a hollow bra/en horse( ha,in$ doors( at which he stoopin$ and loo%in$ in saw a dead body o# stature( as appeared to him( more than human( and ha,in$ nothin$ on but a $old rin$+ this he too% #rom the #in$er o# the dead and reascended) Now the shepherds met to$ether( accordin$ to custom( that they mi$ht send their monthly report about the #loc%s to the %in$+ into their assembly he came ha,in$ the rin$ on his #in$er( and as he was sittin$ amon$ them he chanced to turn the collet o# the rin$ inside his hand( when instantly he became in,isible to the rest o# the company and they be$an to spea% o# him as i# he were no lon$er present) He was astonished at this( and a$ain touchin$ the rin$ he turned the collet outwards and reappeared+ he made se,eral trials o# the rin$( and always with the same result-when he turned the collet inwards he became in,isible( when outwards he reappeared) 2hereupon he contri,ed to be chosen one o# the messen$ers who were sent to the court+ where as soon as he arri,ed he seduced the -ueen( and with her help conspired a$ainst the %in$ and slew him( and too% the %in$dom) *uppose now that there were two such ma$ic rin$s( and the just put on one o# them and the unjust the other+(no man can be ima$ined to be o# such an iron nature that he would stand #ast in justice) No man would %eep his hands o## what was not his own when he could sa#ely ta%e what he li%ed out o# the mar%et( or $o into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure( or %ill or release #rom prison whom he would( and in all respects be li%e a .od amon$ men) Then the actions o# the just would be as the actions o# the unjust+ they would both come at last to the same point) 1nd this we may truly a##irm to be a $reat proo# that a man is just( not willin$ly or because he thin%s that justice is any $ood to him indi,idually( but o# necessity( #or where,er any one thin%s

that he can sa#ely be unjust( there he is unjust) @or all men belie,e in their hearts that injustice is #ar more pro#itable to the indi,idual than justice( and he who ar$ues as I ha,e been supposin$( will say that they are ri$ht) I# you could ima$ine any one obtainin$ this power o# becomin$ in,isible( and ne,er doin$ any wron$ or touchin$ what was another6s( he would be thou$ht by the loo%ers-on to be a most wretched idiot( althou$h they would praise him to one another6s #aces( and %eep up appearances with one another #rom a #ear that they too mi$ht su##er injustice) Enou$h o# this) Now( i# we are to #orm a real jud$ment o# the li#e o# the just and unjust( we must isolate them+ there is no other way+ and how is the isolation to be e##ected9 I answerD 'et the unjust man be entirely unjust( and the just man entirely just+ nothin$ is to be ta%en away #rom either o# them( and both are to be per#ectly #urnished #or the wor% o# their respecti,e li,es) @irst( let the unjust be li%e other distin$uished masters o# cra#t+ li%e the s%il#ul pilot or physician( who %nows intuiti,ely his own powers and %eeps within their limits( and who( i# he #ails at any point( is able to reco,er himsel#) *o let the unjust ma%e his unjust attempts in the ri$ht way( and lie hidden i# he means to be $reat in his injustice 5he who is #ound out is nobody7D #or the hi$hest reach o# injustice isD to be deemed just when you are not) There#ore I say that in the per#ectly unjust man we must assume the most per#ect injustice+ there is to be no deduction( but we must allow him( while doin$ the most unjust acts( to ha,e ac-uired the $reatest reputation #or justice) I# he ha,e ta%en a #alse step he must be able to reco,er himsel#+ he must be one who can spea% with e##ect( i# any o# his deeds come to li$ht( and who can #orce his way where #orce is re-uired his coura$e and stren$th( and command o# money and #riends) 1nd at his side let us place the just man in his nobleness and simplicity( wishin$( as 1eschylus says( to be and not to seem $ood) There must be no seemin$( #or i# he seem to be just he will be honoured and rewarded( and then we shall not %now whether he is just #or the sa%e o# justice or #or the sa%e o# honours and rewards+ there#ore( let him be clothed in justice only( and ha,e no other co,erin$+ and he must be ima$ined in a state o# li#e the opposite o# the #ormer) 'et him be the best o# men( and let him be thou$ht the worst+ then he will ha,e been put to the proo#+ and we shall see whether he will be a##ected by the #ear o# in#amy and its conse-uences) 1nd let him continue thus to the hour o# death+ bein$ just and seemin$ to be unjust) 2hen both ha,e reached the uttermost e&treme( the one o# justice and the other o# injustice( let jud$ment be $i,en which o# them is the happier o# the two) *ocrates - .'1!"ON Hea,ens4 my dear .laucon( I said( how ener$etically you polish them up #or the decision( #irst one and then the other( as i# they were two statues) I do my best( he said) 1nd now that we %now what they are li%e there is no di##iculty in tracin$ out the sort o# li#e which awaits either o# them) This I will proceed to describe+ but as you may thin% the

description a little too coarse( I as% you to suppose( *ocrates( that the words which #ollow are not mine) --'et me put them into the mouths o# the eulo$ists o# injusticeD They will tell you that the just man who is thou$ht unjust will be scour$ed( rac%ed( bound --will ha,e his eyes burnt out+ and( at last( a#ter su##erin$ e,ery %ind o# e,il( he will be impaledD Then he will understand that he ou$ht to seem only( and not to be( just+ the words o# 1eschylus may be more truly spo%en o# the unjust than o# the just) @or the unjust is pursuin$ a reality+ he does not li,e with a ,iew to appearances --he wants to be really unjust and not to seem onlyD-His mind has a soil deep and #ertile( Out o# which sprin$ his prudent counsels) In the #irst place( he is thou$ht just( and there#ore bears rule in the city+ he can marry whom he will( and $i,e in marria$e to whom he will+ also he can trade and deal where he li%es( and always to his own ad,anta$e( because he has no mis$i,in$s about injustice and at e,ery contest( whether in public or pri,ate( he $ets the better o# his anta$onists( and $ains at their e&pense( and is rich( and out o# his $ains he can bene#it his #riends( and harm his enemies+ moreo,er( he can o##er sacri#ices( and dedicate $i#ts to the $ods abundantly and ma$ni#icently( and can honour the $ods or any man whom he wants to honour in a #ar better style than the just( and there#ore he is li%ely to be dearer than they are to the $ods) 1nd thus( *ocrates( $ods and men are said to unite in ma%in$ the li#e o# the unjust better than the li#e o# the just) 1deimantus -*O"R1TE* I was $oin$ to say somethin$ in answer to .laucon( when 1deimantus( his brother( interposedD *ocrates( he said( you do not suppose that there is nothin$ more to be ur$ed9 2hy( what else is there9 I answered) The stron$est point o# all has not been e,en mentioned( he replied) 2ell( then( accordin$ to the pro,erb( 6'et brother help brother6 --i# he #ails in any part do you assist him+ althou$h I must con#ess that .laucon has already said -uite enou$h to lay me in the dust( and ta%e #rom me the power o# helpin$ justice) 1deimantus Nonsense( he replied) But let me add somethin$ moreD There is another side to .laucon6s ar$ument about the praise and censure o# justice and injustice( which is e-ually re-uired in order to brin$ out what I belie,e to be his meanin$) Parents and tutors are always tellin$ their sons and their wards that they are to be just+ but why9 not #or the sa%e o# justice( but #or the sa%e o# character and reputation+ in the hope o# obtainin$ #or him who is reputed just some o# those o##ices( marria$es( and the li%e which .laucon has enumerated amon$ the ad,anta$es accruin$ to the unjust #rom the reputation o# justice) 3ore( howe,er( is made o# appearances by this class o# persons than by the others+ #or they throw in the $ood opinion o# the $ods( and

will tell you o# a shower o# bene#its which the hea,ens( as they say( rain upon the pious+ and this accords with the testimony o# the noble Hesiod and Homer( the #irst o# whom says( that the $ods ma%e the oa%s o# the just-To hear acorns at their summit( and bees I the middle+ 1nd the sheep the bowed down bowed the with the their #leeces) and many other blessin$s o# a li%e %ind are pro,ided #or them) 1nd Homer has a ,ery similar strain+ #or he spea%s o# one whose #ame is-1s the #ame o# some blameless %in$ who( li%e a $od( 3aintains justice to whom the blac% earth brin$s #orth 2heat and barley( whose trees are bowed with #ruit( 1nd his sheep ne,er #ail to bear( and the sea $i,es him #ish) *till $rander are the $i#ts o# hea,en which 3usaeus and his son ,ouchsa#e to the just+ they ta%e them down into the world below( where they ha,e the saints lyin$ on couches at a #east( e,erlastin$ly drun%( crowned with $arlands+ their idea seems to be that an immortality o# drun%enness is the hi$hest meed o# ,irtue) *ome e&tend their rewards yet #urther+ the posterity( as they say( o# the #aith#ul and just shall sur,i,e to the third and #ourth $eneration) This is the style in which they praise justice) But about the wic%ed there is another strain+ they bury them in a slou$h in Hades( and ma%e them carry water in a sie,e+ also while they are yet li,in$ they brin$ them to in#amy( and in#lict upon them the punishments which .laucon described as the portion o# the just who are reputed to be unjust+ nothin$ else does their in,ention supply) *uch is their manner o# praisin$ the one and censurin$ the other) Once more( *ocrates( I will as% you to consider another way o# spea%in$ about justice and injustice( which is not con#ined to the poets( but is #ound in prose writers) The uni,ersal ,oice o# man%ind is always declarin$ that justice and ,irtue are honourable( but $rie,ous and toilsome+ and that the pleasures o# ,ice and injustice are easy o# attainment( and are only censured by law and opinion) They say also that honesty is #or the most part less pro#itable than dishonesty+ and they are -uite ready to call wic%ed men happy( and to honour them both in public and pri,ate when they are rich or in any other way in#luential( while they despise and o,erloo% those who may be wea% and poor( e,en thou$h ac%nowled$in$ them to be better than the others) But most e&traordinary o# all is their mode o# spea%in$ about ,irtue and the $odsD they say that the $ods apportion calamity and misery to many $ood men( and $ood and happiness to the wic%ed) 1nd mendicant prophets $o to rich men6s doors and persuade them that they ha,e a power committed to them by the $ods o# ma%in$ an atonement #or a man6s own or his ancestor6s sins by sacri#ices or charms( with rejoicin$s and #easts+ and they promise to harm an enemy( whether just or unjust( at a small cost+ with ma$ic arts and incantations bindin$ hea,en( as they say( to e&ecute their will) 1nd the poets are the authorities to whom they appeal( now smoothin$ the path o# ,ice with the words o# Hesiod+ ->ice may be had in abundance without trouble+ the way is smooth and

her dwellin$-place is near) But be#ore ,irtue the $ods ha,e set toil( and a tedious and uphill roadD then citin$ Homer as a witness that the $ods may be in#luenced by men+ #or he also saysD The $ods( too( may he turned #rom their purpose+ and men pray to them and a,ert their wrath by sacri#ices and soothin$ entreaties( and by libations and the odour o# #at( when they ha,e sinned and trans$ressed) 1nd they produce a host o# boo%s written by 3usaeus and Orpheus( who were children o# the 3oon and the 3uses --that is what they say --accordin$ to which they per#orm their ritual( and persuade not only indi,iduals( but whole cities( that e&piations and atonements #or sin may be made by sacri#ices and amusements which #ill a ,acant hour( and are e-ually at the ser,ice o# the li,in$ and the dead+ the latter sort they call mysteries( and they redeem us #rom the pains o# hell( but i# we ne$lect them no one %nows what awaits us) He proceededD 1nd now when the youn$ hear all this said about ,irtue and ,ice( and the way in which $ods and men re$ard them( how are their minds li%ely to be a##ected( my dear *ocrates( --those o# them( I mean( who are -uic%witted( and( li%e bees on the win$( li$ht on e,ery #lower( and #rom all that they hear are prone to draw conclusions as to what manner o# persons they should be and in what way they should wal% i# they would ma%e the best o# li#e9 Probably the youth will say to himsel# in the words o# Pindar-"an I by justice or by croo%ed ways o# deceit ascend a lo#tier tower which may he a #ortress to me all my days9 @or what men say is that( i# I am really just and am not also thou$ht just pro#it there is none( but the pain and loss on the other hand are unmista%able) But i#( thou$h unjust( I ac-uire the reputation o# justice( a hea,enly li#e is promised to me) *ince then( as philosophers pro,e( appearance tyranni/es o,er truth and is lord o# happiness( to appearance I must de,ote mysel#) I will describe around me a picture and shadow o# ,irtue to be the ,estibule and e&terior o# my house+ behind I will trail the subtle and cra#ty #o&( as 1rchilochus( $reatest o# sa$es( recommends) But I hear some one e&claimin$ that the concealment o# wic%edness is o#ten di##icult+ to which I answer( Nothin$ $reat is easy) Ne,ertheless( the ar$ument indicates this( i# we would be happy( to be the path alon$ which we should proceed) 2ith a ,iew to concealment we will establish secret brotherhoods and political clubs) 1nd there are pro#essors o# rhetoric who teach the art o# persuadin$ courts and assemblies+ and so( partly by persuasion and partly by #orce( I shall ma%e unlaw#ul $ains and not be punished) *till I hear a ,oice sayin$ that the $ods cannot be decei,ed( neither can they be compelled) But what i# there are no $ods9 or( suppose them to ha,e no care o# human thin$s --why in either case should we mind about concealment9 1nd e,en i# there are $ods( and they do care about us( yet we %now o# them only #rom tradition and the $enealo$ies o# the poets+ and these are the ,ery persons who say that they may be in#luenced and turned by 6sacri#ices and soothin$ entreaties and by o##erin$s)6 'et us be consistent then( and belie,e both or neither) I# the poets spea% truly( why then we had better be unjust( and o##er o# the #ruits o# injustice+ #or i# we are just( althou$h we may escape the ,en$eance o# hea,en( we shall

lose the $ains o# injustice+ but( i# we are unjust( we shall %eep the $ains( and by our sinnin$ and prayin$( and prayin$ and sinnin$( the $ods will be propitiated( and we shall not be punished) 6But there is a world below in which either we or our posterity will su##er #or our unjust deeds)6 Aes( my #riend( will be the re#lection( but there are mysteries and atonin$ deities( and these ha,e $reat power) That is what mi$hty cities declare+ and the children o# the $ods( who were their poets and prophets( bear a li%e testimony) On what principle( then( shall we any lon$er choose justice rather than the worst injustice9 when( i# we only unite the latter with a deceit#ul re$ard to appearances( we shall #are to our mind both with $ods and men( in li#e and a#ter death( as the most numerous and the hi$hest authorities tell us) Gnowin$ all this( *ocrates( how can a man who has any superiority o# mind or person or ran% or wealth( be willin$ to honour justice+ or indeed to re#rain #rom lau$hin$ when he hears justice praised9 1nd e,en i# there should be some one who is able to dispro,e the truth o# my words( and who is satis#ied that justice is best( still he is not an$ry with the unjust( but is ,ery ready to #or$i,e them( because he also %nows that men are not just o# their own #ree will+ unless( perad,enture( there be some one whom the di,inity within him may ha,e inspired with a hatred o# injustice( or who has attained %nowled$e o# the truth --but no other man) He only blames injustice who( owin$ to cowardice or a$e or some wea%ness( has not the power o# bein$ unjust) 1nd this is pro,ed by the #act that when he obtains the power( he immediately becomes unjust as #ar as he can be) The cause o# all this( *ocrates( was indicated by us at the be$innin$ o# the ar$ument( when my brother and I told you how astonished we were to #ind that o# all the pro#essin$ pane$yrists o# justice --be$innin$ with the ancient heroes o# whom any memorial has been preser,ed to us( and endin$ with the men o# our own time --no one has e,er blamed injustice or praised justice e&cept with a ,iew to the $lories( honours( and bene#its which #low #rom them) No one has e,er ade-uately described either in ,erse or prose the true essential nature o# either o# them abidin$ in the soul( and in,isible to any human or di,ine eye+ or shown that o# all the thin$s o# a man6s soul which he has within him( justice is the $reatest $ood( and injustice the $reatest e,il) Had this been the uni,ersal strain( had you sou$ht to persuade us o# this #rom our youth upwards( we should not ha,e been on the watch to %eep one another #rom doin$ wron$( but e,ery one would ha,e been his own watchman( because a#raid( i# he did wron$( o# harbourin$ in himsel# the $reatest o# e,ils) I dare say that Thrasymachus and others would seriously hold the lan$ua$e which I ha,e been merely repeatin$( and words e,en stron$er than these about justice and injustice( $rossly( as I concei,e( per,ertin$ their true nature) But I spea% in this ,ehement manner( as I must #ran%ly con#ess to you( because I want to hear #rom you the opposite side+ and I would as% you to show not only the superiority which justice has o,er injustice( but what e##ect they ha,e on the possessor o# them which ma%es the one to be a $ood and the other an e,il to him) 1nd please( as .laucon re-uested o# you( to e&clude reputations+ #or unless you ta%e away #rom each o# them his true reputation and

add on the #alse( we shall say that you do not praise justice( but the appearance o# it+ we shall thin% that you are only e&hortin$ us to %eep injustice dar%( and that you really a$ree with Thrasymachus in thin%in$ that justice is another6s $ood and the interest o# the stron$er( and that injustice is a man6s own pro#it and interest( thou$h injurious to the wea%er) Now as you ha,e admitted that justice is one o# that hi$hest class o# $oods which are desired indeed #or their results( but in a #ar $reater de$ree #or their own sa%es --li%e si$ht or hearin$ or %nowled$e or health( or any other real and natural and not merely con,entional $ood --I would as% you in your praise o# justice to re$ard one point onlyD I mean the essential $ood and e,il which justice and injustice wor% in the possessors o# them) 'et others praise justice and censure injustice( ma$ni#yin$ the rewards and honours o# the one and abusin$ the other+ that is a manner o# ar$uin$ which( comin$ #rom them( I am ready to tolerate( but #rom you who ha,e spent your whole li#e in the consideration o# this -uestion( unless I hear the contrary #rom your own lips( I e&pect somethin$ better) 1nd there#ore( I say( not only pro,e to us that justice is better than injustice( but show what they either o# them do to the possessor o# them( which ma%es the one to be a $ood and the other an e,il( whether seen or unseen by $ods and men) *ocrates - 1 EI31NT!* I had always admired the $enius o# .laucon and 1deimantus( but on hearin$ these words I was -uite deli$hted( and saidD *ons o# an illustrious #ather( that was not a bad be$innin$ o# the Ele$iac ,erses which the admirer o# .laucon made in honour o# you a#ter you had distin$uished yoursel,es at the battle o# 3e$araD-6*ons o# 1riston(6 he san$( 6di,ine o##sprin$ o# an illustrious hero)6 The epithet is ,ery appropriate( #or there is somethin$ truly di,ine in bein$ able to ar$ue as you ha,e done #or the superiority o# injustice( and remainin$ uncon,inced by your own ar$uments) 1nd I do belie,e that you are not con,inced --this I in#er #rom your $eneral character( #or had I jud$ed only #rom your speeches I should ha,e mistrusted you) But now( the $reater my con#idence in you( the $reater is my di##iculty in %nowin$ what to say) @or I am in a strait between two+ on the one hand I #eel that I am une-ual to the tas%+ and my inability is brou$ht home to me by the #act that you were not satis#ied with the answer which I made to Thrasymachus( pro,in$( as I thou$ht( the superiority which justice has o,er injustice) 1nd yet I cannot re#use to help( while breath and speech remain to me+ I am a#raid that there would be an impiety in bein$ present when justice is e,il spo%en o# and not li#tin$ up a hand in her de#ence) 1nd there#ore I had best $i,e such help as I can) .laucon and the rest entreated me by all means not to let the -uestion drop( but to proceed in the in,esti$ation) They wanted to arri,e at the truth( #irst( about the nature o# justice and injustice( and secondly( about their relati,e ad,anta$es) I told them( what I --really thou$ht( that the en-uiry would be o# a serious nature( and would re-uire ,ery $ood eyes) *eein$ then( I said( that we are no $reat wits( I thin%

that we had better adopt a method which I may illustrate thus+ suppose that a short-si$hted person had been as%ed by some one to read small letters #rom a distance+ and it occurred to some one else that they mi$ht be #ound in another place which was lar$er and in which the letters were lar$er --i# they were the same and he could read the lar$er letters #irst( and then proceed to the lesser --this would ha,e been thou$ht a rare piece o# $ood #ortune) >ery true( said 1deimantus+ but how does the illustration apply to our en-uiry9 I will tell you( I replied+ justice( which is the subject o# our en-uiry( is( as you %now( sometimes spo%en o# as the ,irtue o# an indi,idual( and sometimes as the ,irtue o# a *tate) True( he replied) 1nd is not a *tate lar$er than an indi,idual9 It is) Then in the lar$er the -uantity o# justice is li%ely to be lar$er and more easily discernible) I propose there#ore that we en-uire into the nature o# justice and injustice( #irst as they appear in the *tate( and secondly in the indi,idual( proceedin$ #rom the $reater to the lesser and comparin$ them) That( he said( is an e&cellent proposal) 1nd i# we ima$ine the *tate in process o# creation( we shall see the justice and injustice o# the *tate in process o# creation also) I dare say) 2hen the *tate is completed there may be a hope that the object o# our search will be more easily disco,ered) Aes( #ar more easily) But ou$ht we to attempt to construct one9 I said+ #or to do so( as I am inclined to thin%( will be a ,ery serious tas%) Re#lect there#ore) I ha,e re#lected( said 1deimantus( and am an&ious that you should proceed) 1 *tate( I said( arises( as I concei,e( out o# the needs o# man%ind+ no one is sel#-su##icin$( but all o# us ha,e many wants) "an any other ori$in o# a *tate be ima$ined9 There can I be no other) Then( as we ha,e many wants( and many persons are needed to supply them( one ta%es a helper #or one purpose and another #or another+ and when these partners and helpers are $athered to$ether in one habitation the body o# inhabitants is termed a *tate) True( he said) 1nd they e&chan$e with one another( and one $i,es( and another recei,es( under the idea that the e&chan$e will be #or their $ood)

>ery true) Then( I said( let us be$in and create in idea a *tate+ and yet the true creator is necessity( who is the mother o# our in,ention) O# course( he replied) Now the #irst and $reatest o# necessities is #ood( which is the condition o# li#e and e&istence) "ertainly) The second is a dwellin$( and the third clothin$ and the li%e) True) 1nd now let us see how our city will be able to supply this $reat demandD 2e may suppose that one man is a husbandman( another a builder( some one else a wea,er --shall we add to them a shoema%er( or perhaps some other pur,eyor to our bodily wants9 Cuite ri$ht) The barest notion o# a *tate must include #our or #i,e men) "learly) 1nd how will they proceed9 2ill each brin$ the result o# his labours into a common stoc%9 --the indi,idual husbandman( #or e&ample( producin$ #or #our( and labourin$ #our times as lon$ and as much as he need in the pro,ision o# #ood with which he supplies others as well as himsel#+ or will he ha,e nothin$ to do with others and not be at the trouble o# producin$ #or them( but pro,ide #or himsel# alone a #ourth o# the #ood in a #ourth o# the time( and in the remainin$ three-#ourths o# his time be employed in ma%in$ a house or a coat or a pair o# shoes( ha,in$ no partnership with others( but supplyin$ himsel# all his own wants9 1deimantus thou$ht that he should aim at producin$ #ood only and not at producin$ e,erythin$) Probably( I replied( that would be the better way+ and when I hear you say this( I am mysel# reminded that we are not all ali%e+ there are di,ersities o# natures amon$ us which are adapted to di##erent occupations) >ery true) 1nd will you ha,e a wor% better done when the wor%man has many occupations( or when he has only one9 2hen he has only one) @urther( there can be no doubt that a wor% is spoilt when not done at the ri$ht time9 No doubt) @or business is not disposed to wait until the doer o# the business is at leisure+ but the doer must #ollow up what he is doin$( and ma%e the business his #irst object)

He must) 1nd i# so( we must in#er that all thin$s are produced more plenti#ully and easily and o# a better -uality when one man does one thin$ which is natural to him and does it at the ri$ht time( and lea,es other thin$s) !ndoubtedly)) Then more than #our citi/ens will be re-uired+ #or the husbandman will not ma%e his own plou$h or mattoc%( or other implements o# a$riculture( i# they are to be $ood #or anythin$) Neither will the builder ma%e his tools --and he too needs many+ and in li%e manner the wea,er and shoema%er) True) Then carpenters( and smiths( and many other artisans( will be sharers in our little *tate( which is already be$innin$ to $row9 True) Aet e,en i# we add neatherds( shepherds( and other herdsmen( in order that our husbandmen may ha,e o&en to plou$h with( and builders as well as husbandmen may ha,e drau$ht cattle( and curriers and wea,ers #leeces and hides( --still our *tate will not be ,ery lar$e) That is true+ yet neither will it be a ,ery small *tate which contains all these) Then( a$ain( there is the situation o# the city --to #ind a place where nothin$ need be imported is well-ni$h impossible) Impossible) Then there must be another class o# citi/ens who will brin$ the re-uired supply #rom another city9 There must) But i# the trader $oes empty-handed( ha,in$ nothin$ which they re-uire who would supply his need( he will come bac% empty-handed) That is certain) 1nd there#ore what they produce at home must be not only enou$h #or themsel,es( but such both in -uantity and -uality as to accommodate those #rom whom their wants are supplied) >ery true) Then more husbandmen and more artisans will be re-uired9 They will) Not to mention the importers and e&porters( who are called merchants9 Aes) Then we shall want merchants9 2e shall) 1nd i# merchandise is to be carried o,er the sea( s%il#ul sailors will also be needed( and in considerable numbers9

Aes( in considerable numbers) Then( a$ain( within the city( how will they e&chan$e their productions9 To secure such an e&chan$e was( as you will remember( one o# our principal objects when we #ormed them into a society and constituted a *tate) "learly they will buy and sell) Then they will need a mar%et-place( and a money-to%en #or purposes o# e&chan$e) "ertainly) *uppose now that a husbandman( or an artisan( brin$s some production to mar%et( and he comes at a time when there is no one to e&chan$e with him( --is he to lea,e his callin$ and sit idle in the mar%et-place9 Not at all+ he will #ind people there who( seein$ the want( underta%e the o##ice o# salesmen) In well-ordered *tates they are commonly those who are the wea%est in bodily stren$th( and there#ore o# little use #or any other purpose+ their duty is to be in the mar%et( and to $i,e money in e&chan$e #or $oods to those who desire to sell and to ta%e money #rom those who desire to buy) This want( then( creates a class o# retail-traders in our *tate) Is not 6retailer6 the term which is applied to those who sit in the mar%et-place en$a$ed in buyin$ and sellin$( while those who wander #rom one city to another are called merchants9 Aes( he said) 1nd there is another class o# ser,ants( who are intellectually hardly on the le,el o# companionship+ still they ha,e plenty o# bodily stren$th #or labour( which accordin$ly they sell( and are called( i# I do not mista%e( hirelin$s( hire bein$ the name which is $i,en to the price o# their labour) True) Then hirelin$s will help to ma%e up our population9 Aes) 1nd now( 1deimantus( is our *tate matured and per#ected9 I thin% so) 2here( then( is justice( and where is injustice( and in what part o# the *tate did they sprin$ up9 Probably in the dealin$s o# these citi/ens with one another) cannot ima$ine that they are more li%ely to be #ound anywhere else) I dare say that you are ri$ht in your su$$estion( I said+ we had better thin% the matter out( and not shrin% #rom the en-uiry) 'et us then consider( #irst o# all( what will be their way o# li#e( now that we ha,e thus established them) 2ill they not produce corn( and wine( and clothes( and shoes( and build houses #or themsel,es9 1nd when they are housed( they will wor%( in summer( commonly( stripped

and bare#oot( but in winter substantially clothed and shod) They will #eed on barley-meal and #lour o# wheat( ba%in$ and %neadin$ them( ma%in$ noble ca%es and loa,es+ these they will ser,e up on a mat o# reeds or on clean lea,es( themsel,es reclinin$ the while upon beds strewn with yew or myrtle) 1nd they and their children will #east( drin%in$ o# the wine which they ha,e made( wearin$ $arlands on their heads( and hymnin$ the praises o# the $ods( in happy con,erse with one another) 1nd they will ta%e care that their #amilies do not e&ceed their means+ ha,in$ an eye to po,erty or war) *ocrates - .'1!"ON But( said .laucon( interposin$( you ha,e not $i,en them a relish to their meal) True( I replied( I had #or$otten+ o# course they must ha,e a relish-salt( and oli,es( and cheese( and they will boil roots and herbs such as country people prepare+ #or a dessert we shall $i,e them #i$s( and peas( and beans+ and they will roast myrtle-berries and acorns at the #ire( drin%in$ in moderation) 1nd with such a diet they may be e&pected to li,e in peace and health to a $ood old a$e( and be-ueath a similar li#e to their children a#ter them) Aes( *ocrates( he said( and i# you were pro,idin$ #or a city o# pi$s( how else would you #eed the beasts9 But what would you ha,e( .laucon9 I replied) 2hy( he said( you should $i,e them the ordinary con,eniences o# li#e) People who are to be com#ortable are accustomed to lie on so#as( and dine o## tables( and they should ha,e sauces and sweets in the modern style) Aes( I said( now I understandD the -uestion which you would ha,e me consider is( not only how a *tate( but how a lu&urious *tate is created+ and possibly there is no harm in this( #or in such a *tate we shall be more li%ely to see how justice and injustice ori$inate) In my opinion the true and healthy constitution o# the *tate is the one which I ha,e described) But i# you wish also to see a *tate at #e,er heat( I ha,e no objection) @or I suspect that many will not be satis#ied with the simpler way o# way They will be #or addin$ so#as( and tables( and other #urniture+ also dainties( and per#umes( and incense( and courtesans( and ca%es( all these not o# one sort only( but in e,ery ,ariety+ we must $o beyond the necessaries o# which I was at #irst spea%in$( such as houses( and clothes( and shoesD the arts o# the painter and the embroiderer will ha,e to be set in motion( and $old and i,ory and all sorts o# materials must be procured) True( he said) Then we must enlar$e our borders+ #or the ori$inal healthy *tate is no lon$er su##icient) Now will the city ha,e to #ill and swell with a multitude o# callin$s which are not re-uired by any natural want+ such as the whole tribe o# hunters and actors( o# whom one lar$e class ha,e to do with #orms and colours+ another will be the ,otaries o#

music --poets and their attendant train o# rhapsodists( players( dancers( contractors+ also ma%ers o# di,ers %inds o# articles( includin$ women6s dresses) 1nd we shall want more ser,ants) 2ill not tutors be also in re-uest( and nurses wet and dry( tirewomen and barbers( as well as con#ectioners and coo%s+ and swineherds( too( who were not needed and there#ore had no place in the #ormer edition o# our *tate( but are needed now9 They must not be #or$ottenD and there will be animals o# many other %inds( i# people eat them) "ertainly) 1nd li,in$ in this way we shall ha,e much $reater need o# physicians than be#ore9 3uch $reater) 1nd the country which was enou$h to support the ori$inal inhabitants will be too small now( and not enou$h9 Cuite true) Then a slice o# our nei$hbours6 land will be wanted by us #or pasture and tilla$e( and they will want a slice o# ours( i#( li%e oursel,es( they e&ceed the limit o# necessity( and $i,e themsel,es up to the unlimited accumulation o# wealth9 That( *ocrates( will be ine,itable) 1nd so we shall $o to war( .laucon) *hall we not9 3ost certainly( he replied) Then without determinin$ as yet whether war does $ood or harm( thus much we may a##irm( that now we ha,e disco,ered war to be deri,ed #rom causes which are also the causes o# almost all the e,ils in *tates( pri,ate as well as public) !ndoubtedly) 1nd our *tate must once more enlar$e+ and this time the will be nothin$ short o# a whole army( which will ha,e to $o out and #i$ht with the in,aders #or all that we ha,e( as well as #or the thin$s and persons whom we were describin$ abo,e) 2hy9 he said+ are they not capable o# de#endin$ themsel,es9 No( I said+ not i# we were ri$ht in the principle which was ac%nowled$ed by all o# us when we were #ramin$ the *tateD the principle( as you will remember( was that one man cannot practise many arts with success) >ery true( he said) But is not war an art9 "ertainly) 1nd an art re-uirin$ as much attention as shoema%in$9 Cuite true) 1nd the shoema%er was not allowed by us to be husbandman( or a wea,er( a builder --in order that we mi$ht ha,e our shoes well made+ but to him and to e,ery other wor%er was assi$ned one wor% #or which he was by nature #itted( and at that he was to continue wor%in$ all his li#e lon$ and at no other+ he was not to let opportunities slip( and then

he would become a $ood wor%man) Now nothin$ can be more important than that the wor% o# a soldier should be well done) But is war an art so easily ac-uired that a man may be a warrior who is also a husbandman( or shoema%er( or other artisan+ althou$h no one in the world would be a $ood dice or drau$ht player who merely too% up the $ame as a recreation( and had not #rom his earliest years de,oted himsel# to this and nothin$ else9 No tools will ma%e a man a s%illed wor%man( or master o# de#ence( nor be o# any use to him who has not learned how to handle them( and has ne,er bestowed any attention upon them) How then will he who ta%es up a shield or other implement o# war become a $ood #i$hter all in a day( whether with hea,y-armed or any other %ind o# troops9 Aes( he said( the tools which would teach men their own use would be beyond price) 1nd the hi$her the duties o# the $uardian( I said( the more time( and s%ill( and art( and application will be needed by him9 No doubt( he replied) 2ill he not also re-uire natural aptitude #or his callin$9 "ertainly) Then it will be our duty to select( i# we can( natures which are #itted #or the tas% o# $uardin$ the city9 It will) 1nd the selection will be no easy matter( I said+ but we must be bra,e and do our best) 2e must) Is not the noble youth ,ery li%e a well-bred do$ in respect o# $uardin$ and watchin$9 2hat do you mean9 I mean that both o# them ou$ht to be -uic% to see( and swi#t to o,erta%e the enemy when they see him+ and stron$ too i#( when they ha,e cau$ht him( they ha,e to #i$ht with him) 1ll these -ualities( he replied( will certainly be re-uired by them) 2ell( and your $uardian must be bra,e i# he is to #i$ht well9 "ertainly) 1nd is he li%ely to be bra,e who has no spirit( whether horse or do$ or any other animal9 Ha,e you ne,er obser,ed how in,incible and uncon-uerable is spirit and how the presence o# it ma%es the soul o# any creature to be absolutely #earless and indomitable9 I ha,e) Then now we ha,e a clear notion o# the bodily -ualities which are re-uired in the $uardian)

True) 1nd also o# the mental ones+ his soul is to be #ull o# spirit9 Aes) But are not these spirited natures apt to be sa,a$e with one another( and with e,erybody else9 1 di##iculty by no means easy to o,ercome( he replied) 2hereas( I said( they ou$ht to be dan$erous to their enemies( and $entle to their #riends+ i# not( they will destroy themsel,es without waitin$ #or their enemies to destroy them) True( he said) 2hat is to be done then9 I said+ how shall we #ind a $entle nature which has also a $reat spirit( #or the one is the contradiction o# the other9 True) He will not be a $ood $uardian who is wantin$ in either o# these two -ualities+ and yet the combination o# them appears to be impossible+ and hence we must in#er that to be a $ood $uardian is impossible) I am a#raid that what you say is true( he replied) Here #eelin$ perple&ed I be$an to thin% o,er what had preceded) 3y #riend( I said( no wonder that we are in a perple&ity+ #or we ha,e lost si$ht o# the ima$e which we had be#ore us) 2hat do you mean9 he said) I mean to say that there do e&ist natures $i#ted with those opposite -ualities) 1nd where do you #ind them9 3any animals( I replied( #urnish e&amples o# them+ our #riend the do$ is a ,ery $ood oneD you %now that well-bred do$s are per#ectly $entle to their #amiliars and ac-uaintances( and the re,erse to stran$ers) Aes( I %now) Then there is nothin$ impossible or out o# the order o# nature in our #indin$ a $uardian who has a similar combination o# -ualities9 "ertainly not) 2ould not he who is #itted to be a $uardian( besides the spirited nature( need to ha,e the -ualities o# a philosopher9 I do not apprehend your meanin$) The trait o# which I am spea%in$( I replied( may be also seen in the do$( and is remar%able in the animal) 2hat trait9 2hy( a do$( whene,er he sees a stran$er( is an$ry+ when an ac-uaintance( he welcomes him( althou$h the one has ne,er done him any harm( nor the other any $ood) id this ne,er stri%e you as curious9

The matter ne,er struc% me be#ore+ but I -uite reco$nise the truth o# your remar%) 1nd surely this instinct o# the do$ is ,ery charmin$+ --your do$ is a true philosopher) 2hy9 2hy( because he distin$uishes the #ace o# a #riend and o# an enemy only by the criterion o# %nowin$ and not %nowin$) 1nd must not an animal be a lo,er o# learnin$ who determines what he li%es and disli%es by the test o# %nowled$e and i$norance9 3ost assuredly) 1nd is not the lo,e o# learnin$ the lo,e o# wisdom( which is philosophy9 They are the same( he replied) 1nd may we not say con#idently o# man also( that he who is li%ely to be $entle to his #riends and ac-uaintances( must by nature be a lo,er o# wisdom and %nowled$e9 That we may sa#ely a##irm) Then he who is to be a really $ood and noble $uardian o# the *tate will re-uire to unite in himsel# philosophy and spirit and swi#tness and stren$th9 !ndoubtedly) Then we ha,e #ound the desired natures+ and now that we ha,e #ound them( how are they to be reared and educated9 Is not this en-uiry which may be e&pected to throw li$ht on the $reater en-uiry which is our #inal end --How do justice and injustice $row up in *tates9 #or we do not want either to omit what is to the point or to draw out the ar$ument to an incon,enient len$th) *ocrates - 1 EI31NT!* 1deimantus thou$ht that the en-uiry would be o# $reat ser,ice to us) Then( I said( my dear #riend( the tas% must not be $i,en up( e,en i# somewhat lon$) "ertainly not) "ome then( and let us pass a leisure hour in story-tellin$( and our story shall be the education o# our heroes) By all means) 1nd what shall be their education9 "an we #ind a better than the traditional sort9 --and this has two di,isions( $ymnastic #or the body( and music #or the soul) True) *hall we be$in education with music( and $o on to $ymnastic a#terwards9

By all means) 1nd when you spea% o# music( do you include literature or not9 I do) 1nd literature may be either true or #alse9 Aes) 1nd the youn$ should be trained in both %inds( and we be$in with the #alse9 I do not understand your meanin$( he said) Aou %now( I said( that we be$in by tellin$ children stories which( thou$h not wholly destitute o# truth( are in the main #ictitious+ and these stories are told them when they are not o# an a$e to learn $ymnastics) >ery true) That was my meanin$ when I said that we must teach music be#ore $ymnastics) Cuite ri$ht( he said) Aou %now also that the be$innin$ is the most important part o# any wor%( especially in the case o# a youn$ and tender thin$+ #or that is the time at which the character is bein$ #ormed and the desired impression is more readily ta%en) Cuite true) 1nd shall we just carelessly allow children to hear any casual tales which may be de,ised by casual persons( and to recei,e into their minds ideas #or the most part the ,ery opposite o# those which we should wish them to ha,e when they are $rown up9 2e cannot) Then the #irst thin$ will be to establish a censorship o# the writers o# #iction( and let the censors recei,e any tale o# #iction which is $ood( and reject the bad+ and we will desire mothers and nurses to tell their children the authorised ones only) 'et them #ashion the mind with such tales( e,en more #ondly than they mould the body with their hands+ but most o# those which are now in use must be discarded) O# what tales are you spea%in$9 he said) Aou may #ind a model o# the lesser in the $reater( I said+ #or they are necessarily o# the same type( and there is the same spirit in both o# them) >ery li%ely( he replied+ but I do not as yet %now what you would term the $reater) Those( I said( which are narrated by Homer and Hesiod( and the rest o# the poets( who ha,e e,er been the $reat story-tellers o# man%ind) But which stories do you mean( he said+ and what #ault do you #ind with them9 1 #ault which is most serious( I said+ the #ault o# tellin$ a lie(

and( what is more( a bad lie) But when is this #ault committed9 2hene,er an erroneous representation is made o# the nature o# $ods and heroes( --as when a painter paints a portrait not ha,in$ the shadow o# a li%eness to the ori$inal) Aes( he said( that sort o# thin$ is certainly ,ery blamable+ but what are the stories which you mean9 @irst o# all( I said( there was that $reatest o# all lies( in hi$h places( which the poet told about !ranus( and which was a bad lie too( --I mean what Hesiod says that !ranus did( and how "ronus retaliated on him) The doin$s o# "ronus( and the su##erin$s which in turn his son in#licted upon him( e,en i# they were true( ou$ht certainly not to be li$htly told to youn$ and thou$htless persons+ i# possible( they had better be buried in silence) But i# there is an absolute necessity #or their mention( a chosen #ew mi$ht hear them in a mystery( and they should sacri#ice not a common HEleusinianI pi$( but some hu$e and unprocurable ,ictim+ and then the number o# the hearers will be ,ery #ew indeed) 2hy( yes( said he( those stories are e&tremely objectionable) Aes( 1deimantus( they are stories not to be repeated in our *tate+ the youn$ man should not be told that in committin$ the worst o# crimes he is #ar #rom doin$ anythin$ outra$eous+ and that e,en i# he chastises his #ather when does wron$( in whate,er manner( he will only be #ollowin$ the e&ample o# the #irst and $reatest amon$ the $ods) I entirely a$ree with you( he said+ in my opinion those stories are -uite un#it to be repeated) Neither( i# we mean our #uture $uardians to re$ard the habit o# -uarrellin$ amon$ themsel,es as o# all thin$s the basest( should any word be said to them o# the wars in hea,en( and o# the plots and #i$htin$s o# the $ods a$ainst one another( #or they are not true) No( we shall ne,er mention the battles o# the $iants( or let them be embroidered on $arments+ and we shall be silent about the innumerable other -uarrels o# $ods and heroes with their #riends and relati,es) I# they would only belie,e us we would tell them that -uarrellin$ is unholy( and that ne,er up to this time has there been any( -uarrel between citi/ens+ this is what old men and old women should be$in by tellin$ children+ and when they $row up( the poets also should be told to compose #or them in a similar spirit) But the narrati,e o# Hephaestus bindin$ Here his mother( or how on another occasion Jeus sent him #lyin$ #or ta%in$ her part when she was bein$ beaten( and all the battles o# the $ods in Homer --these tales must not be admitted into our *tate( whether they are supposed to ha,e an alle$orical meanin$ or not) @or a youn$ person cannot jud$e what is alle$orical and what is literal+ anythin$ that he recei,es into his mind at that a$e is li%ely to become indelible and unalterable+ and there#ore it is most important that the tales which the youn$ #irst hear should be models o# ,irtuous thou$hts)

There you are ri$ht( he replied+ but i# any one as%s where are such models to be #ound and o# what tales are you spea%in$ --how shall we answer him9 I said to him( Aou and I( 1deimantus( at this moment are not poets( but #ounders o# a *tateD now the #ounders o# a *tate ou$ht to %now the $eneral #orms in which poets should cast their tales( and the limits which must be obser,ed by them( but to ma%e the tales is not their business) >ery true( he said+ but what are these #orms o# theolo$y which you mean9 *omethin$ o# this %ind( I repliedD --.od is always to be represented as he truly is( whate,er be the sort o# poetry( epic( lyric or tra$ic( in which the representation is $i,en) Ri$ht) 1nd is he not truly $ood9 and must he not be represented as such9 "ertainly) 1nd no $ood thin$ is hurt#ul9 No( indeed) 1nd that which is not hurt#ul hurts not9 "ertainly not) 1nd that which hurts not does no e,il9 No) 1nd can that which does no e,il be a cause o# e,il9 Impossible) 1nd the $ood is ad,anta$eous9 Aes) 1nd there#ore the cause o# well-bein$9 Aes) It #ollows there#ore that the $ood is not the cause o# all thin$s( but o# the $ood only9 1ssuredly) Then .od( i# he be $ood( is not the author o# all thin$s( as the many assert( but he is the cause o# a #ew thin$s only( and not o# most thin$s that occur to men) @or #ew are the $oods o# human li#e( and many are the e,ils( and the $ood is to be attributed to .od alone+ o# the e,ils the causes are to be sou$ht elsewhere( and not in him) That appears to me to be most true( he said) Then we must not listen to Homer or to any other poet who is $uilty o# the #olly o# sayin$ that two cas%s 'ie at the threshold o# Jeus( #ull o# lots( one o# $ood( the other o# e,il lots( and that he to whom Jeus $i,es a mi&ture o# the two *ometimes meets with e,il #ortune( at other times with $ood+ but that he to whom is $i,en the cup o# unmin$led ill( Him wild hun$er dri,es o6er the beauteous earth) 1nd a$ain

Jeus( who is the dispenser o# $ood and e,il to us) 1nd i# any one asserts that the ,iolation o# oaths and treaties( which was really the wor% o# Pandarus( was brou$ht about by 1thene and Jeus( or that the stri#e and contention o# the $ods was insti$ated by Themis and Jeus( he shall not ha,e our appro,al+ neither will we allow our youn$ men to hear the words o# 1eschylus( that .od plants $uilt amon$ men when he desires utterly to destroy a house) 1nd i# a poet writes o# the su##erin$s o# Niobe --the subject o# the tra$edy in which these iambic ,erses occur --or o# the house o# Pelops( or o# the Trojan war or on any similar theme( either we must not permit him to say that these are the wor%s o# .od( or i# they are o# .od( he must de,ise some e&planation o# them such as we are see%in$+ he must say that .od did what was just and ri$ht( and they were the better #or bein$ punished+ but that those who are punished are miserable( and that .od is the author o# their misery --the poet is not to be permitted to say+ thou$h he may say that the wic%ed are miserable because they re-uire to be punished( and are bene#ited by recei,in$ punishment #rom .od+ but that .od bein$ $ood is the author o# e,il to any one is to be strenuously denied( and not to be said or sun$ or heard in ,erse or prose by any one whether old or youn$ in any well-ordered commonwealth) *uch a #iction is suicidal( ruinous( impious) I a$ree with you( he replied( and am ready to $i,e my assent to the law) 'et this then be one o# our rules and principles concernin$ the $ods( to which our poets and reciters will be e&pected to con#orm --that .od is not the author o# all thin$s( but o# $ood only) That will do( he said) 1nd what do you thin% o# a second principle9 *hall I as% you whether .od is a ma$ician( and o# a nature to appear insidiously now in one shape( and now in another --sometimes himsel# chan$in$ and passin$ into many #orms( sometimes decei,in$ us with the semblance o# such trans#ormations+ or is he one and the same immutably #i&ed in his own proper ima$e9 I cannot answer you( he said( without more thou$ht) 2ell( I said+ but i# we suppose a chan$e in anythin$( that chan$e must be e##ected either by the thin$ itsel#( or by some other thin$9 3ost certainly) 1nd thin$s which are at their best are also least liable to be altered or discomposed+ #or e&ample( when healthiest and stron$est( the human #rame is least liable to be a##ected by meats and drin%s( and the plant which is in the #ullest ,i$our also su##ers least #rom winds or the heat o# the sun or any similar causes) O# course) 1nd will not the bra,est and wisest soul be least con#used or deran$ed by any e&ternal in#luence9

True) 1nd the same principle( as I should suppose( applies to all composite thin$s --#urniture( houses( $arments+ when $ood and well made( they are least altered by time and circumstances) >ery true) Then e,erythin$ which is $ood( whether made by art or nature( or both( is least liable to su##er chan$e #rom without9 True) But surely .od and the thin$s o# .od are in e,ery way per#ect9 O# course they are) Then he can hardly be compelled by e&ternal in#luence to ta%e many shapes9 He cannot) But may he not chan$e and trans#orm himsel#9 "learly( he said( that must be the case i# he is chan$ed at all) 1nd will he then chan$e himsel# #or the better and #airer( or #or the worse and more unsi$htly9 I# he chan$e at all he can only chan$e #or the worse( #or we cannot suppose him to be de#icient either in ,irtue or beauty) >ery true( 1deimantus+ but then( would any one( whether .od or man( desire to ma%e himsel# worse9 Impossible) Then it is impossible that .od should e,er be willin$ to chan$e+ bein$( as is supposed( the #airest and best that is concei,able( e,ery $od remains absolutely and #or e,er in his own #orm) That necessarily #ollows( he said( in my jud$ment) Then( I said( my dear #riend( let none o# the poets tell us that The $ods( ta%in$ the dis$uise o# stran$ers #rom other lands( wal% up and down cities in all sorts o# #orms+ and let no one slander Proteus and Thetis( neither let any one( either in tra$edy or in any other %ind o# poetry( introduce Here dis$uised in the li%eness o# a priestess as%in$ an alms @or the li#e-$i,in$ dau$hters o# Inachus the ri,er o# 1r$os+ --let us ha,e no more lies o# that sort) Neither must we ha,e mothers under the in#luence o# the poets scarin$ their children with a bad ,ersion o# these myths --tellin$ how certain $ods( as they say( 6.o about by ni$ht in the li%eness o# so many stran$ers and in di,ers #orms6+ but let them ta%e heed lest they ma%e cowards o# their children( and at the same time spea% blasphemy a$ainst the $ods) Hea,en #orbid( he said) But althou$h the $ods are themsel,es unchan$eable( still by witchcra#t

and deception they may ma%e us thin% that they appear in ,arious #orms9 Perhaps( he replied) 2ell( but can you ima$ine that .od will be willin$ to lie( whether in word or deed( or to put #orth a phantom o# himsel#9 I cannot say( he replied) o you not %now( I said( that the true lie( i# such an e&pression may be allowed( is hated o# $ods and men9 2hat do you mean9 he said) I mean that no one is willin$ly decei,ed in that which is the truest and hi$hest part o# himsel#( or about the truest and hi$hest matters+ there( abo,e all( he is most a#raid o# a lie ha,in$ possession o# him) *till( he said( I do not comprehend you) The reason is( I replied( that you attribute some pro#ound meanin$ to my words+ but I am only sayin$ that deception( or bein$ decei,ed or unin#ormed about the hi$hest realities in the hi$hest part o# themsel,es( which is the soul( and in that part o# them to ha,e and to hold the lie( is what man%ind least li%e+ --that( I say( is what they utterly detest) There is nothin$ more hate#ul to them) 1nd( as I was just now remar%in$( this i$norance in the soul o# him who is decei,ed may be called the true lie+ #or the lie in words is only a %ind o# imitation and shadowy ima$e o# a pre,ious a##ection o# the soul( not pure unadulterated #alsehood) 1m I not ri$ht9 Per#ectly ri$ht) The true lie is hated not only by the $ods( but also by men9 Aes) 2hereas the lie in words is in certain cases use#ul and not hate#ul+ in dealin$ with enemies --that would be an instance+ or a$ain( when those whom we call our #riends in a #it o# madness or illusion are $oin$ to do some harm( then it is use#ul and is a sort o# medicine or pre,enti,e+ also in the tales o# mytholo$y( o# which we were just now spea%in$ --because we do not %now the truth about ancient times( we ma%e #alsehood as much li%e truth as we can( and so turn it to account) >ery true( he said) But can any o# these reasons apply to .od9 "an we suppose that he is i$norant o# anti-uity( and there#ore has recourse to in,ention9 That would be ridiculous( he said) Then the lyin$ poet has no place in our idea o# .od9 I should say not) Or perhaps he may tell a lie because he is a#raid o# enemies9 That is inconcei,able)

But he may ha,e #riends who are senseless or mad9 But no mad or senseless person can be a #riend o# .od) Then no moti,e can be ima$ined why .od should lie9 None whate,er) Then the superhuman and di,ine is absolutely incapable o# #alsehood9 Aes) Then is .od per#ectly simple and true both in word and deed+ he chan$es not+ he decei,es not( either by si$n or word( by dream or wa%in$ ,ision) Aour thou$hts( he said( are the re#lection o# my own) Aou a$ree with me then( I said( that this is the second type or #orm in which we should write and spea% about di,ine thin$s) The $ods are not ma$icians who trans#orm themsel,es( neither do they decei,e man%ind in any way) I $rant that) Then( althou$h we are admirers o# Homer( we do not admire the lyin$ dream which Jeus sends to 1$amemnon+ neither will we praise the ,erses o# 1eschylus in which Thetis says that 1pollo at her nuptials 2as celebratin$ in son$ her #air pro$eny whose days were to he lon$( and to %now no sic%ness) 1nd when he had spo%en o# my lot as in all thin$s blessed o# hea,en he raised a note o# triumph and cheered my soul) 1nd I thou$ht that the word o# Phoebus bein$ di,ine and #ull o# prophecy( would not #ail) 1nd now he himsel# who uttered the strain( he who was present at the ban-uet( and who said this --he it is who has slain my son) These are the %ind o# sentiments about the $ods which will arouse our an$er+ and he who utters them shall be re#used a chorus+ neither shall we allow teachers to ma%e use o# them in the instruction o# the youn$( meanin$( as we do( that our $uardians( as #ar as men can be( should be true worshippers o# the $ods and li%e them) I entirely a$ree( be said( in these principles( and promise to ma%e them my laws) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG III *ocrates - 1 EI31NT!* *uch then( I said( are our principles o# theolo$y --some tales are to be told( and others are not to be told to our disciples #rom their youth upwards( i# we mean them to honour the $ods and their parents( and to ,alue #riendship with one another) Aes+ and I thin% that our principles are ri$ht( he said) But i# they are to be coura$eous( must they not learn other lessons besides these( and lessons o# such a %ind as will ta%e away the #ear

o# death9 "an any man be coura$eous who has the #ear o# death in him9 "ertainly not( he said) 1nd can he be #earless o# death( or will he choose death in battle rather than de#eat and sla,ery( who belie,es the world below to be real and terrible9 Impossible) Then we must assume a control o,er the narrators o# this class o# tales as well as o,er the others( and be$ them not simply to but rather to commend the world below( intimatin$ to them that their descriptions are untrue( and will do harm to our #uture warriors) That will be our duty( he said) Then( I said( we shall ha,e to obliterate many obno&ious passa$es( be$innin$ with the ,erses( I would rather he a ser# on the land o# a poor and portionless man than rule o,er all the dead who ha,e come to nou$ht) 2e must also e&pun$e the ,erse( which tells us how Pluto #eared( 'est the mansions $rim and s-ualid which the $ods abhor should he seen both o# mortals and immortals) 1nd a$ainD O hea,ens4 ,erily in the house o# Hades there is soul and $hostly #orm but no mind at all4 1$ain o# TiresiasD -HTo him e,en a#ter death did Persephone $rant mind(I that he alone should be wise+ but the other souls are #littin$ shades) 1$ainD -The soul #lyin$ #rom the limbs had $one to Hades( lamentn$ her #ate( lea,in$ manhood and youth) 1$ainD -1nd the soul( with shrillin$ cry( passed li%e smo%e beneath the earth) 1nd( -1s bats in hollow o# mystic ca,ern( whene,er any o# the has dropped out o# the strin$ and #alls #rom the roc%( #ly shrillin$ and clin$ to one another( so did they with shrillin$ cry hold to$ether as they mo,ed) 1nd we must be$ Homer and the other poets not to be an$ry i# we stri%e out these and similar passa$es( not because they are unpoetical( or unattracti,e to the popular ear( but because the $reater the poetical charm o# them( the less are they meet #or the ears o# boys and men who are meant to be #ree( and who should #ear sla,ery more than death) !ndoubtedly) 1lso we shall ha,e to reject all the terrible and appallin$ names describe the world below --"ocytus and *ty&( $hosts under the earth( and sapless shades( and any similar words o# which the ,ery mention causes a shudder to pass throu$h the inmost soul o# him who hears them) I do not say that these horrible stories may not ha,e a use o# some %ind+ but there is a dan$er that the ner,es o# our $uardians may be rendered too e&citable and e##eminate by them)

There is a real dan$er( he said) Then we must ha,e no more o# them) True) 1nother and a nobler strain must be composed and sun$ by us) "learly) 1nd shall we proceed to $et rid o# the weepin$s and wailin$s o# #amous men9 They will $o with the rest) But shall we be ri$ht in $ettin$ rid o# them9 Re#lectD our principle is that the $ood man will not consider death terrible to any other $ood man who is his comrade) Aes+ that is our principle) 1nd there#ore he will not sorrow #or his departed #riend as thou$h he had su##ered anythin$ terrible9 He will not) *uch an one( as we #urther maintain( is su##icient #or himsel# and his own happiness( and there#ore is least in need o# other men) True( he said) 1nd #or this reason the loss o# a son or brother( or the depri,ation o# #ortune( is to him o# all men least terrible) 1ssuredly) 1nd there#ore he will be least li%ely to lament( and will bear with the $reatest e-uanimity any mis#ortune o# this sort which may be#all him) Aes( he will #eel such a mis#ortune #ar less than another) Then we shall be ri$ht in $ettin$ rid o# the lamentations o# #amous men( and ma%in$ them o,er to women 5and not e,en to women who are $ood #or anythin$7( or to men o# a baser sort( that those who are bein$ educated by us to be the de#enders o# their country may scorn to do the li%e) That will be ,ery ri$ht) Then we will once more entreat Homer and the other poets not to depict 1chilles( who is the son o# a $oddess( #irst lyin$ on his side( then on his bac%( and then on his #ace+ then startin$ up and sailin$ in a #ren/y alon$ the shores o# the barren sea+ now ta%in$ the sooty ashes in both his hands and pourin$ them o,er his head( or weepin$ and wailin$ in the ,arious modes which Homer has delineated) Nor should he describe Priam the %insman o# the $ods as prayin$ and beseechin$( Rollin$ in the dirt( callin$ each man loudly by his name) *till more earnestly will we be$ o# him at all e,ents not to introduce the $ods lamentin$ and sayin$(

1las4 my misery4 1las4 that I bore the har,est to my sorrow) But i# he must introduce the $ods( at any rate let him not dare so completely to misrepresent the $reatest o# the $ods( as to ma%e him say -O hea,ens4 with my eyes ,erily I behold a dear #riend o# mine chased round and round the city( and my heart is sorrow#ul) Or a$ainD -2oe is me that I am #ated to ha,e *arpedon( dearest o# men to me( subdued at the hands o# Patroclus the son o# 3enoetius) @or i#( my sweet 1deimantus( our youth seriously listen to such unworthy representations o# the $ods( instead o# lau$hin$ at them as they ou$ht( hardly will any o# them deem that he himsel#( bein$ but a man( can be dishonoured by similar actions+ neither will he rebu%e any inclination which may arise in his mind to say and do the li%e) 1nd instead o# ha,in$ any shame or sel#-control( he will be always whinin$ and lamentin$ on sli$ht occasions) Aes( he said( that is most true) Aes( I replied+ but that surely is what ou$ht not to be( as the ar$ument has just pro,ed to us+ and by that proo# we must abide until it is dispro,ed by a better) It ou$ht not to be) Neither ou$ht our $uardians to be $i,en to lau$hter) @or a #it o# lau$hter which has been indul$ed to e&cess almost always produces a ,iolent reaction) *o I belie,e) Then persons o# worth( e,en i# only mortal men( must not be represented as o,ercome by lau$hter( and still less must such a representation o# the $ods be allowed) *till less o# the $ods( as you say( he replied) Then we shall not su##er such an e&pression to be used about the $ods as that o# Homer when he describes how Ine&tin$uishable lau$hter arose amon$ the blessed $ods( when they saw Hephaestus bustlin$ about the mansion) On your ,iews( we must not admit them) On my ,iews( i# you li%e to #ather them on me+ that we must not admit them is certain) 1$ain( truth should be hi$hly ,alued+ i#( as we were sayin$( a lie is useless to the $ods( and use#ul only as a medicine to men( then the use o# such medicines should be restricted to physicians+ pri,ate indi,iduals ha,e no business with them) "learly not( he said) Then i# any one at all is to ha,e the pri,ile$e o# lyin$( the rulers o# the *tate should be the persons+ and they( in their dealin$s either with enemies or with their own citi/ens( may be allowed to lie #or the public $ood) But nobody else should meddle with anythin$ o# the

%ind+ and althou$h the rulers ha,e this pri,ile$e( #or a pri,ate man to lie to them in return is to be deemed a more heinous #ault than #or the patient or the pupil o# a $ymnasium not to spea% the truth about his own bodily illnesses to the physician or to the trainer( or #or a sailor not to tell the captain what is happenin$ about the ship and the rest o# the crew( and how thin$s are $oin$ with himsel# or his #ellow sailors) 3ost true( he said) I#( then( the ruler catches anybody beside himsel# lyin$ in the *tate( 1ny o# the cra#tsmen( whether he priest or physician or carpenter) he will punish him #or introducin$ a practice which is e-ually sub,ersi,e and destructi,e o# ship or *tate) 3ost certainly( he said( i# our idea o# the *tate is e,er carried out) In the ne&t place our youth must be temperate9 "ertainly) 1re not the chie# elements o# temperance( spea%in$ $enerally( obedience to commanders and sel#-control in sensual pleasures9 True) Then we shall appro,e such lan$ua$e as that o# iomede in Homer(

@riend( sit still and obey my word( and the ,erses which #ollow( The .ree%s marched breathin$ prowess( )))in silent awe o# their leaders( and other sentiments o# the same %ind) 2e shall) 2hat o# this line( O hea,y with wine( who hast the eyes o# a do$ and the heart o# a sta$( and o# the words which #ollow9 2ould you say that these( or any similar impertinences which pri,ate indi,iduals are supposed to address to their rulers( whether in ,erse or prose( are well or ill spo%en9 They are ill spo%en) They may ,ery possibly a##ord some amusement( but they do not conduce to temperance) 1nd there#ore they are li%ely to do harm to our youn$ men --you would a$ree with me there9 Aes) 1nd then( a$ain( to ma%e the wisest o# men say that nothin$ in his opinion is more $lorious than 2hen the tables are #ull o# bread and meat( and the cup-bearer carries round wine which he draws #rom the bowl and pours into the cups( is it #it or conduci,e to temperance #or a youn$ man to hear such words9 Or the ,erse

The saddest o# #ates is to die and meet destiny #rom hun$er9 2hat would you say a$ain to the tale o# Jeus( who( while other $ods and men were asleep and he the only person awa%e( lay de,isin$ plans( but #or$ot them all in a moment throu$h his lust( and was so completely o,ercome at the si$ht o# Here that he would not e,en $o into the hut( but wanted to lie with her on the $round( declarin$ that he had ne,er been in such a state o# rapture be#ore( e,en when they #irst met one another 2ithout the %nowled$e o# their parents+ or that other tale o# how Hephaestus( because o# similar $oin$s on( cast a chain around 1res and 1phrodite9 Indeed( he said( I am stron$ly o# opinion that they ou$ht not to hear that sort o# thin$) But any deeds o# endurance which are done or told by #amous men( these they ou$ht to see and hear+ as( #or e&ample( what is said in the ,erses( He smote his breast( and thus reproached his heart( Endure( my heart+ #ar worse hast thou endured4 "ertainly( he said) In the ne&t place( we must not let them be recei,ers o# $i#ts or lo,ers o# money) "ertainly not) Neither must we sin$ to them o# .i#ts persuadin$ $ods( and persuadin$ re,erend %in$s) Neither is Phoeni&( the tutor o# 1chilles( to be appro,ed or deemed to ha,e $i,en his pupil $ood counsel when he told him that he should ta%e the $i#ts o# the .ree%s and assist them+ but that without a $i#t he should not lay aside his an$er) Neither will we belie,e or ac%nowled$e 1chilles himsel# to ha,e been such a lo,er o# money that he too% 1$amemnon6s or that when he had recei,ed payment he restored the dead body o# Hector( but that without payment he was unwillin$ to do so) !ndoubtedly( he said( these are not sentiments which can be appro,ed) 'o,in$ Homer as I do( I hardly li%e to say that in attributin$ these #eelin$s to 1chilles( or in belie,in$ that they are truly to him( he is $uilty o# downri$ht impiety) 1s little can I belie,e the narrati,e o# his insolence to 1pollo( where he says( Thou hast wron$ed me( O #ar-darter( most abominable o# deities) >erily I would he e,en with thee( i# I had only the power( or his insubordination to the ri,er-$od( on whose di,inity he is ready to lay hands+ or his o##erin$ to the dead Patroclus o# his own hair( which had been pre,iously dedicated to the other ri,er-$od *percheius( and that he actually per#ormed this ,ow+ or that he dra$$ed Hector round the tomb o# Patroclus( and slau$htered the capti,es at the pyre+ o# all this I cannot belie,e

that he was $uilty( any more than I can allow our citi/ens to belie,e that he( the wise "heiron6s pupil( the son o# a $oddess and o# Peleus who was the $entlest o# men and third in descent #rom Jeus( was so disordered in his wits as to be at one time the sla,e o# two seemin$ly inconsistent passions( meanness( not untainted by a,arice( combined with o,erweenin$ contempt o# $ods and men) Aou are -uite ri$ht( he replied) 1nd let us e-ually re#use to belie,e( or allow to be repeated( the tale o# Theseus son o# Poseidon( or o# Peirithous son o# Jeus( $oin$ #orth as they did to perpetrate a horrid rape+ or o# any other hero or son o# a $od darin$ to do such impious and dread#ul thin$s as they #alsely ascribe to them in our dayD and let us #urther compel the poets to declare either that these acts were not done by them( or that they were not the sons o# $ods+ --both in the same breath they shall not be permitted to a##irm) 2e will not ha,e them tryin$ to persuade our youth that the $ods are the authors o# e,il( and that heroes are no better than men-sentiments which( as we were sayin$( are neither pious nor true( #or we ha,e already pro,ed that e,il cannot come #rom the $ods) 1ssuredly not) 1nd #urther they are li%ely to ha,e a bad e##ect on those who hear them+ #or e,erybody will be$in to e&cuse his own ,ices when he is con,inced that similar wic%ednesses are always bein$ perpetrated by -The %indred o# the $ods( the relati,es o# Jeus( whose ancestral altar( the attar o# Jeus( is alo#t in air on the pea% o# Ida( and who ha,e the blood o# deities yet #lowin$ in their ,eins) 1nd there#ore let us put an end to such tales( lest they en$ender la&ity o# morals amon$ the youn$) By all means( he replied) But now that we are determinin$ what classes o# subjects are or are not to be spo%en o#( let us see whether any ha,e been omitted by us) The manner in which $ods and demi$ods and heroes and the world below should be treated has been already laid down) >ery true) 1nd what shall we say about men9 That is clearly the remainin$ portion o# our subject) "learly so) But we are not in a condition to answer this -uestion at present( my #riend) 2hy not9 Because( i# I am not mista%en( we shall ha,e to say that about men poets and story-tellers are $uilty o# ma%in$ the $ra,est misstatements when they tell us that wic%ed men are o#ten happy( and the $ood miserable+ and that injustice is pro#itable when undetected( but that justice

is a man6s own loss and another6s $ain --these thin$s we shall #orbid them to utter( and command them to sin$ and say the opposite) To be sure we shall( he replied) But i# you admit that I am ri$ht in this( then I shall maintain that you ha,e implied the principle #or which we ha,e been all alon$ contendin$) I $rant the truth o# your in#erence) That such thin$s are or are not to be said about men is a -uestion which we cannot determine until we ha,e disco,ered what justice is( and how naturally ad,anta$eous to the possessor( whether he seems to be just or not) 3ost true( he said) Enou$h o# the subjects o# poetryD let us now spea% o# the style+ and when this has been considered( both matter and manner will ha,e been completely treated) I do not understand what you mean( said 1deimantus) Then I must ma%e you understand+ and perhaps I may be more intelli$ible i# I put the matter in this way) Aou are aware( I suppose( that all mytholo$y and poetry is a narration o# e,ents( either past( present( or to come9 "ertainly( he replied) 1nd narration may be either simple narration( or imitation( or a union o# the two9 That a$ain( he said( I do not -uite understand) I #ear that I must be a ridiculous teacher when I ha,e so much di##iculty in ma%in$ mysel# apprehended) 'i%e a bad spea%er( there#ore( I will not ta%e the whole o# the subject( but will brea% a piece o## in illustration o# my meanin$) Aou %now the #irst lines o# the Iliad( in which the poet says that "hryses prayed 1$amemnon to release his dau$hter( and that 1$amemnon #lew into a passion with him+ whereupon "hryses( #ailin$ o# his object( in,o%ed the an$er o# the .od a$ainst the 1chaeans) Now as #ar as these lines( 1nd he prayed all the .ree%s( but especially the two sons o# 1treus( the chie#s o# the people( the poet is spea%in$ in his own person+ he ne,er leads us to suppose that he is any one else) But in what #ollows he ta%es the person o# "hryses( and then he does all that he can to ma%e us belie,e that the spea%er is not Homer( but the a$ed priest himsel#) 1nd in this double #orm he has cast the entire narrati,e o# the e,ents which occurred at Troy and in Ithaca and throu$hout the Odyssey) Aes) 1nd a narrati,e it remains both in the speeches which the poet recites #rom time to time and in the intermediate passa$es9 Cuite true) But when the poet spea%s in the person o# another( may we not say

that he assimilates his style to that o# the person who( as he in#orms you( is $oin$ to spea%9 "ertainly) 1nd this assimilation o# himsel# to another( either by the use o# ,oice or $esture( is the imitation o# the person whose character he assumes9 O# course) Then in this case the narrati,e o# the poet may be said to proceed by way o# imitation9 >ery true) Or( i# the poet e,erywhere appears and ne,er conceals himsel#( then a$ain the imitation is dropped( and his poetry becomes simple narration) Howe,er( in order that I may ma%e my meanin$ -uite clear( and that you may no more say( I don6t understand(6 I will show how the chan$e mi$ht be e##ected) I# Homer had said( 6The priest came( ha,in$ his dau$hter6s ransom in his hands( supplicatin$ the 1chaeans( and abo,e all the %in$s+6 and then i#( instead o# spea%in$ in the person o# "hryses( he had continued in his own person( the words would ha,e been( not imitation( but simple narration) The passa$e would ha,e run as #ollows 5I am no poet( and there#ore I drop the metre7( 6The priest came and prayed the $ods on behal# o# the .ree%s that they mi$ht capture Troy and return sa#ely home( but be$$ed that they would $i,e him bac% his dau$hter( and ta%e the ransom which he brou$ht( and respect the .od) Thus he spo%e( and the other .ree%s re,ered the priest and assented) But 1$amemnon was wroth( and bade him depart and not come a$ain( lest the sta## and chaplets o# the .od should be o# no a,ail to him --the dau$hter o# "hryses should not be released( he said --she should $row old with him in 1r$os) 1nd then he told him to $o away and not to pro,o%e him( i# he intended to $et home unscathed) 1nd the old man went away in #ear and silence( and( when he had le#t the camp( he called upon 1pollo by his many names( remindin$ him o# e,erythin$ which he had done pleasin$ to him( whether in buildin$ his temples( or in o##erin$ sacri#ice( and prayin$ that his $ood deeds mi$ht be returned to him( and that the 1chaeans mi$ht e&piate his tears by the arrows o# the $od(6 --and so on) In this way the whole becomes simple narrati,e) I understand( he said) Or you may suppose the opposite case --that the intermediate passa$es are omitted( and the dialo$ue only le#t) That also( he said( I understand+ you mean( #or e&ample( as in tra$edy) Aou ha,e concei,ed my meanin$ per#ectly+ and i# I mista%e not( what you #ailed to apprehend be#ore is now made clear to you( that poetry and mytholo$y are( in some cases( wholly imitati,e --instances o# this are supplied by tra$edy and comedy+ there is li%ewise the opposite style( in which the my poet is the only spea%er --o# this the dithyramb a##ords the best e&ample+ and the combination o# both is #ound in epic( and in se,eral other styles o# poetry) o I ta%e you with me9

Aes( he said+ I see now what you meant) I will as% you to remember also what I be$an by sayin$( that we had done with the subject and mi$ht proceed to the style) Aes( I remember) In sayin$ this( I intended to imply that we must come to an understandin$ about the mimetic art( --whether the poets( in narratin$ their stories( are to be allowed by us to imitate( and i# so( whether in whole or in part( and i# the latter( in what parts+ or should all imitation be prohibited9 Aou mean( I suspect( to as% whether tra$edy and comedy shall be admitted into our *tate9 Aes( I said+ but there may be more than this in -uestionD I really do not %now as yet( but whither the ar$ument may blow( thither we $o) 1nd $o we will( he said) Then( 1deimantus( let me as% you whether our $uardians ou$ht to be imitators+ or rather( has not this -uestion been decided by the rule already laid down that one man can only do one thin$ well( and not many+ and that i# he attempt many( he will alto$ether #all o# $ainin$ much reputation in any9 "ertainly) 1nd this is e-ually true o# imitation+ no one man can imitate many thin$s as well as he would imitate a sin$le one9 He cannot) Then the same person will hardly be able to play a serious part in li#e( and at the same time to be an imitator and imitate many other parts as well+ #or e,en when two species o# imitation are nearly allied( the same persons cannot succeed in both( as( #or e&ample( the writers o# tra$edy and comedy --did you not just now call them imitations9 Aes( I did+ and you are ri$ht in thin%in$ that the same persons cannot succeed in both) 1ny more than they can be rhapsodists and actors at once9 True) Neither are comic and tra$ic actors the same+ yet all these thin$s are but imitations) They are so) 1nd human nature( 1deimantus( appears to ha,e been coined into yet smaller pieces( and to be as incapable o# imitatin$ many thin$s well( as o# per#ormin$ well the actions o# which the imitations are copies) Cuite true( he replied) I# then we adhere to our ori$inal notion and bear in mind that our

$uardians( settin$ aside e,ery other business( are to dedicate themsel,es wholly to the maintenance o# #reedom in the *tate( ma%in$ this their cra#t( and en$a$in$ in no wor% which does not bear on this end( they ou$ht not to practise or imitate anythin$ else+ i# they imitate at all( they should imitate #rom youth upward only those characters which are suitable to their pro#ession --the coura$eous( temperate( holy( #ree( and the li%e+ but they should not depict or be s%il#ul at imitatin$ any %ind o# illiberality or baseness( lest #rom imitation they should come to be what they imitate) id you ne,er obser,e how imitations( be$innin$ in early youth and continuin$ #ar into li#e( at len$th $row into habits and become a second nature( a##ectin$ body( ,oice( and mind9 Aes( certainly( he said) Then( I said( we will not allow those #or whom we pro#ess a care and o# whom we say that they ou$ht to be $ood men( to imitate a woman( whether youn$ or old( -uarrellin$ with her husband( or stri,in$ and ,auntin$ a$ainst the $ods in conceit o# her happiness( or when she is in a##liction( or sorrow( or weepin$+ and certainly not one who is in sic%ness( lo,e( or labour) >ery ri$ht( he said) Neither must they represent sla,es( male or #emale( per#ormin$ the o##ices o# sla,es9 They must not) 1nd surely not bad men( whether cowards or any others( who do the re,erse o# what we ha,e just been prescribin$( who scold or moc% or re,ile one another in drin% or out o# in drin% or( or who in any other manner sin a$ainst themsel,es and their nei$hbours in word or deed( as the manner o# such is) Neither should they be trained to imitate the action or speech o# men or women who are mad or bad+ #or madness( li%e ,ice( is to be %nown but not to be practised or imitated) >ery true( he replied) Neither may they imitate smiths or other arti#icers( or oarsmen( or boatswains( or the li%e9 How can they( he said( when they are not allowed to apply their minds to the callin$s o# any o# these9 Nor may they imitate the nei$hin$ o# horses( the bellowin$ o# bulls( the murmur o# ri,ers and roll o# the ocean( thunder( and all that sort o# thin$9 Nay( he said( i# madness be #orbidden( neither may they copy the beha,iour o# madmen) Aou mean( I said( i# I understand you ari$ht( that there is one sort o# narrati,e style which may be employed by a truly $ood man when he has anythin$ to say( and that another sort will be used by a man o# an opposite character and education)

1nd which are these two sorts9 he as%ed) *uppose( I answered( that a just and $ood man in the course o# a narration comes on some sayin$ or action o# another $ood man( --I should ima$ine that he will li%e to personate him( and will not be ashamed o# this sort o# imitationD he will be most ready to play the part o# the $ood man when he is actin$ #irmly and wisely+ in a less de$ree when he is o,erta%en by illness or lo,e or drin%( or has met with any other disaster) But when he comes to a character which is unworthy o# him( he will not ma%e a study o# that+ he will disdain such a person( and will assume his li%eness( i# at all( #or a moment only when he is per#ormin$ some $ood action+ at other times he will be ashamed to play a part which he has ne,er practised( nor will he li%e to #ashion and #rame himsel# a#ter the baser models+ he #eels the employment o# such an art( unless in jest( to be beneath him( and his mind re,olts at it) *o I should e&pect( he replied) Then he will adopt a mode o# narration such as we ha,e illustrated out o# Homer( that is to say( his style will be both imitati,e and narrati,e+ but there will be ,ery little o# the #ormer( and a $reat deal o# the latter) o you a$ree9 "ertainly( he said+ that is the model which such a spea%er must necessarily ta%e) But there is another sort o# character who will narrate anythin$( and( the worse lie is( the more unscrupulous he will be+ nothin$ will be too bad #or himD and he will be ready to imitate anythin$( not as a jo%e( but in ri$ht $ood earnest( and be#ore a lar$e company) 1s I was just now sayin$( he will attempt to represent the roll o# thunder( the noise o# wind and hall( or the crea%in$ o# wheels( and pulleys( and the ,arious sounds o# #lutes+ pipes( trumpets( and all sorts o# instrumentsD he will bar% li%e a do$( bleat li%e a sheep( or crow li%e a coc%+ his entire art will consist in imitation o# ,oice and $esture( and there will be ,ery little narration) That( he said( will be his mode o# spea%in$) These( then( are the two %inds o# style9 Aes) 1nd you would a$ree with me in sayin$ that one o# them is simple and has but sli$ht chan$es+ and i# the harmony and rhythm are also chosen #or their simplicity( the result is that the spea%er( i# hc spea%s correctly( is always pretty much the same in style( and he will %eep within the limits o# a sin$le harmony 5#or the chan$es are not $reat7( and in li%e manner he will ma%e use o# nearly the same rhythm9 That is -uite true( he said) 2hereas the other re-uires all sorts o# harmonies and all sorts o# rhythms( i# the music and the style are to correspond( because the style has all sorts o# chan$es) That is also per#ectly true( he replied) 1nd do not the two styles( or the mi&ture o# the two( comprehend all

poetry( and e,ery #orm o# e&pression in words9 No one can say anythin$ e&cept in one or other o# them or in both to$ether) They include all( he said) 1nd shall we recei,e into our *tate all the three styles( or one only o# the two unmi&ed styles9 or would you include the mi&ed9 I should pre#er only to admit the pure imitator o# ,irtue) Aes( I said( 1deimantus( but the mi&ed style is also ,ery charmin$D and indeed the pantomimic( which is the opposite o# the one chosen by you( is the most popular style with children and their attendants( and with the world in $eneral) I do not deny it) But I suppose you would ar$ue that such a style is unsuitable to our *tate( in which human nature is not two#old or mani#old( #or one man plays one part only9 Aes+ -uite unsuitable) 1nd this is the reason why in our *tate( and in our *tate only( we shall #ind a shoema%er to be a shoema%er and not a pilot also( and a husbandman to be a husbandman and not a dicast also( and a soldier a soldier and not a trader also( and the same throu$hout9 True( he said) 1nd there#ore when any one o# these pantomimic $entlemen( who are so cle,er that they can imitate anythin$( comes to us( and ma%es a proposal to e&hibit himsel# and his poetry( we will #all down and worship him as a sweet and holy and wonder#ul bein$+ but we must also in#orm him that in our *tate such as he are not permitted to e&ist+ the law will not allow them) 1nd so when we ha,e anointed him with myrrh( and set a $arland o# wool upon his head( we shall send him away to another city) @or we mean to employ #or our souls6 health the rou$her and se,erer poet or story-teller( who will imitate the style o# the ,irtuous only( and will #ollow those models which we prescribed at #irst when we be$an the education o# our soldiers) 2e certainly will( he said( i# we ha,e the power) Then now( my #riend( I said( that part o# music or literary education which relates to the story or myth may be considered to be #inished+ #or the matter and manner ha,e both been discussed) I thin% so too( he said) Ne&t in order will #ollow melody and son$) That is ob,ious) E,ery one can see already what we ou$ht to say about them( i# we are to be consistent with oursel,es) *ocrates - .'1!"ON I #ear( said .laucon( lau$hin$( that the words 6e,ery one6 hardly includes me( #or I cannot at the moment say what they should be+ thou$h

I may $uess) 1t any rate you can tell that a son$ or ode has three parts --the words( the melody( and the rhythm+ that de$ree o# %nowled$e I may presuppose9 Aes( he said+ so much as that you may) 1nd as #or the words( there surely be no di##erence words between words which are and which are not set to music+ both will con#orm to the same laws( and these ha,e been already determined by us9 Aes) 1nd the melody and rhythm will depend upon the words9 "ertainly) 2e were sayin$( when we spo%e o# the subject-matter( that we had no need o# lamentations and strains o# sorrow9 True) 1nd which are the harmonies e&pressi,e o# sorrow9 Aou are musical( and can tell me) The harmonies which you mean are the mi&ed or tenor 'ydian( and the #ull-toned or bass 'ydian( and such li%e) These then( I said( must be banished+ e,en to women who ha,e a character to maintain they are o# no use( and much less to men) "ertainly) In the ne&t place( drun%enness and so#tness and indolence are utterly unbecomin$ the character o# our $uardians) !tterly unbecomin$) 1nd which are the so#t or drin%in$ harmonies9 The Ionian( he replied( and the 'ydian+ they are termed 6rela&ed)6 2ell( and are these o# any military use9 Cuite the re,erse( he replied+ and i# so the are the only ones which you ha,e le#t) orian and the Phry$ian

I answeredD O# the harmonies I %now nothin$( but I want to ha,e one warli%e( to sound the note or accent which a bra,e man utters in the hour o# dan$er and stern resol,e( or when his cause is #ailin$( and he is $oin$ to wounds or death or is o,erta%en by some other e,il( and at e,ery such crisis meets the blows o# #ortune with #irm step and a determination to endure+ and another to be used by him in times o# peace and #reedom o# action( when there is no pressure o# necessity( and he is see%in$ to persuade .od by prayer( or man by instruction and admonition( or on the other hand( when he is e&pressin$ his willin$ness to yield to persuasion or entreaty or admonition( and which represents him when by prudent conduct he has attained his end( not carried away by his success( but actin$ moderately and wisely under the circumstances( and ac-uiescin$ in the e,ent) These two harmonies I as% you to lea,e+ the strain o# necessity and the strain o# #reedom( the strain o# the un#ortunate and the strain o# the #ortunate( the strain o# coura$e(

and the strain o# temperance+ these( I say( lea,e) 1nd these( he replied( are the I was just now spea%in$) orian and Phry$ian harmonies o# which

Then( I said( i# these and these only are to be used in our son$s and melodies( we shall not want multiplicity o# notes or a panharmonic scale9 I suppose not) Then we shall not maintain the arti#icers o# lyres with three corners and comple& scales( or the ma%ers o# any other many-strin$ed curiously-harmonised instruments9 "ertainly not) But what do you say to #lute-ma%ers and #lute-players9 2ould you admit them into our *tate when you re#lect that in this composite use o# harmony the #lute is worse than all the strin$ed instruments put to$ether+ e,en the panharmonic music is only an imitation o# the #lute9 "learly not) There remain then only the lyre and the harp #or use in the city( and the shepherds may ha,e a pipe in the country) That is surely the conclusion to be drawn #rom the ar$ument) The pre#errin$ o# 1pollo and his instruments to 3arsyas and his instruments is not at all stran$e( I said) Not at all( he replied) 1nd so( by the do$ o# E$ypt( we ha,e been unconsciously pur$in$ the *tate( which not lon$ a$o we termed lu&urious) 1nd we ha,e done wisely( he replied) Then let us now #inish the pur$ation( I said) Ne&t in order to harmonies( rhythms will naturally #ollow( and they should be subject to the same rules( #or we ou$ht not to see% out comple& systems o# metre( or metres o# e,ery %ind( but rather to disco,er what rhythms are the e&pressions o# a coura$eous and harmonious li#e+ and when we ha,e #ound them( we shall adapt the #oot and the melody to words ha,in$ a li%e spirit( not the words to the #oot and melody) To say what these rhythms are will be your duty --you must teach me them( as you ha,e already tau$ht me the harmonies) But( indeed( he replied( I cannot tell you) I only %now that there are some three principles o# rhythm out o# which metrical systems are #ramed( just as in sounds there are #our notes out o# which all the harmonies are composed+ that is an obser,ation which I ha,e made) But o# what sort o# li,es they are se,erally the imitations I am unable to say) Then( I said( we must ta%e amon into our counsels+ and he will tell us what rhythms are e&pressi,e o# meanness( or insolence( or #ury(

or other unworthiness( and what are to be reser,ed #or the e&pression o# opposite #eelin$s) 1nd I thin% that I ha,e an indistinct recollection o# his mentionin$ a comple& "retic rhythm+ also a dactylic or heroic( and he arran$ed them in some manner which I do not -uite understand( ma%in$ the rhythms e-ual in the rise and #all o# the #oot( lon$ and short alternatin$+ and( unless I am mista%en( he spo%e o# an iambic as well as o# a trochaic rhythm( and assi$ned to them short and lon$ -uantities) 1lso in some cases he appeared to praise or censure the mo,ement o# the #oot -uite as much as the rhythm+ or perhaps a combination o# the two+ #or I am not certain what he meant) These matters( howe,er( as I was sayin$( had better be re#erred to amon himsel#( #or the analysis o# the subject would be di##icult( you %now) Rather so( I should say) But there is no di##iculty in seein$ that $race or the absence o# $race is an e##ect o# $ood or bad rhythm) None at all) 1nd also that $ood and bad rhythm naturally assimilate to a $ood and bad style+ and that harmony and discord in li%e manner #ollow style+ #or our principle is that rhythm and harmony are re$ulated by the words( and not the words by them) Just so( he said( they should #ollow the words) 1nd will not the words and the character o# the style depend on the temper o# the soul9 Aes) 1nd e,erythin$ else on the style9 Aes) Then beauty o# style and harmony and $race and $ood rhythm depend on simplicity( --I mean the true simplicity o# a ri$htly and nobly ordered mind and character( not that other simplicity which is only an euphemism #or #olly9 >ery true( he replied) 1nd i# our youth are to do their wor% in li#e( must they not ma%e these $races and harmonies their perpetual aim9 They must) 1nd surely the art o# the painter and e,ery other creati,e and constructi,e art are #ull o# them( --wea,in$( embroidery( architecture( and e,ery %ind o# manu#acture+ also nature( animal and ,e$etable( --in all o# them there is $race or the absence o# $race) 1nd u$liness and discord and inharmonious motion are nearly allied to ill words and ill nature( as $race and harmony are the twin sisters o# $oodness and ,irtue and bear their li%eness) That is -uite true( he said) But shall our superintendence $o no #urther( and are the poets only to be re-uired by us to e&press the ima$e o# the $ood in their wor%s( on pain( i# they do anythin$ else( o# e&pulsion #rom our *tate9 Or is the same control to be e&tended to other artists( and are they

also to be prohibited #rom e&hibitin$ the opposite #orms o# ,ice and intemperance and meanness and indecency in sculpture and buildin$ and the other creati,e arts+ and is he who cannot con#orm to this rule o# ours to be pre,ented #rom practisin$ his art in our *tate( lest the taste o# our citi/ens be corrupted by him9 2e would not ha,e our $uardians $row up amid ima$es o# moral de#ormity( as in some no&ious pasture( and there browse and #eed upon many a bane#ul herb and #lower day by day( little by little( until they silently $ather a #esterin$ mass o# corruption in their own soul) 'et our artists rather be those who are $i#ted to discern the true nature o# the beauti#ul and $race#ul+ then will our youth dwell in a land o# health( amid #air si$hts and sounds( and recei,e the $ood in e,erythin$+ and beauty( the e##luence o# #air wor%s( shall #low into the eye and ear( li%e a health-$i,in$ bree/e #rom a purer re$ion( and insensibly draw the soul #rom earliest years into li%eness and sympathy with the beauty o# reason) There can be no nobler trainin$ than that( he replied) 1nd there#ore( I said( .laucon( musical trainin$ is a more potent instrument than any other( because rhythm and harmony #ind their way into the inward places o# the soul( on which they mi$htily #asten( impartin$ $race( and ma%in$ the soul o# him who is ri$htly educated $race#ul( or o# him who is ill-educated un$race#ul+ and also because he who has recei,ed this true education o# the inner bein$ will most shrewdly percei,e omissions or #aults in art and nature( and with a true taste( while he praises and rejoices o,er and recei,es into his soul the $ood( and becomes noble and $ood( he will justly blame and hate the bad( now in the days o# his youth( e,en be#ore he is able to %now the reason why+ and when reason comes he will reco$nise and salute the #riend with whom his education has made him lon$ #amiliar) Aes( he said( I -uite a$ree with you in thin%in$ that our youth should be trained in music and on the $rounds which you mention) Just as in learnin$ to read( I said( we were satis#ied when we %new the letters o# the alphabet( which are ,ery #ew( in all their recurrin$ si/es and combinations+ not sli$htin$ them as unimportant whether they occupy a space lar$e or small( but e,erywhere ea$er to ma%e them out+ and not thin%in$ oursel,es per#ect in the art o# readin$ until we reco$nise them where,er they are #oundD True -Or( as we reco$nise the re#lection o# letters in the water( or in a mirror( only when we %now the letters themsel,es+ the same art and study $i,in$ us the %nowled$e o# bothD E&actly -E,en so( as I maintain( neither we nor our $uardians( whom we ha,e to educate( can e,er become musical until we and they %now the essential #orms( in all their combinations( and can reco$nise them and their ima$es where,er they are #ound( not sli$htin$ them either in small thin$s or $reat( but belie,in$ them all to be within the sphere o# one art and study)

3ost assuredly) 1nd when a beauti#ul soul harmonises with a beauti#ul #orm( and the two are cast in one mould( that will be the #airest o# si$hts to him who has an eye to see it9 The #airest indeed) 1nd the #airest is also the lo,eliest9 That may be assumed) 1nd the man who has the spirit o# harmony will be most in lo,e with the lo,eliest+ but he will not lo,e him who is o# an inharmonious soul9 That is true( he replied( i# the de#iciency be in his soul+ but i# there be any merely bodily de#ect in another he will be patient o# it( and will lo,e all the same) I percei,e( I said( that you ha,e or ha,e had e&periences o# this sort( and I a$ree) But let me as% you another -uestionD Has e&cess o# pleasure any a##inity to temperance9 How can that be9 he replied+ pleasure depri,es a man o# the use o# his #aculties -uite as much as pain) Or any a##inity to ,irtue in $eneral9 None whate,er) 1ny a##inity to wantonness and intemperance9 Aes( the $reatest) 1nd is there any $reater or %eener pleasure than that o# sensual lo,e9 No( nor a madder) 2hereas true lo,e is a lo,e o# beauty and order --temperate and harmonious9 Cuite true( he said) Then no intemperance or madness should be allowed to approach true lo,e9 "ertainly not) Then mad or intemperate pleasure must ne,er be allowed to come near the lo,er and his belo,ed+ neither o# them can ha,e any part in it i# their lo,e is o# the ri$ht sort9 No( indeed( *ocrates( it must ne,er come near them) Then I suppose that in the city which we are #oundin$ you would ma%e a law to the e##ect that a #riend should use no other #amiliarity to his lo,e than a #ather would use to his son( and then only #or a noble purpose( and he must #irst ha,e the other6s consent+ and this rule is to limit him in all his intercourse( and he is ne,er to be seen $oin$ #urther( or( i# he e&ceeds( he is to be deemed $uilty o# coarseness and bad taste) I -uite a$ree( he said) Thus much o# music( which ma%es a #air endin$+ #or what should be the end o# music i# not the lo,e o# beauty9

I a$ree( he said) 1#ter music comes $ymnastic( in which our youth are ne&t to be trained) "ertainly) .ymnastic as well as music should be$in in early years+ the trainin$ in it should be care#ul and should continue throu$h li#e) Now my belie# is( --and this is a matter upon which I should li%e to ha,e your opinion in con#irmation o# my own( but my own belie# is( --not that the $ood body by any bodily e&cellence impro,es the soul( but( on the contrary( that the $ood soul( by her own e&cellence( impro,es the body as #ar as this may be possible) 2hat do you say9 Aes( I a$ree) Then( to the mind when ade-uately trained( we shall be ri$ht in handin$ o,er the more particular care o# the body+ and in order to a,oid proli&ity we will now only $i,e the $eneral outlines o# the subject) >ery $ood) That they must abstain #rom into&ication has been already remar%ed by us+ #or o# all persons a $uardian should be the last to $et drun% and not %now where in the world he is) Aes( he said+ that a $uardian should re-uire another $uardian to ta%e care o# him is ridiculous indeed) But ne&t( what shall we say o# their #ood+ #or the men are in trainin$ #or the $reat contest o# all --are they not9 Aes( he said) 1nd will the habit o# body o# our ordinary athletes be suited to them9 2hy not9 I am a#raid( I said( that a habit o# body such as they ha,e is but a sleepy sort o# thin$( and rather perilous to health) o you not obser,e that these athletes sleep away their li,es( and are liable to most dan$erous illnesses i# they depart( in e,er so sli$ht a de$ree( #rom their customary re$imen9 Aes( I do) Then( I said( a #iner sort o# trainin$ will be re-uired #or our warrior athletes( who are to be li%e wa%e#ul do$s( and to see and hear with the utmost %eenness+ amid the many chan$es o# water and also o# #ood( o# summer heat and winter cold( which they will ha,e to endure when on a campai$n( they must not be liable to brea% down in health) That is my ,iew) The really e&cellent $ymnastic is twin sister o# that simple music which we were just now describin$) How so9 2hy( I concei,e that there is a $ymnastic which( li%e our music( is simple and $ood+ and especially the military $ymnastic)

2hat do you mean9 3y meanin$ may be learned #rom Homer+ he( you %now( #eeds his heroes at their #easts( when they are campai$nin$( on soldiers6 #are+ they ha,e no #ish( althou$h they are on the shores o# the Hellespont( and they are not allowed boiled meats but only roast( which is the #ood most con,enient #or soldiers( re-uirin$ only that they should li$ht a #ire( and not in,ol,in$ the trouble o# carryin$ about pots and pans) True) 1nd I can hardly be mista%en in sayin$ that sweet sauces are nowhere mentioned in Homer) In proscribin$ them( howe,er( he is not sin$ular+ all pro#essional athletes are well aware that a man who is to be in $ood condition should ta%e nothin$ o# the %ind) Aes( he said+ and %nowin$ this( they are -uite ri$ht in not ta%in$ them) Then you would not appro,e o# *yracusan dinners( and the re#inements o# *icilian coo%ery9 I thin% not) Nor( i# a man is to be in condition( would you allow him to ha,e a "orinthian $irl as his #air #riend9 "ertainly not) Neither would you appro,e o# the delicacies( as they are thou$ht( o# 1thenian con#ectionery9 "ertainly not) 1ll such #eedin$ and li,in$ may be ri$htly compared by us to melody and son$ composed in the panharmonic style( and in all the rhythms) E&actly) There comple&ity en$endered license( and here disease+ whereas simplicity in music was the parent o# temperance in the soul+ and simplicity in $ymnastic o# health in the body) 3ost true( he said) But when intemperance and disease multiply in a *tate( halls o# justice and medicine are always bein$ opened+ and the arts o# the doctor and the lawyer $i,e themsel,es airs( #indin$ how %een is the interest which not only the sla,es but the #reemen o# a city ta%e about them) O# course) 1nd yet what $reater proo# can there be o# a bad and dis$race#ul state o# education than this( that not only artisans and the meaner sort o# people need the s%ill o# #irst-rate physicians and jud$es( but also those who would pro#ess to ha,e had a liberal education9 Is it not dis$race#ul( and a $reat si$n o# want o# $ood-breedin$( that a man should ha,e to $o abroad #or his law and physic because he has none o# his own at home( and must there#ore surrender himsel# into the hands o# other men whom he ma%es lords and jud$es o,er him9

O# all thin$s( he said( the most dis$race#ul) 2ould you say 6most(6 I replied( when you consider that there is a #urther sta$e o# the e,il in which a man is not only a li#e-lon$ liti$ant( passin$ all his days in the courts( either as plainti## or de#endant( but is actually led by his bad taste to pride himsel# on his liti$iousness+ he ima$ines that he is a master in dishonesty+ able to ta%e e,ery croo%ed turn( and wri$$le into and out o# e,ery hole( bendin$ li%e a withy and $ettin$ out o# the way o# justiceD and all #or what9 --in order to $ain small points not worth mentionin$( he not %nowin$ that so to order his li#e as to be able to do without a nappin$ jud$e is a #ar hi$her and nobler sort o# thin$) Is not that still more dis$race#ul9 Aes( he said( that is still more dis$race#ul) 2ell( I said( and to re-uire the help o# medicine( not when a wound has to be cured( or on occasion o# an epidemic( but just because( by indolence and a habit o# li#e such as we ha,e been describin$( men #ill themsel,es with waters and winds( as i# their bodies were a marsh( compellin$ the in$enious sons o# 1sclepius to #ind more names #or diseases( such as #latulence and catarrh+ is not this( too( a dis$race9 Aes( he said( they do certainly $i,e ,ery stran$e and new#an$led names to diseases) Aes( I said( and I do not belie,e that there were any such diseases in the days o# 1sclepius+ and this I in#er #rom the circumstance that the hero Eurypylus( a#ter he has been wounded in Homer( drin%s a posset o# Pramnian wine well besprin%led with barley-meal and $rated cheese( which are certainly in#lammatory( and yet the sons o# 1sclepius who were at the Trojan war do not blame the damsel who $i,es him the drin%( or rebu%e Patroclus( who is treatin$ his case) 2ell( he said( that was surely an e&traordinary drin% to be $i,en to a person in his condition) Not so e&traordinary( I replied( i# you bear in mind that in #ormer days( as is commonly said( be#ore the time o# Herodicus( the $uild o# 1sclepius did not practise our present system o# medicine( which may be said to educate diseases) But Herodicus( bein$ a trainer( and himsel# o# a sic%ly constitution( by a combination o# trainin$ and doctorin$ #ound out a way o# torturin$ #irst and chie#ly himsel#( and secondly the rest o# the world) How was that9 he said) By the in,ention o# lin$erin$ death+ #or he had a mortal disease which he perpetually tended( and as reco,ery was out o# the -uestion( he passed his entire li#e as a ,aletudinarian+ he could do nothin$ but attend upon himsel#( and he was in constant torment whene,er he departed in anythin$ #rom his usual re$imen( and so dyin$ hard( by the help o# science he stru$$led on to old a$e) 1 rare reward o# his s%ill4

Aes( I said+ a reward which a man mi$ht #airly e&pect who ne,er understood that( i# 1sclepius did not instruct his descendants in ,aletudinarian arts( the omission arose( not #rom i$norance or ine&perience o# such a branch o# medicine( but because he %new that in all well-ordered states e,ery indi,idual has an occupation to which he must attend( and has there#ore no leisure to spend in continually bein$ ill) This we remar% in the case o# the artisan( but( ludicrously enou$h( do not apply the same rule to people o# the richer sort) How do you mean9 he said) I mean thisD 2hen a carpenter is ill he as%s the physician #or a rou$h and ready cure+ an emetic or a pur$e or a cautery or the %ni#e( --these are his remedies) 1nd i# some one prescribes #or him a course o# dietetics( and tells him that he must swathe and swaddle his head( and all that sort o# thin$( he replies at once that he has no time to be ill( and that he sees no $ood in a li#e which is spent in nursin$ his disease to the ne$lect o# his customary employment+ and there#ore biddin$ $ood-bye to this sort o# physician( he resumes his ordinary habits( and either $ets well and li,es and does his business( or( i# his constitution #alls( he dies and has no more trouble) Aes( he said( and a man in his condition o# li#e ou$ht to use the art o# medicine thus #ar only) Has he not( I said( an occupation+ and what pro#it would there be in his li#e i# he were depri,ed o# his occupation9 Cuite true( he said) But with the rich man this is otherwise+ o# him we do not say that he has any specially appointed wor% which he must per#orm( i# he would li,e) He is $enerally supposed to ha,e nothin$ to do) Then you ne,er heard o# the sayin$ o# Phocylides( that as soon as a man has a li,elihood he should practise ,irtue9 Nay( he said( I thin% that he had better be$in somewhat sooner) 'et us not ha,e a dispute with him about this( I said+ but rather as% oursel,esD Is the practice o# ,irtue obli$atory on the rich man( or can he li,e without it9 1nd i# obli$atory on him( then let us raise a #urther -uestion( whether this dietin$ o# disorders which is an impediment to the application o# the mind t in carpenterin$ and the mechanical arts( does not e-ually stand in the way o# the sentiment o# Phocylides9 O# that( he replied( there can be no doubt+ such e&cessi,e care o# the body( when carried beyond the rules o# $ymnastic( is most inimical to the practice o# ,irtue) Aes( indeed( I replied( and e-ually incompatible with the mana$ement o# a house( an army( or an o##ice o# state+ and( what is most important o# all( irreconcilable with any %ind o# study or thou$ht or sel#-re#lection

--there is a constant suspicion that headache and $iddiness are to be ascribed to philosophy( and hence all practisin$ or ma%in$ trial o# ,irtue in the hi$her sense is absolutely stopped+ #or a man is always #ancyin$ that he is bein$ made ill( and is in constant an&iety about the state o# his body) Aes( li%ely enou$h) 1nd there#ore our politic 1sclepius may be supposed to ha,e e&hibited the power o# his art only to persons who( bein$ $enerally o# healthy constitution and habits o# li#e( had a de#inite ailment+ such as these he cured by pur$es and operations( and bade them li,e as usual( herein consultin$ the interests o# the *tate+ but bodies which disease had penetrated throu$h and throu$h he would not ha,e attempted to cure by $radual processes o# e,acuation and in#usionD he did not want to len$then out $ood-#or-nothin$ li,es( or to ha,e wea% #athers be$ettin$ wea%er sons+ --i# a man was not able to li,e in the ordinary way he had no business to cure him+ #or such a cure would ha,e been o# no use either to himsel#( or to the *tate) Then( he said( you re$ard 1sclepius as a statesman) "learly+ and his character is #urther illustrated by his sons) Note that they were heroes in the days o# old and practised the medicines o# which I am spea%in$ at the sie$e o# TroyD Aou will remember how( when Pandarus wounded 3enelaus( they *uc%ed the blood out o# the wound( and sprin%led soothin$ remedies( but they ne,er prescribed what the patient was a#terwards to eat or drin% in the case o# 3enelaus( any more than in the case o# Eurypylus+ the remedies( as they concei,ed( were enou$h to heal any man who be#ore he was wounded was healthy and re$ular in habits+ and e,en thou$h he did happen to drin% a posset o# Pramnian wine( he mi$ht $et well all the same) But they would ha,e nothin$ to do with unhealthy and intemperate subjects( whose li,es were o# no use either to themsel,es or others+ the art o# medicine was not desi$ned #or their $ood( and thou$h they were as rich as 3idas( the sons o# 1sclepius would ha,e declined to attend them) They were ,ery acute persons( those sons o# 1sclepius) Naturally so( I replied) Ne,ertheless( the tra$edians and Pindar disobeyin$ our behests( althou$h they ac%nowled$e that 1sclepius was the son o# 1pollo( say also that he was bribed into healin$ a rich man who was at the point o# death( and #or this reason he was struc% by li$htnin$) But we( in accordance with the principle already a##irmed by us( will not belie,e them when they tell us both+ --i# he was the son o# a $od( we maintain that hd was not a,aricious+ or( i# he was a,aricious he was not the son o# a $od) 1ll that( *ocrates( is e&cellent+ but I should li%e to put a -uestion to youD Ou$ht there not to be $ood physicians in a *tate( and are not the best those who ha,e treated the $reatest number o# constitutions $ood and bad9 and are not the best jud$es in li%e manner those who are ac-uainted with all sorts o# moral natures9

Aes( I said( I too would ha,e $ood jud$es and $ood physicians) But do you %now whom I thin% $ood9 2ill you tell me9 I will( i# I can) 'et me howe,er note that in the same -uestion you join two thin$s which are not the same) How so9 he as%ed) 2hy( I said( you join physicians and jud$es) Now the most s%il#ul physicians are those who( #rom their youth upwards( ha,e combined with the %nowled$e o# their art the $reatest e&perience o# disease+ they had better not be robust in health( and should ha,e had all manner o# diseases in their own persons) @or the body( as I concei,e( is not the instrument with which they cure the body+ in that case we could not allow them e,er to be or to ha,e been sic%ly+ but they cure the body with the mind( and the mind which has become and is sic% can cure nothin$) That is ,ery true( he said) But with the jud$e it is otherwise+ since he $o,erns mind by mind+ he ou$ht not there#ore to ha,e been trained amon$ ,icious minds( and to ha,e associated with them #rom youth upwards( and to ha,e $one throu$h the whole calendar o# crime( only in order that he may -uic%ly in#er the crimes o# others as he mi$ht their bodily diseases #rom his own sel#-consciousness+ the honourable mind which is to #orm a healthy jud$ment should ha,e had no e&perience or contamination o# e,il habits when youn$) 1nd this is the reason why in youth $ood men o#ten appear to be simple( and are easily practised upon by the dishonest( because they ha,e no e&amples o# what e,il is in their own souls) Aes( he said( they are #ar too apt to be decei,ed) There#ore( I said( the jud$e should not be youn$+ he should ha,e learned to %now e,il( not #rom his own soul( but #rom late and lon$ obser,ation o# the nature o# e,il in othersD %nowled$e should be his $uide( not personal e&perience) Aes( he said( that is the ideal o# a jud$e) Aes( I replied( and he will be a $ood man 5which is my answer to your -uestion7+ #or he is $ood who has a $ood soul) But the cunnin$ and suspicious nature o# which we spo%e( --he who has committed many crimes( and #ancies himsel# to be a master in wic%edness( when he is amon$st his #ellows( is wonder#ul in the precautions which he ta%es( because he jud$es o# them by himsel#D but when he $ets into the company o# men o# ,irtue( who ha,e the e&perience o# a$e( he appears to be a #ool a$ain( owin$ to his unseasonable suspicions+ he cannot reco$nise an honest man( because he has no pattern o# honesty in himsel#+ at the same time( as the bad are more numerous than the $ood( and he meets with them o#tener( he thin%s himsel#( and is by others thou$ht to be( rather wise than #oolish) 3ost true( he said) Then the $ood and wise jud$e whom we are see%in$ is not this man( but the other+ #or ,ice cannot %now ,irtue too( but a ,irtuous nature(

educated by time( will ac-uire a %nowled$e both o# ,irtue and ,iceD the ,irtuous( and not the ,icious( man has wisdom --in my opinion) 1nd in mine also) This is the sort o# medicine( and this is the sort o# law( which you sanction in your *tate) They will minister to better natures( $i,in$ health both o# soul and o# body+ but those who are diseased in their bodies they will lea,e to die( and the corrupt and incurable souls they will put an end to themsel,es) That is clearly the best thin$ both #or the patients and #or the *tate) 1nd thus our youth( ha,in$ been educated only in that simple music which( as we said( inspires temperance( will be reluctant to $o to law) "learly) 1nd the musician( who( %eepin$ to the same trac%( is content to practise the simple $ymnastic( will ha,e nothin$ to do with medicine unless in some e&treme case) That I -uite belie,e) The ,ery e&ercises and tolls which he under$oes are intended to stimulate the spirited element o# his nature( and not to increase his stren$th+ he will not( li%e common athletes( use e&ercise and re$imen to de,elop his muscles) >ery ri$ht( he said) Neither are the two arts o# music and $ymnastic really desi$ned( as is o#ten supposed( the one #or the trainin$ o# the soul( the other #ir the trainin$ o# the body) 2hat then is the real object o# them9 I belie,e( I said( that the teachers o# both ha,e in ,iew chie#ly the impro,ement o# the soul) How can that be9 he as%ed) id you ne,er obser,e( I said( the e##ect on the mind itsel# o# e&clusi,e de,otion to $ymnastic( or the opposite e##ect o# an e&clusi,e de,otion to music9 In what way shown9 he said) The one producin$ a temper o# hardness and #erocity( the other o# so#tness and e##eminacy( I replied) Aes( he said( I am -uite aware that the mere athlete becomes too much o# a sa,a$e( and that the mere musician is melted and so#tened beyond what is $ood #or him) Aet surely( I said( this #erocity only comes #rom spirit( which( i# ri$htly educated( would $i,e coura$e( but( i# too much intensi#ied( is liable to become hard and brutal)

That I -uite thin%) On the other hand the philosopher will ha,e the -uality o# $entleness) 1nd this also( when too much indul$ed( will turn to so#tness( but( i# educated ri$htly( will be $entle and moderate) True) 1nd in our opinion the $uardians ou$ht to ha,e both these -ualities9 1ssuredly) 1nd both should be in harmony9 Beyond -uestion) 1nd the harmonious soul is both temperate and coura$eous9 Aes) 1nd the inharmonious is cowardly and boorish9 >ery true) 1nd( when a man allows music to play upon him and to pour into his soul throu$h the #unnel o# his ears those sweet and so#t and melancholy airs o# which we were just now spea%in$( and his whole li#e is passed in warblin$ and the deli$hts o# son$+ in the #irst sta$e o# the process the passion or spirit which is in him is tempered li%e iron( and made use#ul( instead o# brittle and useless) But( i# he carries on the so#tenin$ and soothin$ process( in the ne&t sta$e he be$ins to melt and waste( until he has wasted away his spirit and cut out the sinews o# his soul+ and he becomes a #eeble warrior) >ery true) I# the element o# spirit is naturally wea% in him the chan$e is speedily accomplished( but i# he ha,e a $ood deal( then the power o# music wea%enin$ the spirit renders him e&citable+ --on the least pro,ocation he #lames up at once( and is speedily e&tin$uished+ instead o# ha,in$ spirit he $rows irritable and passionate and is -uite impracticable) E&actly) 1nd so in $ymnastics( i# a man ta%es ,iolent e&ercise and is a $reat #eeder( and the re,erse o# a $reat student o# music and philosophy( at #irst the hi$h condition o# his body #ills him with pride and spirit( and lie becomes twice the man that he was) "ertainly) 1nd what happens9 i# he do nothin$ else( and holds no con-a ,erse with the 3uses( does not e,en that intelli$ence which there may be in him( ha,in$ no taste o# any sort o# learnin$ or en-uiry or thou$ht or culture( $row #eeble and dull and blind( his mind ne,er wa%in$ up or recei,in$ nourishment( and his senses not bein$ pur$ed o# their mists9 True( he said) 1nd he ends by becomin$ a hater o# philosophy( unci,ili/ed( ne,er usin$ the weapon o# persuasion( --he is li%e a wild beast( all ,iolence and #ierceness( and %nows no other way o# dealin$+ and he li,es in all i$norance and e,il conditions( and has no sense o# propriety and $race)

That is -uite true( he said) 1nd as there are two principles o# human nature( one the spirited and the other the philosophical( some .od( as I should say( has $i,en man%ind two arts answerin$ to them 5and only indirectly to the soul and body7( in order that these two principles 5li%e the strin$s o# an instrument7 may be rela&ed or drawn ti$hter until they are duly harmonised) That appears to be the intention) 1nd he who min$les music with $ymnastic in the #airest proportions( and best attempers them to the soul( may be ri$htly called the true musician and harmonist in a #ar hi$her sense than the tuner o# the strin$s) Aou are -uite ri$ht( *ocrates) 1nd such a presidin$ $enius will be always re-uired in our *tate i# the $o,ernment is to last) Aes( he will be absolutely necessary) *uch( then( are our principles o# nurture and educationD 2here would be the use o# $oin$ into #urther details about the dances o# our citi/ens( or about their huntin$ and coursin$( their $ymnastic and e-uestrian contests9 @or these all #ollow the $eneral principle( and ha,in$ #ound that( we shall ha,e no di##iculty in disco,erin$ them) I dare say that there will be no di##iculty) >ery $ood( I said+ then what is the ne&t -uestion9 3ust we not as% who are to be rulers and who subjects9 "ertainly) There can be no doubt that the elder must rule the youn$er) "learly) 1nd that the best o# these must rule) That is also clear) Now( are not the best husbandmen those who are most de,oted to husbandry9 Aes) 1nd as we are to ha,e the best o# $uardians #or our city( must they not be those who ha,e most the character o# $uardians9 Aes) 1nd to this end they ou$ht to be wise and e##icient( and to ha,e a special care o# the *tate9 True) 1nd a man will be most li%ely to care about that which he lo,es9 To be sure) 1nd he will be most li%ely to lo,e that which he re$ards as ha,in$ the same interests with himsel#( and that o# which the $ood or e,il #ortune is supposed by him at any time most to a##ect his own9

>ery true( he replied) Then there must be a selection) 'et us note amon$ the $uardians those who in their whole li#e show the $reatest ea$erness to do what is #or the $ood o# their country( and the $reatest repu$nance to do what is a$ainst her interests) Those are the ri$ht men) 1nd they will ha,e to be watched at e,ery a$e( in order that we may see whether they preser,e their resolution( and ne,er( under the in#luence either o# #orce or enchantment( #or$et or cast o## their sense o# duty to the *tate) How cast o##9 he said) I will e&plain to you( I replied) 1 resolution may $o out o# a man6s mind either with his will or a$ainst his will+ with his will when he $ets rid o# a #alsehood and learns better( a$ainst his will whene,er he is depri,ed o# a truth) I understand( he said( the willin$ loss o# a resolution+ the meanin$ o# the unwillin$ I ha,e yet to learn) 2hy( I said( do you not see that men are unwillin$ly depri,ed o# $ood( and willin$ly o# e,il9 Is not to ha,e lost the truth an e,il( and to possess the truth a $ood9 and you would a$ree that to concei,e thin$s as they are is to possess the truth9 Aes( he replied+ I a$ree with you in thin%in$ that man%ind are depri,ed o# truth a$ainst their will) 1nd is not this in,oluntary depri,ation caused either by the#t( or #orce( or enchantment9 *till( he replied( I do not understand you) I #ear that I must ha,e been tal%in$ dar%ly( li%e the tra$edians) I only mean that some men are chan$ed by persuasion and that others #or$et+ ar$ument steals away the hearts o# one class( and time o# the other+ and this I call the#t) Now you understand me9 Aes) Those a$ain who are #orced are those whom the ,iolence o# some pain or $rie# compels to chan$e their opinion) I understand( he said( and you are -uite ri$ht) 1nd you would also ac%nowled$e that the enchanted are those who chan$e their minds either under the so#ter in#luence o# pleasure( or the sterner in#luence o# #ear9 Aes( he said+ e,erythin$ that decei,es may be said to enchant) There#ore( as I was just now sayin$( we must en-uire who are the best $uardians o# their own con,iction that what they thin% the interest o# the *tate is to be the rule o# their li,es) 2e must watch them

#rom their youth upwards( and ma%e them per#orm actions in which they are most li%ely to #or$et or to be decei,ed( and he who remembers and is not decei,ed is to be selected( and he who #alls in the trial is to be rejected) That will be the way9 Aes) 1nd there should also be toils and pains and con#licts prescribed #or them( in which they will be made to $i,e #urther proo# o# the same -ualities) >ery ri$ht( he replied) 1nd then( I said( we must try them with enchantments that is the third sort o# test --and see what will be their beha,iourD li%e those who ta%e colts amid noise and tumult to see i# they are o# a timid nature( so must we ta%e our youth amid terrors o# some %ind( and a$ain pass them into pleasures( and pro,e them more thorou$hly than $old is pro,ed in the #urnace( that we may disco,er whether they are armed a$ainst all enchantments( and o# a noble bearin$ always( $ood $uardians o# themsel,es and o# the music which they ha,e learned( and retainin$ under all circumstances a rhythmical and harmonious nature( such as will be most ser,iceable to the indi,idual and to the *tate) 1nd he who at e,ery a$e( as boy and youth and in mature li#e( has come out o# the trial ,ictorious and pure( shall be appointed a ruler and $uardian o# the *tate+ he shall be honoured in li#e and death( and shall recei,e sepulture and other memorials o# honour( the $reatest that we ha,e to $i,e) But him who #ails( we must reject) I am inclined to thin% that this is the sort o# way in which our rulers and $uardians should be chosen and appointed) I spea% $enerally( and not with any pretension to e&actness) 1nd( spea%in$ $enerally( I a$ree with you( he said) 1nd perhaps the word 6$uardian6 in the #ullest sense ou$ht to be applied to this hi$her class only who preser,e us a$ainst #orei$n enemies and maintain peace amon$ our citi/ens at home( that the one may not ha,e the will( or the others the power( to harm us) The youn$ men whom we be#ore called $uardians may be more properly desi$nated au&iliaries and supporters o# the principles o# the rulers) I a$ree with you( he said) How then may we de,ise one o# those need#ul #alsehoods o# which we lately spo%e --just one royal lie which may decei,e the rulers( i# that be possible( and at any rate the rest o# the city9 2hat sort o# lie9 he said) Nothin$ new( I replied+ only an old Phoenician tale o# what has o#ten occurred be#ore now in other places( 5as the poets say( and ha,e made the world belie,e(7 thou$h not in our time( and I do not %now whether such an e,ent could e,er happen a$ain( or could now e,en be made probable( i# it did) How your words seem to hesitate on your lips4 Aou will not wonder( I replied( at my hesitation when you ha,e heard)

*pea%( he said( and #ear not) 2ell then( I will spea%( althou$h I really %now not how to loo% you in the #ace( or in what words to utter the audacious #iction( which I propose to communicate $radually( #irst to the rulers( then to the soldiers( and lastly to the people) They are to be told that their youth was a dream( and the education and trainin$ which they recei,ed #rom us( an appearance only+ in reality durin$ all that time they were bein$ #ormed and #ed in the womb o# the earth( where they themsel,es and their arms and appurtenances were manu#actured+ when they were completed( the earth( their mother( sent them up+ and so( their country bein$ their mother and also their nurse( they are bound to ad,ise #or her $ood( and to de#end her a$ainst attac%s( and her citi/ens they are to re$ard as children o# the earth and their own brothers) Aou had $ood reason( he said( to be ashamed o# the lie which you were $oin$ to tell) True( I replied( but there is more comin$+ I ha,e only told you hal#) "iti/ens( we shall say to them in our tale( you are brothers( yet .od has #ramed you di##erently) *ome o# you ha,e the power o# command( and in the composition o# these he has min$led $old( where#ore also they ha,e the $reatest honour+ others he has made o# sil,er( to be au&illaries+ others a$ain who are to be husbandmen and cra#tsmen he has composed o# brass and iron+ and the species will $enerally be preser,ed in the children) But as all are o# the same ori$inal stoc%( a $olden parent will sometimes ha,e a sil,er son( or a sil,er parent a $olden son) 1nd .od proclaims as a #irst principle to the rulers( and abo,e all else( that there is nothin$ which should so an&iously $uard( or o# which they are to be such $ood $uardians( as o# the purity o# the race) They should obser,e what elements min$le in their o## sprin$+ #or i# the son o# a $olden or sil,er parent has an admi&ture o# brass and iron( then nature orders a transposition o# ran%s( and the eye o# the ruler must not be piti#ul towards the child because he has to descend in the scale and become a husbandman or artisan( just as there may be sons o# artisans who ha,in$ an admi&ture o# $old or sil,er in them are raised to honour( and become $uardians or au&iliaries) @or an oracle says that when a man o# brass or iron $uards the *tate( it will be destroyed) *uch is the tale+ is there any possibility o# ma%in$ our citi/ens belie,e in it9 Not in the present $eneration( he replied+ there is no way o# accomplishin$ this+ but their sons may be made to belie,e in the tale( and their sons6 sons( and posterity a#ter them) I see the di##iculty( I replied+ yet the #osterin$ o# such a belie# will ma%e them care more #or the city and #or one another) Enou$h( howe,er( o# the #iction( which may now #ly abroad upon the win$s o# rumour( while we arm our earth-born heroes( and lead them #orth under the command o# their rulers) 'et them loo% round and select a spot whence they can best suppress insurrection( i# any pro,e re#ractory within( and also de#end themsel,es a$ainst enemies( who li%e wol,es may come down on the #old #rom without+ there let them encamp( and when they ha,e encamped( let them sacri#ice to the proper .ods and

prepare their dwellin$s) Just so( he said) 1nd their dwellin$s must be such as will shield them a$ainst the cold o# winter and the heat o# summer) I suppose that you mean houses( he replied) Aes( I said+ but they must be the houses o# soldiers( and not o# shop-%eepers) 2hat is the di##erence9 he said) That I will endea,our to e&plain( I replied) To %eep watchdo$s( who( #rom want o# discipline or hun$er( or some e,il habit( or e,il habit or other( would turn upon the sheep and worry them( and beha,e not li%e do$s but wol,es( would be a #oul and monstrous thin$ in a shepherd9 Truly monstrous( he said) 1nd there#ore e,ery care must be ta%en that our au&iliaries( bein$ stron$er than our citi/ens( may not $row to be too much #or them and become sa,a$e tyrants instead o# #riends and allies9 Aes( $reat care should be ta%en) 1nd would not a really $ood education #urnish the best sa#e$uard9 But they are well-educated already( he replied) I cannot be so con#ident( my dear .laucon( I said+ I am much certain that they ou$ht to be( and that true education( whate,er that may be( will ha,e the $reatest tendency to ci,ili/e and humani/e them in their relations to one another( and to those who are under their protection) >ery true( he replied) 1nd not only their education( but their habitations( and all that belon$s to them( should be such as will neither impair their ,irtue as $uardians( nor tempt them to prey upon the other citi/ens) 1ny man o# sense must ac%nowled$e that) He must) Then let us consider what will be their way o# li#e( i# they are to reali/e our idea o# them) In the #irst place( none o# them should ha,e any property o# his own beyond what is absolutely necessary+ neither should they ha,e a pri,ate house or store closed a$ainst any one who has a mind to enter+ their pro,isions should be only such as are re-uired by trained warriors( who are men o# temperance and coura$e+ they should a$ree to recei,e #rom the citi/ens a #i&ed rate o# pay( enou$h to meet the e&penses o# the year and no more+ and they will $o and li,e to$ether li%e soldiers in a camp) .old and sil,er we will tell them that they ha,e #rom .od+ the di,iner metal is within them( and they ha,e there#ore no need o# the dross which is current amon$ men( and ou$ht not to pollute the di,ine by any such earthly admi&ture+ #or that commoner metal has been the source o# many unholy deeds( but their own is unde#iled) 1nd they alone o# all the citi/ens may not touch or handle sil,er or $old( or be under the same roo# with them( or wear them( or drin% #rom them) 1nd this will be their

sal,ation( and they will be the sa,iours o# the *tate) But should they e,er ac-uire homes or lands or moneys o# their own( they will become house%eepers and husbandmen instead o# $uardians( enemies and tyrants instead o# allies o# the other citi/ens+ hatin$ and bein$ hated( plottin$ and bein$ plotted a$ainst( they will pass their whole li#e in much $reater terror o# internal than o# e&ternal enemies( and the hour o# ruin( both to themsel,es and to the rest o# the *tate( will be at hand) @or all which reasons may we not say that thus shall our *tate be ordered( and that these shall be the re$ulations appointed by us #or $uardians concernin$ their houses and all other matters9 other Aes( said .laucon) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG I> 1deimantus - *O"R1TE* Here 1deimantus interposed a -uestionD How would you answer( *ocrates( said he( i# a person were to say that you are ma%in$ these people miserable( and that they are the cause o# their own unhappiness+ the city in #act belon$s to them( but they are none the better #or it+ whereas other men ac-uire lands( and build lar$e and handsome houses( and ha,e e,erythin$ handsome about them( o##erin$ sacri#ices to the $ods on their own account( and practisin$ hospitality+ moreo,er( as you were sayin$ just now( they ha,e $old and sil,er( and all that is usual amon$ the #a,ourites o# #ortune+ but our poor citi/ens are no better than mercenaries who are -uartered in the city and are always mountin$ $uard9 Aes( I said+ and you may add that they are only #ed( and not paid in addition to their #ood( li%e other men+ and there#ore they cannot( i# they would( ta%e a journey o# pleasure+ they ha,e no money to spend on a mistress or any other lu&urious #ancy( which( as the world $oes( is thou$ht to be happiness+ and many other accusations o# the same nature mi$ht be added) But( said he( let us suppose all this to be included in the char$e) Aou mean to as%( I said( what will be our answer9 Aes) I# we proceed alon$ the old path( my belie#( I said( is that we shall #ind the answer) 1nd our answer will be that( e,en as they are( our $uardians may ,ery li%ely be the happiest o# men+ but that our aim in #oundin$ the *tate was not the disproportionate happiness o# any one class( but the $reatest happiness o# the whole+ we thou$ht that in a *tate which is ordered with a ,iew to the $ood o# the whole we should be most li%ely to #ind Justice( and in the ill-ordered *tate injusticeD and( ha,in$ #ound them( we mi$ht then decide which o# the two is the happier) 1t present( I ta%e it( we are #ashionin$ the happy *tate( not piecemeal( or with a ,iew o# ma%in$ a #ew happy citi/ens(

but as a whole+ and by-and-by we will proceed to ,iew the opposite %ind o# *tate) *uppose that we were paintin$ a statue( and some one came up to us and said( 2hy do you not put the most beauti#ul colours on the most beauti#ul parts o# the body --the eyes ou$ht to be purple( but you ha,e made them blac% --to him we mi$ht #airly answer( *ir( you would not surely ha,e us beauti#y the eyes to such a de$ree that they are no lon$er eyes+ consider rather whether( by $i,in$ this and the other #eatures their due proportion( we ma%e the whole beauti#ul) 1nd so I say to you( do not compel us to assi$n to the $uardians a sort o# happiness which will ma%e them anythin$ but $uardians+ #or we too can clothe our husbandmen in royal apparel( and set crowns o# $old on their heads( and bid them till the $round as much as they li%e( and no more) Our potters also mi$ht be allowed to repose on couches( and #east by the #ireside( passin$ round the winecup( while their wheel is con,eniently at hand( and wor%in$ at pottery only as much as they li%e+ in this way we mi$ht ma%e e,ery class happy-and then( as you ima$ine( the whole *tate would be happy) But do not put this idea into our heads+ #or( i# we listen to you( the husbandman will be no lon$er a husbandman( the potter will cease to be a potter( and no one will ha,e the character o# any distinct class in the *tate) Now this is not o# much conse-uence where the corruption o# society( and pretension to be what you are not( is con#ined to cobblers+ but when the $uardians o# the laws and o# the $o,ernment are only seemin$ly and not real $uardians( then see how they turn the *tate upside down+ and on the other hand they alone ha,e the power o# $i,in$ order and happiness to the *tate) 2e mean our $uardians to be true sa,iours and not the destroyers o# the *tate( whereas our opponent is thin%in$ o# peasants at a #esti,al( who are enjoyin$ a li#e o# re,elry( not o# citi/ens who are doin$ their duty to the *tate) But( i# so( we mean di##erent thin$s( and he is spea%in$ o# somethin$ which is not a *tate) 1nd there#ore we must consider whether in appointin$ our $uardians we would loo% to their $reatest happiness indi,idually( or whether this principle o# happiness does not rather reside in the *tate as a whole) But the latter be the truth( then the $uardians and au&illaries( and all others e-ually with them( must be compelled or induced to do their own wor% in the best way) 1nd thus the whole *tate will $row up in a noble order( and the se,eral classes will recei,e the proportion o# happiness which nature assi$ns to them) I thin% that you are -uite ri$ht) I wonder whether you will a$ree with another remar% which occurs to me) 2hat may that be9 There seem to be two causes o# the deterioration o# the arts) 2hat are they9 2ealth( I said( and po,erty) How do they act9 The process is as #ollowsD 2hen a potter becomes rich( will he( thin% you( any lon$er ta%e the same pains with his art9 "ertainly not)

He will $row more and more indolent and careless9 >ery true) 1nd the result will be that he becomes a worse potter9 Aes+ he $reatly deteriorates) But( on the other hand( i# he has no money( and cannot pro,ide himsel# tools or instruments( he will not wor% e-ually well himsel#( nor will he teach his sons or apprentices to wor% e-ually well) "ertainly not) Then( under the in#luence either o# po,erty or o# wealth( wor%men and their wor% are e-ually liable to de$enerate9 That is e,ident) Here( then( is a disco,ery o# new e,ils( I said( a$ainst which the $uardians will ha,e to watch( or they will creep into the city unobser,ed) 2hat e,ils9 2ealth( I said( and po,erty+ the one is the parent o# lu&ury and indolence( and the other o# meanness and ,iciousness( and both o# discontent) That is ,ery true( he replied+ but still I should li%e to %now( *ocrates( how our city will be able to $o to war( especially a$ainst an enemy who is rich and power#ul( i# depri,ed o# the sinews o# war) There would certainly be a di##iculty( I replied( in $oin$ to war with one such enemy+ but there is no di##iculty where there are two o# them) How so9 he as%ed) In the #irst place( I said( i# we ha,e to #i$ht( our side will be trained warriors #i$htin$ a$ainst an army o# rich men) That is true( he said) 1nd do you not suppose( 1deimantus( that a sin$le bo&er who was per#ect in his art would easily be a match #or two stout and well-to-do $entlemen who were not bo&ers9 Hardly( i# they came upon him at once) 2hat( not( I said( i# he were able to run away and then turn and stri%e at the one who #irst came up9 1nd supposin$ he were to do this se,eral times under the heat o# a scorchin$ sun( mi$ht he not( bein$ an e&pert( o,erturn more than one stout persona$e9 "ertainly( he said( there would be nothin$ wonder#ul in that) 1nd yet rich men probably ha,e a $reater superiority in the science and practice o# bo&in$ than they ha,e in military -ualities) 'i%ely enou$h) Then we may assume that our athletes will be able to #i$ht with two or three times their own number9 I a$ree with you( #or I thin% you ri$ht)

1nd suppose that( be#ore en$a$in$( our citi/ens send an embassy to one o# the two cities( tellin$ them what is the truthD *il,er and $old we neither ha,e nor are permitted to ha,e( but you may+ do you there#ore come and help us in war( o# and ta%e the spoils o# the other cityD 2ho( on hearin$ these words( would choose to #i$ht a$ainst lean wiry do$s( rather th than( with the do$s on their side( a$ainst #at and tender sheep9 That is not li%ely+ and yet there mi$ht be a dan$er to the poor *tate i# the wealth o# many *tates were to be $athered into one) But how simple o# you to use the term *tate at all o# any but our own4 2hy so9 Aou ou$ht to spea% o# other *tates in the plural number+ not one o# them is a city( but many cities( as they say in the $ame) @or indeed any city( howe,er small( is in #act di,ided into two( one the city o# the poor( the other o# the rich+ these are at war with one another+ and in either there are many smaller di,isions( and you would be alto$ether beside the mar% i# you treated them all as a sin$le *tate) But i# you deal with them as many( and $i,e the wealth or power or persons o# the one to the others( you will always ha,e a $reat many #riends and not many enemies) 1nd your *tate( while the wise order which has now been prescribed continues to pre,ail in her( will be the $reatest o# *tates( I do not mean to say in reputation or appearance( but in deed and truth( thou$h she number not more than a thousand de#enders) 1 sin$le *tate which is her e-ual you will hardly #ind( either amon$ Hellenes or barbarians( thou$h many that appear to be as $reat and many times $reater) That is most true( he said) 1nd what( I said( will be the best limit #or our rulers to #i& when they are considerin$ the si/e o# the *tate and the amount o# territory which they are to include( and beyond which they will not $o9 2hat limit would you propose9 I would allow the *tate to increase so #ar as is consistent with unity+ that( I thin%( is the proper limit) >ery $ood( he said) Here then( I said( is another order which will ha,e to be con,eyed to our $uardiansD 'et our city be accounted neither lar$e nor small( but one and sel#-su##icin$) 1nd surely( said he( this is not a ,ery se,ere order which we impose upon them) 1nd the other( said I( o# which we were spea%in$ be#ore is li$hter still( -I mean the duty o# de$radin$ the o##sprin$ o# the $uardians when in#erior( and o# ele,atin$ into the ran% o# $uardians the o##sprin$ o# the lower classes( when naturally superior) The intention was( that( in the case o# the citi/ens $enerally( each indi,idual should

be put to the use #or which nature which nature intended him( one to one wor%( and then e,ery man would do his own business( and be one and not many+ and so the whole city would be one and not many) Aes( he said+ that is not so di##icult) The re$ulations which we are prescribin$( my $ood 1deimantus( are not( as mi$ht be supposed( a number o# $reat principles( but tri#les all( i# care be ta%en( as the sayin$ is( o# the one $reat thin$( --a thin$( howe,er( which I would rather call( not $reat( but su##icient #or our purpose) 2hat may that be9 he as%ed) Education( I said( and nurtureD I# our citi/ens are well educated( and $row into sensible men( they will easily see their way throu$h all these( as well as other matters which I omit+ such( #or e&ample( as marria$e( the possession o# women and the procreation o# children( which will all #ollow the $eneral principle that #riends ha,e all thin$s in common( as the pro,erb says) That will be the best way o# settlin$ them) 1lso( I said( the *tate( i# once started well( mo,es with accumulatin$ #orce li%e a wheel) @or $ood nurture and education implant $ood constitutions( and these $ood constitutions ta%in$ root in a $ood education impro,e more and more( and this impro,ement a##ects the breed in man as in other animals) >ery possibly( he said) Then to sum upD This is the point to which( abo,e all( the attention o# our rulers should be directed( --that music and $ymnastic be preser,ed in their ori$inal #orm( and no inno,ation made) They must do their utmost to maintain them intact) 1nd when any one says that man%ind most re$ard The newest son$ which the sin$ers ha,e( they will be a#raid that he may be praisin$( not new son$s( but a new %ind o# son$+ and this ou$ht not to be praised( or concei,ed to be the meanin$ o# the poet+ #or any musical inno,ation is #ull o# dan$er to the whole *tate( and ou$ht to be prohibited) *o amon tells me( and I can -uite belie,e him+-he says that when modes o# music chan$e( o# the *tate always chan$e with them) Aes( said 1deimantus+ and you may add my su##ra$e to own) amon6s and your

Then( I said( our $uardians must lay the #oundations o# their #ortress in music9 Aes( he said+ the lawlessness o# which you spea% too easily steals in) Aes( I replied( in the #orm o# amusement+ and at #irst si$ht it appears harmless)

2hy( yes( he said( and there is no harm+ were it not that little by little this spirit o# licence( #indin$ a home( imperceptibly penetrates into manners and customs+ whence( issuin$ with $reater #orce( it in,ades contracts between man and man( and #rom contracts $oes on to laws and constitutions( in utter rec%lessness( endin$ at last( *ocrates( by an o,erthrow o# all ri$hts( pri,ate as well as public) Is that true9 I said) That is my belie#( he replied) Then( as I was sayin$( our youth should be trained #rom the #irst in a stricter system( #or i# amusements become lawless( and the youths themsel,es become lawless( they can ne,er $row up into well-conducted and ,irtuous citi/ens) >ery true( he said) 1nd when they ha,e made a $ood be$innin$ in play( and by the help o# music ha,e $ained the habit o# $ood order( then this habit o# order( in a manner how unli%e the lawless play o# the others4 will accompany them in all their actions and be a principle o# $rowth to them( and i# there be any #allen places a principle in the *tate will raise them up a$ain) >ery true( he said) Thus educated( they will in,ent #or themsel,es any lesser rules which their predecessors ha,e alto$ether ne$lected) 2hat do you mean9 I mean such thin$s as theseD --when the youn$ are to be silent be#ore their elders+ how they are to show respect to them by standin$ and ma%in$ them sit+ what honour is due to parents+ what $arments or shoes are to be worn+ the mode o# dressin$ the hair+ deportment and manners in $eneral) Aou would a$ree with me9 Aes) But there is( I thin%( small wisdom in le$islatin$ about such matters( --I doubt i# it is e,er done+ nor are any precise written enactments about them li%ely to be lastin$) Impossible) It would seem( 1deimantus( that the direction in which education starts a man( will determine his #uture li#e) oes not li%e always attract li%e9 To be sure) !ntil some one rare and $rand result is reached which may be $ood( and may be the re,erse o# $ood9 That is not to be denied) 1nd #or this reason( I said( I shall not attempt to le$islate #urther about them) Naturally enou$h( he replied) 2ell( and about the business o# the a$ora( dealin$s and the ordinary

dealin$s between man and man( or a$ain about a$reements with the commencement with artisans+ about insult and injury( o# the commencement o# actions( and the appointment o# juries( what would you say9 there may also arise -uestions about any impositions and e&tractions o# mar%et and harbour dues which may be re-uired( and in $eneral about the re$ulations o# mar%ets( police( harbours( and the li%e) But( oh hea,ens4 shall we condescend to le$islate on any o# these particulars9 I thin%( he said( that there is no need to impose laws about them on $ood men+ what re$ulations are necessary they will #ind out soon enou$h #or themsel,es) Aes( I said( my #riend( i# .od will only preser,e to them the laws which we ha,e $i,en them) 1nd without di,ine help( said 1deimantus( they will $o on #or e,er ma%in$ and mendin$ their laws and their li,es in the hope o# attainin$ per#ection) Aou would compare them( I said( to those in,alids who( ha,in$ no sel#-restraint( will not lea,e o## their habits o# intemperance9 E&actly) Aes( I said+ and what a deli$ht#ul li#e they lead4 they are always doctorin$ and increasin$ and complicatin$ their disorders( and always #ancyin$ that they will be cured by any nostrum which anybody ad,ises them to try) *uch cases are ,ery common( he said( with in,alids o# this sort) Aes( I replied+ and the charmin$ thin$ is that they deem him their worst enemy who tells them the truth( which is simply that( unless they $i,e up eatin$ and drin%in$ and wenchin$ and idlin$( neither dru$ nor cautery nor spell nor amulet nor any other remedy will a,ail) "harmin$4 he replied) I see nothin$ charmin$ in $oin$ into a passion with a man who tells you what is ri$ht) These $entlemen( I said( do not seem to be in your $ood $races) 1ssuredly not) Nor would you praise the beha,iour o# *tates which act li%e the men whom I was just now describin$) @or are there not ill-ordered *tates in which the citi/ens are #orbidden under pain o# death to alter the constitution+ and yet he who most sweetly courts those who li,e under this re$ime and indul$es them and #awns upon them and is s%il#ul in anticipatin$ and $rati#yin$ their humours is held to be a $reat and $ood statesman --do not these *tates resemble the persons whom I was describin$9 Aes( he said+ the *tates are as bad as the men+ and I am ,ery #ar #rom praisin$ them)

But do you not admire( I said( the coolness and de&terity o# these ready ministers o# political corruption9 Aes( he said( I do+ but not o# all o# them( #or there are some whom the applause o# the multitude has deluded into the belie# that they are really statesmen( and these are not much to be admired) 2hat do you mean9 I said+ you should ha,e more #eelin$ #or them) 2hen a man cannot measure( and a $reat many others who cannot measure declare that he is #our cubits hi$h( can he help belie,in$ what they say9 Nay( he said( certainly not in that case) 2ell( then( do not be an$ry with them+ #or are they not as $ood as a play( tryin$ their hand at paltry re#orms such as I was describin$+ they are always #ancyin$ that by le$islation they will ma%e an end o# #rauds in contracts( and the other rascalities which I was mentionin$( not %nowin$ that they are in reality cuttin$ o## the heads o# a hydra9 Aes( he said+ that is just what they are doin$) I concei,e( I said( that the true le$islator will not trouble himsel# with this class o# enactments whether concernin$ laws or the constitution either in an ill-ordered or in a well-ordered *tate+ #or in the #ormer they are -uite useless( and in the latter there will be no di##iculty in de,isin$ them+ and many o# them will naturally #low out o# our pre,ious re$ulations) 2hat( then( he said( is still remainin$ to us o# the wor% o# le$islation9 Nothin$ to us( I replied+ but to 1pollo( the .od o# elphi( there remains the orderin$ o# the $reatest and noblest and chie#est thin$s o# all) 2hich are they9 he said) The institution o# temples and sacri#ices( and the entire ser,ice o# $ods( demi$ods( and heroes+ also the orderin$ o# the repositories o# the dead( and the rites which ha,e to be obser,ed by him who would propitiate the inhabitants o# the world below) These are matters o# which we are i$norant oursel,es( and as #ounders o# a city we should be unwise in trustin$ them to any interpreter but our ancestral deity) He is the $od who sits in the center( on the na,el o# the earth( and he is the interpreter o# reli$ion to all man%ind) Aou are ri$ht( and we will do as you propose) But where( amid all this( is justice9 son o# 1riston( tell me where) Now that our city has been made habitable( li$ht a candle and search( and $et your brother and Polemarchus and the rest o# our #riends to help( and let us see where in it we can disco,er justice and where injustice( and in what they di##er #rom one another( and which o# them the man who would be happy should ha,e #or his portion( whether seen or unseen by $ods and men) *ocrates - .'1!"ON

Nonsense( said .lauconD did you not promise to search yoursel#( sayin$ that #or you not to help justice in her need would be an impiety9 I do not deny that I said so( and as you remind me( I will be as $ood as my word+ but you must join) 2e will( he replied) 2ell( then( I hope to ma%e the disco,ery in this wayD I mean to be$in with the assumption that our *tate( i# ri$htly ordered( is per#ect) That is most certain) 1nd bein$ per#ect( is there#ore wise and ,aliant and temperate and just) That is li%ewise clear) 1nd whiche,er o# these -ualities we #ind in the *tate( the one which is not #ound will be the residue9 >ery $ood) I# there were #our thin$s( and we were searchin$ #or one o# them( where,er it mi$ht be( the one sou$ht #or mi$ht be %nown to us #rom the #irst( and there would be no #urther trouble+ or we mi$ht %now the other three #irst( and then the #ourth would clearly be the one le#t) >ery true( he said) 1nd is not a similar method to be pursued about the ,irtues( which are also #our in number9 "learly) @irst amon$ the ,irtues #ound in the *tate( wisdom comes into ,iew( and in this I detect a certain peculiarity) 2hat is that9 The *tate which we ha,e been describin$ is said to be wise as bein$ $ood in counsel9 >ery true) 1nd $ood counsel is clearly a %ind o# %nowled$e( #or not by i$norance( but by %nowled$e( do men counsel well9 "learly) 1nd the %inds o# %nowled$e in a *tate are many and di,erse9 O# course) There is the %nowled$e o# the carpenter+ but is that the sort o# %nowled$e which $i,es a city the title o# wise and $ood in counsel9 "ertainly not+ that would only $i,e a city the reputation o# s%ill in carpenterin$) Then a city is not to be called wise because possessin$ a %nowled$e

which counsels #or the best about wooden implements9 "ertainly not) Nor by reason o# a %nowled$e which ad,ises about bra/en pots( I said( nor as possessin$ any other similar %nowled$e9 Not by reason o# any o# them( he said) Nor yet by reason o# a %nowled$e which culti,ates the earth+ that would $i,e the city the name o# a$ricultural9 Aes) 2ell( I said( and is there any %nowled$e in our recently #ounded *tate amon$ any o# the citi/ens which ad,ises( not about any particular thin$ in the *tate( but about the whole( and considers how a *tate can best deal with itsel# and with other *tates9 There certainly is) 1nd what is %nowled$e( and amon$ whom is it #ound9 I as%ed) It is the %nowled$e o# the $uardians( he replied( and #ound amon$ those whom we were just now describin$ as per#ect $uardians) 1nd what is the name which the city deri,es #rom the possession o# this sort o# %nowled$e9 The name o# $ood in counsel and truly wise) 1nd will there be in our city more o# these true $uardians or more smiths9 The smiths( he replied( will be #ar more numerous) 2ill not the $uardians be the smallest o# all the classes who recei,e a name #rom the pro#ession o# some %ind o# %nowled$e9 3uch the smallest) 1nd so by reason o# the smallest part or class( and o# the %nowled$e which resides in this presidin$ and rulin$ part o# itsel#( the whole *tate( bein$ thus constituted accordin$ to nature( will be wise+ and this( which has the only %nowled$e worthy to be called wisdom( has been ordained by nature to be o# all classes the least) 3ost true) Thus( then( I said( the nature and place in the *tate o# one o# the #our ,irtues has somehow or other been disco,ered) 1nd( in my humble opinion( ,ery satis#actorily disco,ered( he replied) 1$ain( I said( there is no di##iculty in seein$ the nature o# coura$e+ and in what part that -uality resides which $i,es the name o# coura$eous to the *tate) How do you mean9 2hy( I said( e,ery one who calls any *tate coura$eous or cowardly( will be thin%in$ o# the part which #i$hts and $oes out to war on the

*tate6s behal#) No one( he replied( would e,er thin% o# any other) "ertainly not) The rest o# the citi/ens may be coura$eous or may be cowardly but their coura$e or cowardice will not( as I concei,e( ha,e the e##ect o# ma%in$ the city either the one or the other) The city will be coura$eous in ,irtue o# a portion o# hersel# which preser,es under all circumstances that opinion about the nature o# thin$s to be #eared and not to be #eared in which our le$islator educated them+ and this is what you term coura$e) I should li%e to hear what you are sayin$ once more( #or I do not thin% that I per#ectly understand you) I mean that coura$e is a %ind o# sal,ation) *al,ation o# what9 O# the opinion respectin$ thin$s to be #eared( what they are and o# what nature( which the law implants throu$h education+ and I mean by the words 6under all circumstances6 to intimate that in pleasure or in pain( or under the in#luence o# desire or #ear( a man preser,es( and does not lose this opinion) *hall I $i,e you an illustration9 I# you please) Aou %now( I said( that dyers( when they want to dye wool #or ma%in$ the true sea-purple( be$in by selectin$ their white colour #irst+ this they prepare and dress with much care and pains( in order that the white $round may ta%e the purple hue in #ull per#ection) The dyein$ then proceeds+ and whate,er is dyed in this manner becomes a #ast colour( and no washin$ either with lyes or without them can ta%e away the bloom) But( when the $round has not been duly prepared( you will ha,e noticed how poor is the loo% either o# purple or o# any other colour) Aes( he said+ I %now that they ha,e a washed-out and ridiculous appearance) Then now( I said( you will understand what our object was in selectin$ our soldiers( and educatin$ them in music and $ymnastic+ we were contri,in$ in#luences which would prepare them to ta%e the dye o# the laws in per#ection( and the colour o# their opinion about dan$ers and o# e,ery other opinion was to be indelibly #i&ed by their nurture and trainin$( not to be washed away by such potent lyes as pleasure --mi$htier a$ent #ar in washin$ the soul than any soda or lye+ or by sorrow( #ear( and desire( the mi$htiest o# all other sol,ents) 1nd this sort o# uni,ersal sa,in$ power o# true opinion in con#ormity with law about real and #alse dan$ers I call and maintain to be coura$e( unless you disa$ree) But I a$ree( he replied+ #or I suppose that you mean to e&clude mere uninstructed coura$e( such as that o# a wild beast or o# a sla,e --this( in your opinion( is not the coura$e which the law ordains( and ou$ht to ha,e another name)

3ost certainly) Then I may in#er coura$e to be such as you describe9 2hy( yes( said I( you may( and i# you add the words 6o# a citi/en(6 you will not be #ar wron$+ --herea#ter( i# you li%e( we will carry the e&amination #urther( but at present we are we w see%in$ not #or coura$e but justice+ and #or the purpose o# our en-uiry we ha,e said enou$h) Aou are ri$ht( he replied) Two ,irtues remain to be disco,ered in the *tate-#irst temperance( and then justice which is the end o# our search) >ery true) Now( can we #ind justice without troublin$ oursel,es about temperance9 I do not %now how that can be accomplished( he said( nor do I desire that justice should be brou$ht to li$ht and temperance lost si$ht o#+ and there#ore I wish that you would do me the #a,our o# considerin$ temperance #irst) "ertainly( I replied( I should not be justi#ied in re#usin$ your re-uest) Then consider( he said) Aes( I replied+ I will+ and as #ar as I can at present see( the ,irtue o# temperance has more o# the nature o# harmony and symphony than the precedin$) How so9 he as%ed) Temperance( I replied( is the orderin$ or controllin$ o# certain pleasures and desires+ this is curiously enou$h implied in the sayin$ o# 6a man bein$ his own master6 and other traces o# the same notion may be #ound in lan$ua$e) No doubt( he said) There is somethin$ ridiculous in the e&pression 6master o# himsel#6+ #or the master is also the ser,ant and the ser,ant the master+ and in all these modes o# spea%in$ the same person is denoted) "ertainly) The meanin$ is( I belie,e( that in the human soul there is a better and also a worse principle+ and when the better has the worse under control( then a man is said to be master o# himsel#+ and this is a term o# praiseD but when( owin$ to e,il education or association( the better principle( which is also the smaller( is o,erwhelmed by the $reater mass o# the worse --in this case he is blamed and is called the sla,e o# sel# and unprincipled) Aes( there is reason in that) 1nd now( I said( loo% at our newly created *tate( and there you will #ind one o# these two conditions realised+ #or the *tate( as you will ac%nowled$e( may be justly called master o# itsel#( i# the words 6temperance6 and 6sel#-mastery6 truly e&press the rule o# the better part o,er

the worse) Aes( he said( I see that what you say is true) 'et me #urther note that the mani#old and comple& pleasures and desires and pains are $enerally #ound in children and women and ser,ants( and in the #reemen so called who are o# the lowest and more numerous class) "ertainly( he said) 2hereas the simple and moderate desires which #ollow reason( and are under the $uidance o# mind and true opinion( are to be #ound only in a #ew( and those the best born and best educated) >ery true) These two( as you may percei,e( ha,e a place in our *tate+ and the meaner desires o# the are held down by the ,irtuous desires and wisdom o# the #ew) That I percei,e( he said) Then i# there be any city which may be described as master o# its own pleasures and desires( and master o# itsel#( ours may claim such a desi$nation9 "ertainly( he replied) It may also be called temperate( and #or the same reasons9 Aes) 1nd i# there be any *tate in which rulers and subjects will be a$reed as to the -uestion who are to rule( that a$ain will be our *tate9 !ndoubtedly) 1nd the citi/ens bein$ thus a$reed amon$ themsel,es( in which class will temperance be #ound --in the rulers or in the subjects9 In both( as I should ima$ine( he replied) o you obser,e that we were not #ar wron$ in our $uess that temperance was a sort o# harmony9 2hy so9 2hy( because temperance is unli%e coura$e and wisdom( each o# which resides in a part only( the one ma%in$ the *tate wise and the other ,aliant+ not so temperance( which e&tends to the whole( and runs throu$h all the notes o# the scale( and produces a harmony o# the wea%er and the stron$er and the middle class( whether you suppose them to be stron$er or wea%er in wisdom or power or numbers or wealth( or anythin$ else) 3ost truly then may we deem temperance to be the a$reement o# the naturally superior and in#erior( as to the ri$ht to rule o# either( both in states and indi,iduals) I entirely a$ree with you) 1nd so( I said( we may consider three out o# the #our ,irtues to ha,e been disco,ered in our *tate) The last o# those -ualities which ma%e a state ,irtuous must be justice( i# we only %new what that was)

The in#erence is ob,ious) The time then has arri,ed( .laucon( when( li%e huntsmen( we should surround the co,er( and loo% sharp that justice does not steal away( and pass out o# si$ht and escape us+ #or beyond a doubt she is somewhere in this countryD watch there#ore and stri,e to catch a si$ht o# her( and i# you see her #irst( let me %now) 2ould that I could4 but you should re$ard me rather as a #ollower who has just eyes enou$h to( see what you show him --that is about as much as I am $ood #or) O##er up a prayer with me and #ollow) I will( but you must show me the way) Here is no path( I said( and the wood is dar% and perple&in$+ still we must push on) 'et us push on) Here I saw somethin$D Halloo4 I said( I be$in to percei,e a trac%( and I belie,e that the -uarry will not escape) .ood news( he said) Truly( I said( we are stupid #ellows) 2hy so9 2hy( my $ood sir( at the be$innin$ o# our en-uiry( a$es a$o( there was justice tumblin$ out at our #eet( and we ne,er saw her+ nothin$ could be more ridiculous) 'i%e people who $o about loo%in$ #or what they ha,e in their hands --that was the way with us --we loo%ed not at what we were see%in$( but at what was #ar o## in the distance+ and there#ore( I suppose( we missed her) 2hat do you mean9 I mean to say that in reality #or a lon$ time past we ha,e been tal%in$ o# justice( and ha,e #ailed to reco$nise her) I $row impatient at the len$th o# your e&ordium) 2ell then( tell me( I said( whether I am ri$ht or notD Aou remember the ori$inal principle which we were always layin$ down at the #oundation o# the *tate( that one man should practise one thin$ only( the thin$ to which his nature was best adapted+ --now justice is this principle or a part o# it) Aes( we o#ten said that one man should do one thin$ only) @urther( we a##irmed that justice was doin$ one6s own business( and not bein$ a busybody+ we said so a$ain and a$ain( and many others ha,e said the same to us) Aes( we said so) Then to do one6s own business in a certain way may be assumed to be justice) "an you tell me whence I deri,e this in#erence9 I cannot( but I should li%e to be told) Because I thin% that this is the only ,irtue which remains in the

*tate when the other ,irtues o# temperance and coura$e and wisdom are abstracted+ and( that this is the ultimate cause and condition o# the e&istence o# all o# them( and while remainin$ in them is also their preser,ati,e+ and we were sayin$ that i# the three were disco,ered by us( justice would be the #ourth or remainin$ one) That #ollows o# necessity) I# we are as%ed to determine which o# these #our -ualities by its presence contributes most to the e&cellence o# the *tate( whether the a$reement o# rulers and subjects( or the preser,ation in the soldiers o# the opinion which the law ordains about the true nature o# dan$ers( or wisdom and watch#ulness in the rulers( or whether this other which I am mentionin$( and which is #ound in children and women( sla,e and #reeman( artisan( ruler( subject( --the -uality( I mean( o# e,ery one doin$ his own wor%( and not bein$ a busybody( would claim the palm --the -uestion is not so easily answered) "ertainly( he replied( there would be a di##iculty in sayin$ which) Then the power o# each indi,idual in the *tate to do his own wor% appears to compete with the other political ,irtues( wisdom( temperance( coura$e) Aes( he said) 1nd the ,irtue which enters into this competition is justice9 E&actly) 'et us loo% at the -uestion #rom another point o# ,iewD 1re not the rulers in a *tate those to whom you would entrust the o##ice o# determinin$ suits at law9 "ertainly) 1nd are suits decided on any other $round but that a man may neither ta%e what is another6s( nor be depri,ed o# what is his own9 Aes+ that is their principle) 2hich is a just principle9 Aes) Then on this ,iew also justice will be admitted to be the ha,in$ and doin$ what is a man6s own( and belon$s to him9 >ery true) Thin%( now( and say whether you a$ree with me or not) *uppose a carpenter to be doin$ the business o# a cobbler( or a cobbler o# a carpenter+ and suppose them to e&chan$e their implements or their duties( or the same person to be doin$ the wor% o# both( or whate,er be the chan$e+ do you thin% that any $reat harm would result to the *tate9 Not much) But when the cobbler or any other man whom nature desi$ned to be a trader( ha,in$ his heart li#ted up by wealth or stren$th or the number o# his #ollowers( or any li%e ad,anta$e( attempts to #orce his way into the class o# warriors( or a warrior into that o# le$islators

and $uardians( #or which he is un#itted( and either to ta%e the implements or the duties o# the other+ or when one man is trader( le$islator( and warrior all in one( then I thin% you will a$ree with me in sayin$ that this interchan$e and this meddlin$ o# one with another is the ruin o# the *tate) 3ost true) *eein$ then( I said( that there are three distinct classes( any meddlin$ o# one with another( or the chan$e o# one into another( is the $reatest harm to the *tate( and may be most justly termed e,il-doin$9 Precisely) 1nd the $reatest de$ree o# e,il-doin$ to one6s own city would be termed by you injustice9 "ertainly) This then is injustice+ and on the other hand when the trader( the au&iliary( and the $uardian each do their own business( that is justice( and will ma%e the city just) I a$ree with you) 2e will not( I said( be o,er-positi,e as yet+ but i#( on trial( this conception o# justice be ,eri#ied in the indi,idual as well as in the *tate( there will be no lon$er any room #or doubt+ i# it be not ,eri#ied( we must ha,e a #resh en-uiry) @irst let us complete the old in,esti$ation( which we be$an( as you remember( under the impression that( i# we could pre,iously e&amine justice on the lar$er scale( there would be less di##iculty in discernin$ her in the indi,idual) That lar$er e&ample appeared to be the *tate( and accordin$ly we constructed as $ood a one as we could( %nowin$ well that in the $ood *tate justice would be #ound) 'et the disco,ery which we made be now applied to the indi,idual --i# they a$ree( we shall be satis#ied+ or( i# there be a di##erence in the indi,idual( we will come bac% to the *tate and ha,e another trial o# the theory) The #riction o# the two when rubbed to$ether may possibly stri%e a li$ht in which justice will shine #orth( and the ,ision which is then re,ealed we will #i& in our souls) That will be in re$ular course+ let us do as you say) I proceeded to as%D 2hen two thin$s( a $reater and less( are called by the same name( are they li%e or unli%e in so #ar as they are called the same9 'i%e( he replied) The just man then( i# we re$ard the idea o# justice only( will be li%e the just *tate9 He will) 1nd a *tate was thou$ht by us to be just when the three classes in the *tate se,erally did their own business+ and also thou$ht to be temperate and ,aliant and wise by reason o# certain other a##ections and -ualities o# these same classes9

True( he said) 1nd so o# the indi,idual+ we may assume that he has the same three principles in his own soul which are #ound in the *tate+ and he may be ri$htly described in the same terms( because he is a##ected in the same manner9 "ertainly( he said) Once more then( O my #riend( we ha,e ali$hted upon an easy -uestion --whether the soul has these three principles or not9 1n easy -uestion4 Nay( rather( *ocrates( the pro,erb holds that hard is the $ood) >ery true( I said+ and I do not thin% that the method which we are employin$ is at all ade-uate to the accurate solution o# this -uestion+ the true method is another and a lon$er one) *till we may arri,e at a solution not below the le,el o# the pre,ious en-uiry) 3ay we not be satis#ied with that9 he said+ --under the circumstances( I am -uite content) I too( I replied( shall be e&tremely well satis#ied) Then #aint not in pursuin$ the speculation( he said) 3ust we not ac%nowled$e( I said( that in each o# us there are the same principles and habits which there are in the *tate+ and that #rom the indi,idual they pass into the *tate9 --how else can they come there9 Ta%e the -uality o# passion or spirit+ --it would be ridiculous to ima$ine that this -uality( when #ound in *tates( is not deri,ed #rom the indi,iduals who are supposed to possess it( e)$) the Thracians( *cythians( and in $eneral the northern nations+ and the same may be said o# the lo,e o# %nowled$e( which is the special characteristic o# our part o# the world( or o# the lo,e o# money( which may( with e-ual truth( be attributed to the Phoenicians and E$yptians) E&actly so( he said) There is no di##iculty in understandin$ this) None whate,er) But the -uestion is not -uite so easy when we proceed to as% whether these principles are three or one+ whether( that is to say( we learn with one part o# our nature( are an$ry with another( and with a third part desire the satis#action o# our natural appetites+ or whether the whole soul comes into play in each sort o# action --to determine that is the di##iculty) Aes( he said+ there lies the di##iculty) Then let us now try and determine whether they are the same or di##erent) How can we9 he as%ed) I replied as #ollowsD The same thin$ clearly cannot act or be acted upon in the same part or in relation to the same thin$ at the same time( in contrary ways+ and there#ore whene,er this contradiction occurs in thin$s apparently the same( we %now that they are really not the same( but di##erent)

.ood) @or e&ample( I said( can the same thin$ be at rest and in motion at the same time in the same part9 Impossible) *till( I said( let us ha,e a more precise statement o# terms( lest we should herea#ter #all out by the way) Ima$ine the case o# a man who is standin$ and also mo,in$ his hands and his head( and suppose a person to say that one and the same person is in motion and at rest at the same moment-to such a mode o# speech we should object( and should rather say that one part o# him is in motion while another is at rest) >ery true) 1nd suppose the objector to re#ine still #urther( and to draw the nice distinction that not only parts o# tops( but whole tops( when they spin round with their pe$s #i&ed on the spot( are at rest and in motion at the same time 5and he may say the same o# anythin$ which re,ol,es in the same spot7( his objection would not be admitted by us( because in such cases thin$s are not at rest and in motion in the same parts o# themsel,es+ we should rather say that they ha,e both an a&is and a circum#erence( and that the a&is stands still( #or there is no de,iation #rom the perpendicular+ and that the circum#erence $oes round) But i#( while re,ol,in$( the a&is inclines either to the ri$ht or le#t( #orwards or bac%wards( then in no point o# ,iew can they be at rest) That is the correct mode o# describin$ them( he replied) Then none o# these objections will con#use us( or incline us to belie,e that the same thin$ at the same time( in the same part or in relation to the same thin$( can act or be acted upon in contrary ways) "ertainly not( accordin$ to my way o# thin%in$) Aet( I said( that we may not be compelled to e&amine all such objections( and pro,e at len$th that they are untrue( let us assume their absurdity( and $o #orward on the understandin$ that herea#ter( i# this assumption turn out to be untrue( all the conse-uences which #ollow shall be withdrawn) Aes( he said( that will be the best way) 2ell( I said( would you not allow that assent and dissent( desire and a,ersion( attraction and repulsion( are all o# them opposites( whether they are re$arded as acti,e or passi,e 5#or that ma%es no di##erence in the #act o# their opposition79 Aes( he said( they are opposites) 2ell( I said( and hun$er and thirst( and the desires in $eneral( and a$ain willin$ and wishin$( --all these you would re#er to the classes already mentioned) Aou would say --would you not9 --that the soul o# him who desires is see%in$ a#ter the object o# his desires+ or that he is drawin$ to himsel# the thin$ which he wishes to possessD

or a$ain( when a person wants anythin$ to be $i,en him( his mind( lon$in$ #or the realisation o# his desires( intimates his wish to ha,e it by a nod o# assent( as i# he had been as%ed a -uestion9 >ery true) 1nd what would you say o# unwillin$ness and disli%e and the absence o# desire+ should not these be re#erred to the opposite class o# repulsion and rejection9 "ertainly) 1dmittin$ this to be true o# desire $enerally( let us suppose a particular class o# desires( and out o# these we will select hun$er and thirst( as they are termed( which are the most ob,ious o# them9 'et us ta%e that class( he said) The object o# one is #ood( and o# the other drin%9 Aes) 1nd here comes the pointD is not thirst the desire which the soul has o# drin%( and o# drin% only+ not o# drin% -uali#ied by anythin$ else+ #or e&ample( warm or cold( or much or little( or( in a word( drin% o# any particular sortD but i# the thirst be accompanied by heat( then the desire is o# cold drin%+ or( i# accompanied by cold( then o# warm drin%+ or( i# the thirst be e&cessi,e( then the drin% which is desired will be e&cessi,e+ or( i# not $reat( the -uantity o# drin% will also be smallD but thirst pure and simple will desire drin% pure and simple( which is the natural satis#action o# thirst( as #ood is o# hun$er9 Aes( he said+ the simple desire is( as you say( in e,ery case o# the simple object( and the -uali#ied desire o# the -uali#ied object) But here a con#usion may arise+ and I should wish to $uard a$ainst an opponent startin$ up and sayin$ that no man desires drin% only( but $ood drin%( or #ood only( but $ood #ood+ #or $ood is the uni,ersal object o# desire( and thirst bein$ a desire( will necessarily be thirst a#ter $ood drin%+ and the same is true o# e,ery other desire) Aes( he replied( the opponent mi$ht ha,e somethin$ to say) Ne,ertheless I should still maintain( that o# relati,es some ha,e a -uality attached to either term o# the relation+ others are simple and ha,e their correlati,es simple) I do not %now what you mean) 2ell( you %now o# course that the $reater is relati,e to the less9 "ertainly) 1nd the much $reater to the much less9 Aes) 1nd the sometime $reater to the sometime less( and the $reater that is to be to the less that is to be9 "ertainly( he said)

1nd so o# more and less( and o# other correlati,e terms( such as the double and the hal#( or a$ain( the hea,ier and the li$hter( the swi#ter and the slower+ and o# hot and cold( and o# any other relati,es+ --is not this true o# all o# them9 Aes) 1nd does not the same principle hold in the sciences9 The object o# science is %nowled$e 5assumin$ that to be the true de#inition7( but the object o# a particular science is a particular %ind o# %nowled$e+ I mean( #or e&ample( that the science o# house-buildin$ is a %ind o# %nowled$e which is de#ined and distin$uished #rom other %inds and is there#ore termed architecture) "ertainly) Because it has a particular -uality which no other has9 Aes) 1nd it has this particular -uality because it has an object o# a particular %ind+ and this is true o# the other arts and sciences9 Aes) Now( then( i# I ha,e made mysel# clear( you will understand my ori$inal meanin$ in what I said about relati,es) 3y meanin$ was( that i# one term o# a relation is ta%en alone( the other is ta%en alone+ i# one term is -uali#ied( the other is also -uali#ied) I do not mean to say that relati,es may not be disparate( or that the science o# health is healthy( or o# disease necessarily diseased( or that the sciences o# $ood and e,il are there#ore $ood and e,il+ but only that( when the term science is no lon$er used absolutely( but has a -uali#ied object which in this case is the nature o# health and disease( it becomes de#ined( and is hence called not merely science( but the science o# medicine) I -uite understand( and I thin% as you do) 2ould you not say that thirst is one o# these essentially relati,e terms( ha,in$ clearly a relation -Aes( thirst is relati,e to drin%) 1nd a certain %ind o# thirst is relati,e to a certain %ind o# drin%+ but thirst ta%en alone is neither o# much nor little( nor o# $ood nor bad( nor o# any particular %ind o# drin%( but o# drin% only9 "ertainly) Then the soul o# the thirsty one( in so #ar as he is thirsty( desires only drin%+ #or this he yearns and tries to obtain it9 That is plain) 1nd i# you suppose somethin$ which pulls a thirsty soul away #rom drin%( that must be di##erent #rom the thirsty principle which draws him li%e a beast to drin%+ #or( as we were sayin$( the same thin$ cannot at the same time with the same part o# itsel# act in contrary ways about the same) Impossible)

No more than you can say that the hands o# the archer push and pull the bow at the same time( but what you say is that one hand pushes and the other pulls) E&actly so( he replied) 1nd mi$ht a man be thirsty( and yet unwillin$ to drin%9 Aes( he said( it constantly happens) 1nd in such a case what is one to say9 2ould you not say that there was somethin$ in the soul biddin$ a man to drin%( and somethin$ else #orbiddin$ him( which is other and stron$er than the principle which bids him9 I should say so) 1nd the #orbiddin$ principle is deri,ed #rom reason( and that which bids and attracts proceeds #rom passion and disease9 "learly) Then we may #airly assume that they are two( and that they di##er #rom one another+ the one with which man reasons( we may call the rational principle o# the soul( the other( with which he lo,es and hun$ers and thirsts and #eels the #lutterin$s o# any other desire( may be termed the irrational or appetiti,e( the ally o# sundry pleasures and satis#actions9 Aes( he said( we may #airly assume them to be di##erent) Then let us #inally determine that there are two principles e&istin$ in the soul) 1nd what o# passion( or spirit9 Is it a third( or a%in to one o# the precedin$9 I should be inclined to say --a%in to desire) 2ell( I said( there is a story which I remember to ha,e heard( and in which I put #aith) The story is( that 'eontius( the son o# 1$laion( comin$ up one day #rom the Piraeus( under the north wall on the outside( obser,ed some dead bodies lyin$ on the $round at the place o# e&ecution) He #elt a desire to see them( and also a dread and abhorrence o# them+ #or a time he stru$$led and co,ered his eyes( but at len$th the desire $ot the better o# him+ and #orcin$ them open( he ran up to the dead bodies( sayin$( 'oo%( ye wretches( ta%e your #ill o# the #air si$ht) I ha,e heard the story mysel#( he said) The moral o# the tale is( that an$er at times $oes to war with desire( as thou$h they were two distinct thin$s) Aes+ that is the meanin$( he said) 1nd are there not many other cases in which we obser,e that when a man6s desires ,iolently pre,ail o,er his reason( he re,iles himsel#( and is an$ry at the ,iolence within him( and that in this stru$$le( which is li%e the stru$$le o# #actions in a *tate( his spirit is on the side o# his reason+ --but #or the passionate or spirited element to ta%e part with the desires when reason that she should not be opposed( is a sort o# thin$ which thin$ which I belie,e that you ne,er obser,ed occurrin$ in yoursel#( nor( as I should ima$ine( in any one else9

"ertainly not) *uppose that a man thin%s he has done a wron$ to another( the nobler he is the less able is he to #eel indi$nant at any su##erin$( such as hun$er( or cold( or any other pain which the injured person may in#lict upon him --these he deems to be just( and( as I say( his an$er re#uses to be e&cited by them) True( he said) But when he thin%s that he is the su##erer o# the wron$( then he boils and cha#es( and is on the side o# what he belie,es to be justice+ and because he su##ers hun$er or cold or other pain he is only the more determined to perse,ere and con-uer) His noble spirit will not be -uelled until he either slays or is slain+ or until he hears the ,oice o# the shepherd( that is( reason( biddin$ his do$ bar% no more) The illustration is per#ect( he replied+ and in our *tate( as we were sayin$( the au&iliaries were to be do$s( and to hear the ,oice o# the rulers( who are their shepherds) I percei,e( I said( that you -uite understand me+ there is( howe,er( a #urther point which I wish you to consider) 2hat point9 Aou remember that passion or spirit appeared at #irst si$ht to be a %ind o# desire( but now we should say -uite the contrary+ #or in the con#lict o# the soul spirit is arrayed on the side o# the rational principle) 3ost assuredly) But a #urther -uestion arisesD Is passion di##erent #rom reason also( or only a %ind o# reason+ in which latter case( instead o# three principles in the soul( there will only be two( the rational and the concupiscent+ or rather( as the *tate was composed o# three classes( traders( au&iliaries( counsellors( so may there not be in the indi,idual soul a third element which is passion or spirit( and when not corrupted by bad education is the natural au&iliary o# reason Aes( he said( there must be a third) Aes( I replied( i# passion( which has already been shown to be di##erent #rom desire( turn out also to be di##erent #rom reason) But that is easily pro,edD --2e may obser,e e,en in youn$ children that they are #ull o# spirit almost as soon as they are born( whereas some o# them ne,er seem to attain to the use o# reason( and most o# them late enou$h) E&cellent( I said( and you may see passion e-ually in brute animals( which is a #urther proo# o# the truth o# what you are sayin$) 1nd we may once more appeal to the words o# Homer( which ha,e been already -uoted by us( He smote his breast( and thus rebu%ed his soul( #or in this ,erse

Homer has clearly supposed the power which reasons about the better and worse to be di##erent #rom the unreasonin$ an$er which is rebu%ed by it) >ery true( he said) 1nd so( a#ter much tossin$( we ha,e reached land( and are #airly a$reed that the same principles which e&ist in the *tate e&ist also in the indi,idual( and that they are three in number) E&actly) 3ust we not then in#er that the indi,idual is wise in the same way( and in ,irtue o# the same -uality which ma%es the *tate wise9 "ertainly) 1lso that the same -uality which constitutes coura$e in the *tate constitutes coura$e in the indi,idual( and that both the *tate and the indi,idual bear the same relation to all the other ,irtues9 1ssuredly) 1nd the indi,idual will be ac%nowled$ed by us to be just in the same way in which the *tate is just9 That #ollows( o# course) 2e cannot but remember that the justice o# the *tate consisted in each o# the three classes doin$ the wor% o# its own class9 2e are not ,ery li%ely to ha,e #or$otten( he said) 2e must recollect that the indi,idual in whom the se,eral -ualities o# his nature do their own wor% will be just( and will do his own wor%9 Aes( he said( we must remember that too) 1nd ou$ht not the rational principle( which is wise( and has the care o# the whole soul( to rule( and the passionate or spirited principle to be the subject and ally9 "ertainly) 1nd( as we were sayin$( the united in#luence o# music and $ymnastic will brin$ them into accord( ner,in$ and sustainin$ the reason with noble words and lessons( and moderatin$ and soothin$ and ci,ili/in$ the wildness o# passion by harmony and rhythm9 Cuite true( he said) 1nd these two( thus nurtured and educated( and ha,in$ learned truly to %now their own #unctions( will rule o,er the concupiscent( which in each o# us is the lar$est part o# the soul and by nature most insatiable o# $ain+ o,er this they will %eep $uard( lest( wa&in$ $reat and stron$ with the #ulness o# bodily pleasures( as they are termed( the concupiscent soul( no lon$er con#ined to her own sphere( should attempt to ensla,e and rule those who are not her natural-born subjects( and o,erturn the whole li#e o# man9 >ery true( he said)

Both to$ether will they not be the best de#enders o# the whole soul and the whole body a$ainst attac%s #rom without+ the one counsellin$( and the other #i$htin$ under his leader( and coura$eously e&ecutin$ his commands and counsels9 True) 1nd he is to be deemed coura$eous whose spirit retains in pleasure and in pain the commands o# reason about what he ou$ht or ou$ht not to #ear9 Ri$ht( he replied) 1nd him we call wise who has in him that little part which rules( and which proclaims these commands+ that part too bein$ supposed to ha,e a %nowled$e o# what is #or the interest o# each o# the three parts and o# the whole9 1ssuredly) 1nd would you not say that he is temperate who has these same elements in #riendly harmony( in whom the one rulin$ principle o# reason( and the two subject ones o# spirit and desire are e-ually a$reed that reason ou$ht to rule( and do not rebel9 "ertainly( he said( that is the true account o# temperance whether in the *tate or indi,idual) 1nd surely( I said( we ha,e e&plained a$ain and a$ain how and by ,irtue o# what -uality a man will be just) That is ,ery certain) 1nd is justice dimmer in the indi,idual( and is her #orm di##erent( or is she the same which we #ound her to be in the *tate9 There is no di##erence in my opinion( he said) Because( i# any doubt is still lin$erin$ in our minds( a #ew commonplace instances will satis#y us o# the truth o# what I am sayin$) 2hat sort o# instances do you mean9 I# the case is put to us( must we not admit that the just *tate( or the man who is trained in the principles o# such a *tate( will be less li%ely than the unjust to ma%e away with a deposit o# $old or sil,er9 2ould any one deny this9 No one( he replied) 2ill the just man or citi/en e,er be $uilty o# sacrile$e or the#t( or treachery either to his #riends or to his country9 Ne,er) Neither will he e,er brea% #aith where there ha,e been oaths or a$reements9 Impossible) No one will be less li%ely to commit adultery( or to dishonour his #ather and mother( or to #all in his reli$ious duties9

No one) 1nd the reason is that each part o# him is doin$ its own business( whether in rulin$ or bein$ ruled9 E&actly so) 1re you satis#ied then that the -uality which ma%es such men and such states is justice( or do you hope to disco,er some other9 Not I( indeed) Then our dream has been realised+ and the suspicion which we entertained at the be$innin$ o# our wor% o# construction( that some di,ine power must ha,e conducted us to a primary #orm o# justice( has now been ,eri#ied9 Aes( certainly) 1nd the di,ision o# labour which re-uired the carpenter and the shoema%er and the rest o# the citi/ens to be doin$ each his own business( and not another6s( was a shadow o# justice( and #or that reason it was o# use9 "learly) But in reality justice was such as we were describin$( bein$ concerned howe,er( not with the outward man( but with the inward( which is the true sel# and concernment o# manD #or the just man does not permit the se,eral elements within him to inter#ere with one another( or any o# them to do the wor% o# others( --he sets in order his own inner li#e( and is his own master and his own law( and at peace with himsel#+ and when he has bound to$ether the three principles within him( which may be compared to the hi$her( lower( and middle notes o# the scale( and the intermediate inter,als --when he has bound all these to$ether( and is no lon$er many( but has become one entirely temperate and per#ectly adjusted nature( then he proceeds to act( i# he has to act( whether in a matter o# property( or in the treatment o# the body( or in some a##air o# politics or pri,ate business+ always thin%in$ and callin$ that which preser,es and co-operates with this harmonious condition( just and $ood action( and the %nowled$e which presides o,er it( wisdom( and that which at any time impairs this condition( he will call unjust action( and the opinion which presides o,er it i$norance) Aou ha,e said the e&act truth( *ocrates) >ery $ood+ and i# we were to a##irm that we had disco,ered the just man and the just *tate( and the nature o# justice in each o# them( we should not be tellin$ a #alsehood9 3ost certainly not) 3ay we say so( then9 'et us say so) 1nd now( I said( injustice has to be considered) "learly) 3ust not injustice be a stri#e which arises amon$ the three principles --a meddlesomeness( and inter#erence( and risin$ up o# a part o# the soul a$ainst the whole( an assertion o# unlaw#ul authority( which is made by a rebellious subject a$ainst a true prince( o# whom he

is the natural ,assal( --what is all this con#usion and delusion but injustice( and intemperance and cowardice and i$norance( and e,ery #orm o# ,ice9 E&actly so) 1nd i# the nature o# justice and injustice be %nown( then the meanin$ o# actin$ unjustly and bein$ unjust( or( a$ain( o# actin$ justly( will also be per#ectly clear9 2hat do you mean9 he said) 2hy( I said( they are li%e disease and health+ bein$ in the soul just what disease and health are in the body) How so9 he said) 2hy( I said( that which is healthy causes health( and that which is unhealthy causes disease) Aes) 1nd just actions cause justice( and unjust actions cause injustice9 That is certain) 1nd the creation o# health is the institution o# a natural order and $o,ernment o# one by another in the parts o# the body+ and the creation o# disease is the production o# a state o# thin$s at ,ariance with this natural order9 True) 1nd is not the creation o# justice the institution o# a natural order and $o,ernment o# one by another in the parts o# the soul( and the creation o# injustice the production o# a state o# thin$s at ,ariance with the natural order9 E&actly so( he said) Then ,irtue is the health and beauty and well-bein$ o# the soul( and ,ice the disease and wea%ness and de#ormity o# the same9 True) 1nd do not $ood practices lead to ,irtue( and e,il practices to ,ice9 1ssuredly) *till our old -uestion o# the comparati,e ad,anta$e o# justice and injustice has not been answeredD 2hich is the more pro#itable( to be just and act justly and practise ,irtue( whether seen or unseen o# $ods and men( or to be unjust and act unjustly( i# only unpunished and unre#ormed9 In my jud$ment( *ocrates( the -uestion has now become ridiculous) 2e %now that( when the bodily constitution is $one( li#e is no lon$er endurable( thou$h pampered with all %inds o# meats and drin%s( and ha,in$ all wealth and all power+ and shall we be told that when the ,ery essence o# the ,ital principle is undermined and corrupted( li#e is still worth ha,in$ to a man( i# only he be allowed to do whate,er he li%es with the sin$le e&ception that he is not to ac-uire justice

and ,irtue( or to escape #rom injustice and ,ice+ assumin$ them both to be such as we ha,e described9 Aes( I said( the -uestion is( as you say( ridiculous) *till( as we are near the spot at which we may see the truth in the clearest manner with our own eyes( let us not #aint by the way) "ertainly not( he replied) "ome up hither( I said( and behold the ,arious #orms o# ,ice( those o# them( I mean( which are worth loo%in$ at) I am #ollowin$ you( he repliedD proceed) I said( The ar$ument seems to ha,e reached a hei$ht #rom which( as #rom some tower o# speculation( a man may loo% down and see that ,irtue is one( but that the #orms o# ,ice are innumerable+ there bein$ #our special ones which are deser,in$ o# note) 2hat do you mean9 he said) I mean( I replied( that there appear to be as many #orms o# the soul as there are distinct #orms o# the *tate) How many9 There are #i,e o# the *tate( and #i,e o# the soul( I said) 2hat are they9 The #irst( I said( is that which we ha,e been describin$( and which may be said to ha,e two names( monarchy and aristocracy( accordin$ly as rule is e&ercised by one distin$uished man or by many) True( he replied) But I re$ard the two names as describin$ one #orm only+ #or whether the $o,ernment is in the hands o# one or many( i# the $o,ernors ha,e been trained in the manner which we ha,e supposed( the #undamental laws o# the *tate will be maintained) That is true( he replied) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG > *ocrates - .'1!"ON - 1 EI31NT!* *uch is the $ood and true "ity or *tate( and the $ood and man is o# the same pattern+ and i# this is ri$ht e,ery other is wron$+ and the e,il is one which a##ects not only the orderin$ o# the *tate( but also the re$ulation o# the indi,idual soul( and is e&hibited in #our #orms) 2hat are they9 he said) I was proceedin$ to tell the order in which the #our e,il #orms appeared to me to succeed one another( when Pole marchus( who was sittin$ a little way o##( just beyond 1deimantus( be$an to whisper to himD stretchin$

#orth his hand( he too% hold o# the upper part o# his coat by the shoulder( and drew him towards him( leanin$ #orward himsel# so as to be -uite close and sayin$ somethin$ in his ear( o# which I only cau$ht the words( 6*hall we let him o##( or what shall we do9 "ertainly not( said 1deimantus( raisin$ his ,oice) 2ho is it( I said( whom you are re#usin$ to let o##9 Aou( he said) I repeated( 2hy am I especially not to be let o##9 2hy( he said( we thin% that you are la/y( and mean to cheat us out o# a whole chapter which is a ,ery important part o# the story+ and you #ancy that we shall not notice your airy way o# proceedin$+ as i# it were sel#-e,ident to e,erybody( that in the matter o# women and children 6#riends ha,e all thin$s in common)6 1nd was I not ri$ht( 1deimantus9 Aes( he said+ but what is ri$ht in this particular case( li%e e,erythin$ else( re-uires to be e&plained+ #or community may be o# many %inds) Please( there#ore( to say what sort o# community you mean) 2e ha,e been lon$ e&pectin$ that you would tell us somethin$ about the #amily li#e o# your citi/ens --how they will brin$ children into the world( and rear them when they ha,e arri,ed( and( in $eneral( what is the nature o# this community o# women and children-#or we are o# opinion that the ri$ht or wron$ mana$ement o# such matters will ha,e a $reat and paramount in#luence on the *tate #or $ood or #or e,il) 1nd now( since the -uestion is still undetermined( and you are ta%in$ in hand another *tate( we ha,e resol,ed( as you heard( not to let you $o until you $i,e an account o# all this) To that resolution( said .laucon( you may re$ard me as sayin$ 1$reed) *ocrates - 1 EI31NT!* - .'1!"ON - THR1*A31"H!* 1nd without more ado( said Thrasymachus( you may consider us all to be e-ually a$reed) I said( Aou %now not what you are doin$ in thus assailin$ meD 2hat an ar$ument are you raisin$ about the *tate4 Just as I thou$ht that I had #inished( and was only too $lad that I had laid this -uestion to sleep( and was re#lectin$ how #ortunate I was in your acceptance o# what I then said( you as% me to be$in a$ain at the ,ery #oundation( i$norant o# what a hornet6s nest o# words you are stirrin$) Now I #oresaw this $atherin$ trouble( and a,oided it) @or what purpose do you concei,e that we ha,e come here( said Thrasymachus( --to loo% #or $old( or to hear discourse9 Aes( but discourse should ha,e a limit) Aes( *ocrates( said .laucon( and the whole o# li#e is the only limit which wise men assi$n to the hearin$ o# such discourses) But ne,er mind about us+ ta%e heart yoursel# and answer the -uestion in your own wayD 2hat sort o# community o# women and children is this which is to pre,ail amon$ our $uardians9 and how shall we mana$e the period

between birth and education( which seems to re-uire the $reatest care9 Tell us how these thin$s will be) Aes( my simple #riend( but the answer is the re,erse o# easy+ many more doubts arise about this than about our pre,ious conclusions) @or the practicability o# what is said may be doubted+ and loo%ed at in another point o# ,iew( whether the scheme( i# e,er so practicable( would be #or the best( is also doubt#ul) Hence I #eel a reluctance to approach the subject( lest our aspiration( my dear #riend( should turn out to be a dream only) @ear not( he replied( #or your audience will not be hard upon you+ they are not sceptical or hostile) I saidD 3y $ood #riend( I suppose that you mean to encoura$e me by these words) Aes( he said) Then let me tell you that you are doin$ just the re,erse+ the encoura$ement which you o##er would ha,e been all ,ery well had I mysel# belie,ed that I %new what I was tal%in$ aboutD to declare the truth about matters o# hi$h interest which a man honours and lo,es amon$ wise men who lo,e him need occasion no #ear or #alterin$ in his mind+ but to carry on an ar$ument when you are yoursel# only a hesitatin$ en-uirer( which is my condition( is a dan$erous and slippery thin$+ and the dan$er is not that I shall be lau$hed at 5o# which the #ear would be childish7( but that I shall miss the truth where I ha,e most need to be sure o# my #ootin$( and dra$ my #riends a#ter me in my #all) 1nd I pray Nemesis not to ,isit upon me the words which I am $oin$ to utter) @or I do indeed belie,e that to be an in,oluntary homicide is a less crime than to be a decei,er about beauty or $oodness or justice in the matter o# laws) 1nd that is a ris% which I would rather run amon$ enemies than amon$ #riends( and there#ore you do well to encoura$e me) .laucon lau$hed and saidD 2ell then( *ocrates( in case you and your ar$ument do us any serious injury you shall be ac-uitted be#orehand o# the and shall not be held to be a decei,er+ ta%e coura$e then and spea%) 2ell( I said( the law says that when a man is ac-uitted he is #ree #rom $uilt( and what holds at law may hold in ar$ument) Then why should you mind9 2ell( I replied( I suppose that I must retrace my steps and say what I perhaps ou$ht to ha,e said be#ore in the proper place) The part o# the men has been played out( and now properly enou$h comes the turn o# the women) O# them I will proceed to spea%( and the more readily since I am in,ited by you) @or men born and educated li%e our citi/ens( the only way( in my opinion( o# arri,in$ at a ri$ht conclusion about the possession and use o# women and children is to #ollow the path on which we ori$inally started(

when we said that the men were to be the $uardians and watchdo$s o# the herd) True) 'et us #urther suppose the birth and education o# our women to be subject to similar or nearly similar re$ulations+ then we shall see whether the result accords with our desi$n) 2hat do you mean9 2hat I mean may be put into the #orm o# a -uestion( I saidD 1re do$s di,ided into hes and shes( or do they both share e-ually in huntin$ and in %eepin$ watch and in the other duties o# do$s9 or do we entrust to the males the entire and e&clusi,e care o# the #loc%s( while we lea,e the #emales at home( under the idea that the bearin$ and suc%lin$ their puppies is labour enou$h #or them9 No( he said( they share ali%e+ the only di##erence between them is that the males are stron$er and the #emales wea%er) But can you use di##erent animals #or the same purpose( unless they are bred and #ed in the same way9 Aou cannot) Then( i# women are to ha,e the same duties as men( they must ha,e the same nurture and education9 Aes) The education which was assi$ned to the men was music and $ymnastic) Aes) Then women must be tau$ht music and $ymnastic and also the art o# war( which they must practise li%e the men9 That is the in#erence( I suppose) I should rather e&pect( I said( that se,eral o# our proposals( i# they are carried out( bein$ unusual( may appear ridiculous) No doubt o# it) Aes( and the most ridiculous thin$ o# all will be the si$ht o# women na%ed in the palaestra( e&ercisin$ with the men( especially when they are no lon$er youn$+ they certainly will not be a ,ision o# beauty( any more than the enthusiastic old men who in spite o# wrin%les and u$liness continue to #re-uent the $ymnasia) Aes( indeed( he saidD accordin$ to present notions the proposal would be thou$ht ridiculous) But then( I said( as we ha,e determined to spea% our minds( we must not #ear the jests o# the wits which will be directed a$ainst this sort o# inno,ation+ how they will tal% o# women6s attainments both in music and $ymnastic( and abo,e all about their wearin$ armour and ridin$ upon horsebac%4

>ery true( he replied) Aet ha,in$ be$un we must $o #orward to the rou$h places o# the law+ at the same time be$$in$ o# these $entlemen #or once in their li#e to be serious) Not lon$ a$o( as we shall remind them( the Hellenes were o# the opinion( which is still $enerally recei,ed amon$ the barbarians( that the si$ht o# a na%ed man was ridiculous and improper+ and when #irst the "retans and then the 'acedaemonians introduced the custom( the wits o# that day mi$ht e-ually ha,e ridiculed the inno,ation) No doubt) But when e&perience showed that to let all thin$s be unco,ered was #ar better than to co,er them up( and the ludicrous e##ect to the outward eye ,anished be#ore the better principle which reason asserted( then the man was percei,ed to be a #ool who directs the sha#ts o# his ridicule at any other si$ht but that o# #olly and ,ice( or seriously inclines to wei$h the beauti#ul by any other standard but that o# the $ood) >ery true( he replied) @irst( then( whether the -uestion is to be put in jest or in earnest( let us come to an understandin$ about the nature o# womanD Is she capable o# sharin$ either wholly or partially in the actions o# men( or not at all9 1nd is the art o# war one o# those arts in which she can or can not share9 That will be the best way o# commencin$ the en-uiry( and will probably lead to the #airest conclusion) That will be much the best way) *hall we ta%e the other side #irst and be$in by ar$uin$ a$ainst oursel,es+ in this manner the ad,ersary6s position will not be unde#ended) 2hy not9 he said) Then let us put a speech into the mouths o# our opponents) They will sayD 6*ocrates and .laucon( no ad,ersary need con,ict you( #or you yoursel,es( at the #irst #oundation o# the *tate( admitted the principle that e,erybody was to do the one wor% suited to his own nature)6 1nd certainly( i# I am not mista%en( such an admission was made by us) 61nd do not the natures o# men and women di##er ,ery much indeed96 1nd we shall replyD O# course they do) Then we shall be as%ed( 62hether the tas%s assi$ned to men and to women should not be di##erent( and such as are a$reeable to their di##erent natures96 "ertainly they should) 6But i# so( ha,e you not #allen into a serious inconsistency in sayin$ that men and women( whose natures are so entirely di##erent( ou$ht to per#orm the same actions96 --2hat de#ence will you ma%e #or us( my $ood *ir( a$ainst any one who o##ers these objections9 That is not an easy -uestion to answer when as%ed suddenly+ and I shall and I do be$ o# you to draw out the case on our side) These are the objections( .laucon( and there are many others o# a li%e %ind( which I #oresaw lon$ a$o+ they made me a#raid and reluctant to ta%e in hand any law about the possession and nurture o# women and children)

By Jeus( he said( the problem to be sol,ed is anythin$ but easy) 2hy yes( I said( but the #act is that when a man is out o# his depth( whether he has #allen into a little swimmin$ bath or into mid-ocean( he has to swim all the same) >ery true) 1nd must not we swim and try to reach the shoreD we will hope that 1rion6s dolphin or some other miraculous help may sa,e us9 I suppose so( he said) 2ell then( let us see i# any way o# escape can be #ound) 2e ac%nowled$ed --did we not9 that di##erent natures ou$ht to ha,e di##erent pursuits( and that men6s and women6s natures are di##erent) 1nd now what are we sayin$9 --that di##erent natures ou$ht to ha,e the same pursuits( --this is the inconsistency which is char$ed upon us) Precisely) >erily( .laucon( I said( $lorious is the power o# the art o# contradiction4 2hy do you say so9 Because I thin% that many a man #alls into the practice a$ainst his will) 2hen he thin%s that he is reasonin$ he is really disputin$( just because he cannot de#ine and di,ide( and so %now that o# which he is spea%in$+ and he will pursue a merely ,erbal opposition in the spirit o# contention and not o# #air discussion) Aes( he replied( such is ,ery o#ten the case+ but what has that to do with us and our ar$ument9 1 $reat deal+ #or there is certainly a dan$er o# our $ettin$ unintentionally into a ,erbal opposition) In what way9 2hy( we ,aliantly and pu$naciously insist upon the ,erbal truth( that di##erent natures ou$ht to ha,e di##erent pursuits( but we ne,er considered at all what was the meanin$ o# sameness or di##erence o# nature( or why we distin$uished them when we assi$ned di##erent pursuits to di##erent natures and the same to the same natures) 2hy( no( he said( that was ne,er considered by us) I saidD *uppose that by way o# illustration we were to as% the -uestion whether there is not an opposition in nature between bald men and hairy men+ and i# this is admitted by us( then( i# bald men are cobblers( we should #orbid the hairy men to be cobblers( and con,ersely9 That would be a jest( he said) Aes( I said( a jest+ and why9 because we ne,er meant when we constructed the *tate( that the opposition o# natures should e&tend to e,ery di##erence( but only to those di##erences which a##ected the pursuit in which the indi,idual is en$a$ed+ we should ha,e ar$ued( #or e&ample( that a physician and one who is in mind a physician may be said to ha,e the same nature)

True) 2hereas the physician and the carpenter ha,e di##erent natures9 "ertainly) 1nd i#( I said( the male and #emale se& appear to di##er in their #itness #or any art or pursuit( we should say that such pursuit or art ou$ht to be assi$ned to one or the other o# them+ but i# the di##erence consists only in women bearin$ and men be$ettin$ children( this does not amount to a proo# that a woman di##ers #rom a man in respect o# the sort o# education she should recei,e+ and we shall there#ore continue to maintain that our $uardians and their wi,es ou$ht to ha,e the same pursuits) >ery true( he said) Ne&t( we shall as% our opponent how( in re#erence to any o# the pursuits or arts o# ci,ic li#e( the nature o# a woman di##ers #rom that o# a man9 That will be -uite #air) 1nd perhaps he( li%e yoursel#( will reply that to $i,e a su##icient answer on the instant is not easy+ but a#ter a little re#lection there is no di##iculty) Aes( perhaps) *uppose then that we in,ite him to accompany us in the ar$ument( and then we may hope to show him that there is nothin$ peculiar in the constitution o# women which would a##ect them in the administration o# the *tate) By all means) 'et us say to himD "ome now( and we will as% you a -uestionD --when you spo%e o# a nature $i#ted or not $i#ted in any respect( did you mean to say that one man will ac-uire a thin$ easily( another with di##iculty+ a little learnin$ will lead the one to disco,er a $reat deal+ whereas the other( a#ter much study and application( no sooner learns than he #or$ets+ or a$ain( did you mean( that the one has a body which is a $ood ser,ant to his mind( while the body o# the other is a hindrance to him9-would not these be the sort o# di##erences which distin$uish the man $i#ted by nature #rom the one who is un$i#ted9 No one will deny that) 1nd can you mention any pursuit o# man%ind in which the male se& has not all these $i#ts and -ualities in a hi$her de$ree than the #emale9 Need I waste time in spea%in$ o# the art o# wea,in$( and the mana$ement o# panca%es and preser,es( in which woman%ind does really appear to be $reat( and in which #or her to be beaten by a man is o# all thin$s the most absurd9 Aou are -uite ri$ht( he replied( in maintainin$ the $eneral in#eriority o# the #emale se&D althou$h many women are in many thin$s superior to many men( yet on the whole what you say is true)

1nd i# so( my #riend( I said( there is no special #aculty o# administration in a state which a woman has because she is a woman( or which a man has by ,irtue o# his se&( but the $i#ts o# nature are ali%e di##used in both+ all the pursuits o# men are the pursuits o# women also( but in all o# them a woman is in#erior to a man) >ery true) Then are we to impose all our enactments on men and none o# them on women9 That will ne,er do) One woman has a $i#t o# healin$( another not+ one is a musician( and another has no music in her nature9 >ery true) 1nd one woman has a turn #or $ymnastic and military e&ercises( and another is unwarli%e and hates $ymnastics9 "ertainly) 1nd one woman is a philosopher( and another is an enemy o# philosophy+ one has spirit( and another is without spirit9 That is also true) Then one woman will ha,e the temper o# a $uardian( and another not) 2as not the selection o# the male $uardians determined by di##erences o# this sort9 Aes) 3en and women ali%e possess the -ualities which ma%e a $uardian+ they di##er only in their comparati,e stren$th or wea%ness) Ob,iously) 1nd those women who ha,e such -ualities are to be selected as the companions and collea$ues o# men who ha,e similar -ualities and whom they resemble in capacity and in character9 >ery true) 1nd ou$ht not the same natures to ha,e the same pursuits9 They ou$ht) Then( as we were sayin$ be#ore( there is nothin$ unnatural in assi$nin$ music and $ymnastic to the wi,es o# the $uardians --to that point we come round a$ain) "ertainly not) The law which we then enacted was a$reeable to nature( and there#ore not an impossibility or mere aspiration+ and the contrary practice( which pre,ails at present( is in reality a ,iolation o# nature) That appears to be true) 2e had to consider( #irst( whether our proposals were possible( and secondly whether they were the most bene#icial9

Aes) 1nd the possibility has been ac%nowled$ed9 Aes) The ,ery $reat bene#it has ne&t to be established9 Cuite so) Aou will admit that the same education which ma%es a man a $ood $uardian will ma%e a woman a $ood $uardian+ #or their ori$inal nature is the same9 Aes) I should li%e to as% you a -uestion) 2hat is it9 2ould you say that all men are e-ual in e&cellence( or is one man better than another9 The latter) 1nd in the commonwealth which we were #oundin$ do you concei,e the $uardians who ha,e been brou$ht up on our model system to be more per#ect men( or the cobblers whose education has been cobblin$9 2hat a ridiculous -uestion4 Aou ha,e answered me( I repliedD 2ell( and may we not #urther say that our $uardians are the best o# our citi/ens9 By #ar the best) 1nd will not their wi,es be the best women9 Aes( by #ar the best) 1nd can there be anythin$ better #or the interests o# the *tate than that the men and women o# a *tate should be as $ood as possible9 There can be nothin$ better) 1nd this is what the arts o# music and $ymnastic( when present in such manner as we ha,e described( will accomplish9 "ertainly) Then we ha,e made an enactment not only possible but in the hi$hest de$ree bene#icial to the *tate9 True) Then let the wi,es o# our $uardians strip( #or their ,irtue will be their robe( and let them share in the toils o# war and the de#ence o# their country+ only in the distribution o# labours the li$hter are to be assi$ned to the women( who are the wea%er natures( but in other respects their duties are to be the same) 1nd as #or the man who lau$hs at na%ed women e&ercisin$ their bodies #rom the best o# moti,es( in his lau$hter he is pluc%in$ 1 #ruit o# unripe wisdom( and he himsel# is i$norant o# what he is lau$hin$ at( or what he is about+ --#or that is( and e,er will be( the best o# sayin$s( That the use#ul is the noble and the hurt#ul is the base) >ery true)

Here( then( is one di##iculty in our law about women( which we may say that we ha,e now escaped+ the wa,e has not swallowed us up ali,e #or enactin$ that the $uardians o# either se& should ha,e all their pursuits in common+ to the utility and also to the possibility o# this arran$ement the consistency o# the ar$ument with itsel# bears witness) Aes( that was a mi$hty wa,e which you ha,e escaped) Aes( I said( but a $reater is comin$+ you will o# this when you see the ne&t) .o on+ let me see) The law( I said( which is the se-uel o# this and o# all that has preceded( is to the #ollowin$ e##ect( --6that the wi,es o# our $uardians are to be common( and their children are to be common( and no parent is to %now his own child( nor any child his parent)6 Aes( he said( that is a much $reater wa,e than the other+ and the possibility as well as the utility o# such a law are #ar more -uestionable) I do not thin%( I said( that there can be any dispute about the ,ery $reat utility o# ha,in$ wi,es and children in common+ the possibility is -uite another matter( and will be ,ery much disputed) I thin% that a $ood many doubts may be raised about both) Aou imply that the two -uestions must be combined( I replied) Now I meant that you should admit the utility+ and in this way( as I thou$ht+ I should escape #rom one o# them( and then there would remain only the possibility) But that little attempt is detected( and there#ore you will please to $i,e a de#ence o# both) 2ell( I said( I submit to my #ate) Aet $rant me a little #a,ourD let me #east my mind with the dream as day dreamers are in the habit o# #eastin$ themsel,es when they are wal%in$ alone+ #or be#ore they ha,e disco,ered any means o# e##ectin$ their wishes --that is a matter which ne,er troubles them --they would rather not tire themsel,es by thin%in$ about possibilities+ but assumin$ that what they desire is already $ranted to them( they proceed with their plan( and deli$ht in detailin$ what they mean to do when their wish has come true --that is a way which they ha,e o# not doin$ much $ood to a capacity which was ne,er $ood #or much) Now I mysel# am be$innin$ to lose heart( and I should li%e( with your permission( to pass o,er the -uestion o# possibility at present) 1ssumin$ there#ore the possibility o# the proposal( I shall now proceed to en-uire how the rulers will carry out these arran$ements( and I shall demonstrate that our plan( i# e&ecuted( will be o# the $reatest bene#it to the *tate and to the $uardians) @irst o# all( then( i# you ha,e no objection( I will endea,our with your help to consider the ad,anta$es o# the measure+ and herea#ter the -uestion o# possibility)

I ha,e no objection+ proceed) @irst( I thin% that i# our rulers and their au&iliaries are to be worthy o# the name which they bear( there must be willin$ness to obey in the one and the power o# command in the other+ the $uardians must themsel,es obey the laws( and they must also imitate the spirit o# them in any details which are entrusted to their care) That is ri$ht( he said) Aou( I said( who are their le$islator( ha,in$ selected the men( will now select the women and $i,e them to them+ --they must be as #ar as possible o# li%e natures with them+ and they must li,e in common houses and meet at common meals( None o# them will ha,e anythin$ specially his or her own+ they will be to$ether( and will be brou$ht up to$ether( and will associate at $ymnastic e&ercises) 1nd so they will be drawn by a necessity o# their natures to ha,e intercourse with each other --necessity is not too stron$ a word( I thin%9 Aes( he said+ --necessity( not $eometrical( but another sort o# necessity which lo,ers %now( and which is #ar more con,incin$ and constrainin$ to the mass o# man%ind) True( I said+ and this( .laucon( li%e all the rest( must proceed a#ter an orderly #ashion+ in a city o# the blessed( licentiousness is an unholy thin$ which the rulers will #orbid) Aes( he said( and it ou$ht not to be permitted) Then clearly the ne&t thin$ will be to ma%e matrimony sacred in the hi$hest de$ree( and what is most bene#icial will be deemed sacred9 E&actly) 1nd how can marria$es be made most bene#icial9 --that is a -uestion which I put to you( because I see in your house do$s #or huntin$( and o# the nobler sort o# birds not a #ew) Now( I beseech you( do tell me( ha,e you e,er attended to their pairin$ and breedin$9 In what particulars9 2hy( in the #irst place( althou$h they are all o# a $ood sort( are not some better than others9 True) 1nd do you breed #rom them all indi##erently( or do you ta%e care to breed #rom the best only9 @rom the best) 1nd do you ta%e the oldest or the youn$est( or only those o# ripe a$e9 I choose only those o# ripe a$e) 1nd i# care was not ta%en in the breedin$( your do$s and birds would $reatly deteriorate9 "ertainly) 1nd the same o# horses and animals in $eneral9

!ndoubtedly) .ood hea,ens4 my dear #riend( I said( what consummate s%ill will our rulers need i# the same principle holds o# the human species4 "ertainly( the same principle holds+ but why does this in,ol,e any particular s%ill9 Because( I said( our rulers will o#ten ha,e to practise upon the body corporate with medicines) Now you %now that when patients do not re-uire medicines( but ha,e only to be put under a re$imen( the in#erior sort o# practitioner is deemed to be $ood enou$h+ but when medicine has to be $i,en( then the doctor should be more o# a man) That is -uite true( he said+ but to what are you alludin$9 I mean( I replied( that our rulers will #ind a considerable dose o# #alsehood and deceit necessary #or the $ood o# their subjectsD we were sayin$ that the use o# all these thin$s re$arded as medicines mi$ht be o# ad,anta$e) 1nd we were ,ery ri$ht) 1nd this law#ul use o# them seems li%ely to be o#ten needed in the re$ulations o# marria$es and births) How so9 2hy( I said( the principle has been already laid down that the best o# either se& should be united with the best as o#ten( and the in#erior with the in#erior( as seldom as possible+ and that they should rear the o##sprin$ o# the one sort o# union( but not o# the other( i# the #loc% is to be maintained in #irst-rate condition) Now these $oin$s on must be a secret which the rulers only %now( or there will be a #urther dan$er o# our herd( as the $uardians may be termed( brea%in$ out into rebellion) >ery true) Had we not better appoint certain #esti,als at which we will brin$ to$ether the brides and bride$rooms( and sacri#ices will be o##ered and suitable hymeneal son$s composed by our poetsD the number o# weddin$s is a matter which must be le#t to the discretion o# the rulers( whose aim will be to preser,e the a,era$e o# population9 There are many other thin$s which they will ha,e to consider( such as the e##ects o# wars and diseases and any similar a$encies( in order as #ar as this is possible to pre,ent the *tate #rom becomin$ either too lar$e or too small) "ertainly( he replied) 2e shall ha,e to in,ent some in$enious %ind o# lots which the less worthy may draw on each occasion o# our brin$in$ them to$ether( and then they will accuse their own ill-luc% and not the rulers) To be sure( he said) 1nd I thin% that our bra,er and better youth( besides their other honours and rewards( mi$ht ha,e $reater #acilities o# intercourse

with women $i,en them+ their bra,ery will be a reason( and such #athers ou$ht to ha,e as many sons as possible) True) 1nd the proper o##icers( whether male or #emale or both( #or o##ices are to be held by women as well as by men -Aes -The proper o##icers will ta%e the o##sprin$ o# the $ood parents to the pen or #old( and there they will deposit them with certain nurses who dwell in a separate -uarter+ but the o##sprin$ o# the in#erior( or o# the better when they chance to be de#ormed( will be put away in some mysterious( un%nown place( as they should be) Aes( he said( that must be done i# the breed o# the $uardians is to be %ept pure) They will pro,ide #or their nurture( and will brin$ the mothers to the #old when they are #ull o# mil%( ta%in$ the $reatest possible care that no mother reco$ni/es her own child+ and other wet-nurses may be en$a$ed i# more are re-uired) "are will also be ta%en that the process o# suc%lin$ shall not be protracted too lon$+ and the mothers will ha,e no $ettin$ up at ni$ht or other trouble( but will hand o,er all this sort o# thin$ to the nurses and attendants) Aou suppose the wi,es o# our $uardians to ha,e a #ine easy time o# it when they are ha,in$ children) 2hy( said I( and so they ou$ht) 'et us( howe,er( proceed with our scheme) 2e were sayin$ that the parents should be in the prime o# li#e9 >ery true) 1nd what is the prime o# li#e9 3ay it not be de#ined as a period o# about twenty years in a woman6s li#e( and thirty in a man6s9 2hich years do you mean to include9 1 woman( I said( at twenty years o# a$e may be$in to bear children to the *tate( and continue to bear them until #orty+ a man may be$in at #i,e-and-twenty( when he has passed the point at which the pulse o# li#e beats -uic%est( and continue to be$et children until he be #i#ty-#i,e) "ertainly( he said( both in men and women those years are the prime o# physical as well as o# intellectual ,i$our) 1ny one abo,e or below the prescribed a$es who ta%es part in the public hymeneals shall be said to ha,e done an unholy and unri$hteous thin$+ the child o# which he is the #ather( i# it steals into li#e( will ha,e been concei,ed under auspices ,ery unli%e the sacri#ices and prayers( which at each hymeneal priestesses and priest and the whole city will o##er( that the new $eneration may be better and more use#ul than their $ood and use#ul parents( whereas his child will be the

o##sprin$ o# dar%ness and stran$e lust) >ery true( he replied) 1nd the same law will apply to any one o# those within the prescribed a$e who #orms a connection with any woman in the prime o# li#e without the sanction o# the rulers+ #or we shall say that he is raisin$ up a bastard to the *tate( uncerti#ied and unconsecrated) >ery true( he replied) This applies( howe,er( only to those who are within the speci#ied a$eD a#ter that we allow them to ran$e at will( e&cept that a man may not marry his dau$hter or his dau$hter6s dau$hter( or his mother or his mother6s mother+ and women( on the other hand( are prohibited #rom marryin$ their sons or #athers( or son6s son or #ather6s #ather( and so on in either direction) 1nd we $rant all this( accompanyin$ the permission with strict orders to pre,ent any embryo which may come into bein$ #rom seein$ the li$ht+ and i# any #orce a way to the birth( the parents must understand that the o##sprin$ o# such an union cannot be maintained( and arran$e accordin$ly) That also( he said( is a reasonable proposition) But how will they %now who are #athers and dau$hters( and so on9 They will ne,er %now) The way will be thisD --datin$ #rom the day o# the hymeneal( the bride$room who was then married will call all the male children who are born in the se,enth and tenth month a#terwards his sons( and the #emale children his dau$hters( and they will call him #ather( and he will call their children his $randchildren( and they will call the elder $eneration $rand#athers and $randmothers) 1ll who were be$otten at the time when their #athers and mothers came to$ether will be called their brothers and sisters( and these( as I was sayin$( will be #orbidden to inter-marry) This( howe,er( is not to be understood as an absolute prohibition o# the marria$e o# brothers and sisters+ i# the lot #a,ours them( and they recei,e the sanction o# the Pythian oracle( the law will allow them) Cuite ri$ht( he replied) *uch is the scheme( .laucon( accordin$ to which the $uardians o# our *tate are to ha,e their wi,es and #amilies in common) 1nd now you would ha,e the ar$ument show that this community is consistent with the rest o# our polity( and also that nothin$ can be better --would you not9 Aes( certainly) *hall we try to #ind a common basis by as%in$ o# oursel,es what ou$ht to be the chie# aim o# the le$islator in ma%in$ laws and in the or$ani/ation o# a *tate( --what is the $reatest I $ood( and what is the $reatest e,il( and then consider whether our pre,ious description has the stamp o# the $ood or o# the e,il9 By all means) "an there be any $reater e,il than discord and distraction and plurality where unity ou$ht to rei$n9 or any $reater $ood than the bond o# unity9

There cannot) 1nd there is unity where there is community o# pleasures and pains --where all the citi/ens are $lad or $rie,ed on the same occasions o# joy and sorrow9 No doubt) Aes+ and where there is no common but only pri,ate #eelin$ a *tate is disor$ani/ed --when you ha,e one hal# o# the world triumphin$ and the other plun$ed in $rie# at the same e,ents happenin$ to the city or the citi/ens9 "ertainly) *uch di##erences commonly ori$inate in a disa$reement about the use o# the terms 6mine6 and 6not mine(6 6his6 and 6not his)6 E&actly so) 1nd is not that the best-ordered *tate in which the $reatest number o# persons apply the terms 6mine6 and 6not mine6 in the same way to the same thin$9 Cuite true) Or that a$ain which most nearly approaches to the condition o# the indi,idual --as in the body( when but a #in$er o# one o# us is hurt( the whole #rame( drawn towards the soul as a center and #ormin$ one %in$dom under the rulin$ power therein( #eels the hurt and sympathi/es all to$ether with the part a##ected( and we say that the man has a pain in his #in$er+ and the same e&pression is used about any other part o# the body( which has a sensation o# pain at su##erin$ or o# pleasure at the alle,iation o# su##erin$) >ery true( he replied+ and I a$ree with you that in the best-ordered *tate there is the nearest approach to this common #eelin$ which you describe) Then when any one o# the citi/ens e&periences any $ood or e,il( the whole *tate will ma%e his case their own( and will either rejoice or sorrow with him9 Aes( he said( that is what will happen in a well-ordered *tate) It will now be time( I said( #or us to return to our *tate and see whether this or some other #orm is most in accordance with these #undamental principles) >ery $ood) Our *tate li%e e,ery other has rulers and subjects9 True) 1ll o# whom will call one another citi/ens9 O# course) But is there not another name which people $i,e to their rulers in other *tates9

.enerally they call them masters( but in democratic *tates they simply call them rulers) 1nd in our *tate what other name besides that o# citi/ens do the people $i,e the rulers9 They are called sa,iours and helpers( he replied) 1nd what do the rulers call the people9 Their maintainers and #oster-#athers) 1nd what do they call them in other *tates9 *la,es) 1nd what do the rulers call one another in other *tates9 @ellow-rulers) 1nd what in ours9 @ellow-$uardians) id you e,er %now an e&ample in any other *tate o# a ruler who would spea% o# one o# his collea$ues as his #riend and o# another as not bein$ his #riend9 Aes( ,ery o#ten) 1nd the #riend he re$ards and describes as one in whom he has an interest( and the other as a stran$er in whom he has no interest9 E&actly) But would any o# your $uardians thin% or spea% o# any other $uardian as a stran$er9 "ertainly he would not+ #or e,ery one whom they meet will be re$arded by them either as a brother or sister( or #ather or mother( or son or dau$hter( or as the child or parent o# those who are thus connected with him) "apital( I said+ but let me as% you once moreD *hall they be a #amily in name only+ or shall they in all their actions be true to the name9 @or e&ample( in the use o# the word 6#ather(6 would the care o# a #ather be implied and the #ilial re,erence and duty and obedience to him which the law commands+ and is the ,iolator o# these duties to be re$arded as an impious and unri$hteous person who is not li%ely to recei,e much $ood either at the hands o# .od or o# man9 1re these to be or not to be the strains which the children will hear repeated in their ears by all the citi/ens about those who are intimated to them to be their parents and the rest o# their %ins#ol%9 These( he said( and none other+ #or what can be more ridiculous than #or them to utter the names o# #amily ties with the lips only and not to act in the spirit o# them9 Then in our city the lan$ua$e o# harmony and concord will be more o#ten beard than in any other) 1s I was describin$ be#ore( when any one is well or ill( the uni,ersal word will be with me it is well6 or 6it is ill)6

3ost true) 1nd a$reeably to this mode o# thin%in$ and spea%in$( were we not sayin$ that they will ha,e their pleasures and pains in common9 Aes( and so they will) 1nd they will ha,e a common interest in the same thin$ which they will ali%e call 6my own(6 and ha,in$ this common interest they will ha,e a common #eelin$ o# pleasure and pain9 Aes( #ar more so than in other *tates) 1nd the reason o# this( o,er and abo,e the $eneral constitution o# the *tate( will be that the $uardians will ha,e a community o# women and children9 That will be the chie# reason) 1nd this unity o# #eelin$ we admitted to be the $reatest $ood( as was implied in our own comparison o# a well-ordered *tate to the relation o# the body and the members( when a##ected by pleasure or pain9 That we ac%nowled$ed( and ,ery ri$htly) Then the community o# wi,es and children amon$ our citi/ens is clearly the source o# the $reatest $ood to the *tate9 "ertainly) 1nd this a$rees with the other principle which we were a##irmin$( --that the $uardians were not to ha,e houses or lands or any other property+ their pay was to be their #ood( which they were to recei,e #rom the other citi/ens( and they were to ha,e no pri,ate e&penses+ #or we intended them to preser,e their true character o# $uardians) Ri$ht( he replied) Both the community o# property and the community o# #amilies( as I am sayin$( tend to ma%e them more truly $uardians+ they will not tear the city in pieces by di##erin$ about 6mine6 and 6not mine+6 each man dra$$in$ any ac-uisition which he has made into a separate house o# his own( where he has a separate wi#e and children and pri,ate pleasures and pains+ but all will be a##ected as #ar as may be by the same pleasures and pains because they are all o# one opinion about what is near and dear to them( and there#ore they all tend towards a common end) "ertainly( he replied) 1nd as they ha,e nothin$ but their persons which they can call their own( suits and complaints will ha,e no e&istence amon$ them+ they will be deli,ered #rom all those -uarrels o# which money or children or relations are the occasion) O# course they will) Neither will trials #or assault or insult e,er be li%ely to occur amon$ them) @or that e-uals should de#end themsel,es a$ainst e-uals we shall maintain to be honourable and ri$ht+ we shall ma%e the protection o# the person a matter o# necessity)

That is $ood( he said) Aes+ and there is a #urther $ood in the law+ ,i/) that i# a man has a -uarrel with another he will satis#y his resentment then and there( and not proceed to more dan$erous len$ths) "ertainly) To the elder shall be assi$ned the duty o# rulin$ and chastisin$ the youn$er) "learly) Nor can there be a doubt that the youn$er will not stri%e or do any other ,iolence to an elder( unless the ma$istrates command him+ nor will he sli$ht him in any way) @or there are two $uardians( shame and #ear( mi$hty to pre,ent himD shame( which ma%es men re#rain #rom layin$ hands on those who are to them in the relation o# parents+ #ear( that the injured one will be succoured by the others who are his brothers( sons( one wi #athers) That is true( he replied) Then in e,ery way the laws will help the citi/ens to %eep the peace with one another9 Aes( there will be no want o# peace) 1nd as the $uardians will ne,er -uarrel amon$ themsel,es there will be no dan$er o# the rest o# the city bein$ di,ided either a$ainst them or a$ainst one another) None whate,er) I hardly li%e e,en to mention the little meannesses o# which they will be rid( #or they are beneath noticeD such( #or e&ample( as the #lattery o# the rich by the poor( and all the pains and pan$s which men e&perience in brin$in$ up a #amily( and in #indin$ money to buy necessaries #or their household( borrowin$ and then repudiatin$( $ettin$ how they can( and $i,in$ the money into the hands o# women and sla,es to %eep --the many e,ils o# so many %inds which people su##er in this way are mean enou$h and ob,ious enou$h( and not worth spea%in$ o#) Aes( he said( a man has no need o# eyes in order to percei,e that) 1nd #rom all these e,ils they will be deli,ered( and their li#e will be blessed as the li#e o# Olympic ,ictors and yet more blessed) How so9 The Olympic ,ictor( I said( is deemed happy in recei,in$ a part only o# the blessedness which is secured to our citi/ens( who ha,e won a more $lorious ,ictory and ha,e a more complete maintenance at the public cost) @or the ,ictory which they ha,e won is the sal,ation o# the whole *tate+ and the crown with which they and their children are crowned is the #ulness o# all that li#e needs+ they recei,e rewards #rom the hands o# their country while li,in$( and a#ter death ha,e an honourable burial) Aes( he said( and $lorious rewards they are)

o you remember( I said( how in the course o# the pre,ious discussion some one who shall be nameless accused us o# ma%in$ our $uardians unhappy --they had nothin$ and mi$ht ha,e possessed all thin$s-to whom we replied that( i# an occasion o##ered( we mi$ht perhaps herea#ter consider this -uestion( but that( as at present ad,ised( we would ma%e our $uardians truly $uardians( and that we were #ashionin$ the *tate with a ,iew to the $reatest happiness( not o# any particular class( but o# the whole9 Aes( I remember) 1nd what do you say( now that the li#e o# our protectors is made out to be #ar better and nobler than that o# Olympic ,ictors --is the li#e o# shoema%ers( or any other artisans( or o# husbandmen( to be compared with it9 "ertainly not) 1t the same time I ou$ht here to repeat what I ha,e said elsewhere( that i# any o# our $uardians shall try to be happy in such a manner that he will cease to be a $uardian( and is not content with this sa#e and harmonious li#e( which( in our jud$ment( is o# all li,es the best( but in#atuated by some youth#ul conceit o# happiness which $ets up into his head shall see% to appropriate the whole *tate to himsel#( then he will ha,e to learn how wisely Hesiod spo%e( when he said( 6hal# is more than the whole)6 I# he were to consult me( I should say to himD *tay where you are( when you ha,e the o##er o# such a li#e) Aou a$ree then( I said( that men and women are to ha,e a common way o# li#e such as we ha,e described --common education( common children+ and they are to watch o,er the citi/ens in common whether abidin$ in the city or $oin$ out to war+ they are to %eep watch to$ether( and to hunt to$ether li%e do$s+ and always and in all thin$s( as #ar as they are able( women are to share with the men9 1nd in so doin$ they will do what is best( and will not ,iolate( but preser,e the natural relation o# the se&es) I a$ree with you( he replied) The en-uiry( I said( has yet to be made( whether such a community be #ound possible --as amon$ other animals( so also amon$ men --and i# possible( in what way possible9 Aou ha,e anticipated the -uestion which I was about to su$$est) There is no di##iculty( I said( in seein$ how war will be carried on by them) How9 2hy( o# course they will $o on e&peditions to$ether+ and will ta%e with them any o# their children who are stron$ enou$h( that( a#ter the manner o# the artisan6s child( they may loo% on at the wor% which they will ha,e to do when they are $rown up+ and besides loo%in$ on they will ha,e to help and be o# use in war( and to wait upon their

#athers and mothers) id you ne,er obser,e in the arts how the potters6 boys loo% on and help( lon$ be#ore they touch the wheel9 Aes( I ha,e) 1nd shall potters be more care#ul in educatin$ their children and in $i,in$ them the opportunity o# seein$ and practisin$ their duties than our $uardians will be9 The idea is ridiculous( he said) There is also the e##ect on the parents( with whom( as with other animals( the presence o# their youn$ ones will be the $reatest incenti,e to ,alour) That is -uite true( *ocrates+ and yet i# they are de#eated( which may o#ten happen in war( how $reat the dan$er is4 the children will be lost as well as their parents( and the *tate will ne,er reco,er) True( I said+ but would you ne,er allow them to run any ris%9 I am #ar #rom sayin$ that) 2ell( but i# they are e,er to run a ris% should they not do so on some occasion when( i# they escape disaster( they will be the better #or it9 "learly) 2hether the #uture soldiers do or do not see war in the days o# their youth is a ,ery important matter( #or the sa%e o# which some ris% may #airly be incurred) Aes( ,ery important) This then must be our #irst step( --to ma%e our children spectators o# war+ but we must also contri,e that they shall be secured a$ainst dan$er+ then all will be well) True) Their parents may be supposed not to be blind to the ris%s o# war( but to %now( as #ar as human #oresi$ht can( what e&peditions are sa#e and what dan$erous9 That may be assumed) 1nd they will ta%e them on the sa#e e&peditions and be cautious about the dan$erous ones9 True) 1nd they will place them under the command o# e&perienced ,eterans who will be their leaders and teachers9 >ery properly) *till( the dan$ers o# war cannot be always #oreseen+ there is a $ood deal o# chance about them9 True) Then a$ainst such chances the children must be at once #urnished with

win$s( in order that in the hour o# need they may #ly away and escape) 2hat do you mean9 he said) I mean that we must mount them on horses in their earliest youth( and when they ha,e learnt to ride( ta%e them on horsebac% to see warD the horses must be spirited and warli%e( but the most tractable and yet the swi#test that can be had) In this way they will $et an e&cellent ,iew o# what is herea#ter to be their own business+ and i# there is dan$er they ha,e only to #ollow their elder leaders and escape) I belie,e that you are ri$ht( he said) Ne&t( as to war+ what are to be the relations o# your soldiers to one another and to their enemies9 I should be inclined to propose that the soldier who lea,es his ran% or throws away his arms( or is $uilty o# any other act o# cowardice( should be de$raded into the ran% o# a husbandman or artisan) 2hat do you thin%9 By all means( I should say) 1nd he who allows himsel# to be ta%en prisoner may as well be made a present o# to his enemies+ he is their law#ul prey( and let them do what they li%e with him) "ertainly) But the hero who has distin$uished himsel#( what shall be done to him9 In the #irst place( he shall recei,e honour in the army #rom his youth#ul comrades+ e,ery one o# them in succession shall crown him) 2hat do you say9 I appro,e) 1nd what do you say to his recei,in$ the ri$ht hand o# #ellowship9 To that too( I a$ree) But you will hardly a$ree to my ne&t proposal) 2hat is your proposal9 That he should %iss and be %issed by them) 3ost certainly( and I should be disposed to $o #urther( and sayD 'et no one whom he has a mind to %iss re#use to be %issed by him while the e&pedition lasts) *o that i# there be a lo,er in the army( whether his lo,e be youth or maiden( he may be more ea$er to win the pri/e o# ,alour) "apital( I said) That the bra,e man is to ha,e more wi,es than others has been already determinedD and he is to ha,e #irst choices in such matters more than others( in order that he may ha,e as many children as possible9 1$reed) 1$ain( there is another manner in which( accordin$ to Homer( bra,e youths should be honoured+ #or he tells how 1ja&( a#ter he had distin$uished himsel# in battle( was rewarded with lon$ chines( which seems to be a compliment appropriate to a hero in the #lower o# his a$e( bein$ not only a tribute o# honour but also a ,ery stren$thenin$ thin$)

3ost true( he said) Then in this( I said( Homer shall be our teacher+ and we too( at sacri#ices and on the li%e occasions( will honour the bra,e accordin$ to the measure o# their ,alour( whether men or women( with hymns and those other distinctions which we were mentionin$+ also with seats o# precedence( and meats and #ull cups+ and in honourin$ them( we shall be at the same time trainin$ them) That( he replied( is e&cellent) Aes( I said+ and when a man dies $loriously in war shall we not say( in the #irst place( that he is o# the $olden race9 To be sure) Nay( ha,e we not the authority o# Hesiod #or a##irmin$ that when they are dead They are holy an$els upon the earth( authors o# $ood( a,erters o# e,il( the $uardians o# speech-$i#ted men9 Aes+ and we accept his authority) 2e must learn o# the $od how we are to order the sepulture o# di,ine and heroic persona$es( and what is to be their special distinction and we must do as he bids9 By all means) 1nd in a$es to come we will re,erence them and %nee) be#ore their sepulchres as at the $ra,es o# heroes) 1nd not only they but any who are deemed pre-eminently $ood( whether they die #rom a$e( or in any other way( shall be admitted to the same honours) That is ,ery ri$ht( he said) Ne&t( how shall our soldiers treat their enemies9 2hat about this9 In what respect do you mean9 @irst o# all( in re$ard to sla,ery9 o you thin% it ri$ht that Hellenes should ensla,e Hellenic *tates( or allow others to ensla,e them( i# they can help9 *hould not their custom be to spare them( considerin$ the dan$er which there is that the whole race may one day #all under the yo%e o# the barbarians9 To spare them is in#initely better) Then no Hellene should be owned by them as a sla,e+ that is a rule which they will obser,e and ad,ise the other Hellenes to obser,e) "ertainly( he said+ they will in this way be united a$ainst the barbarians and will %eep their hands o## one another) Ne&t as to the slain+ ou$ht the con-uerors( I said( to ta%e anythin$ but their armour9 oes not the practice o# despoilin$ an enemy a##ord an e&cuse #or not #acin$ the battle9 "owards s%ul% about the dead( pretendin$ that they are #ul#illin$ a duty( and many an army be#ore now has been lost #rom this lo,e o# plunder)

>ery true) 1nd is there not illiberality and a,arice in robbin$ a corpse( and also a de$ree o# meanness and womanishness in ma%in$ an enemy o# the dead body when the real enemy has #lown away and le#t only his #i$htin$ $ear behind him( --is not this rather li%e a do$ who cannot $et at his assailant( -uarrellin$ with the stones which stri%e him instead9 >ery li%e a do$( he said) Then we must abstain #rom spoilin$ the dead or hinderin$ their burial9 Aes( he replied( we most certainly must) Neither shall we o##er up arms at the temples o# the $ods( least o# all the arms o# Hellenes( i# we care to maintain $ood #eelin$ with other Hellenes+ and( indeed( we ha,e reason to #ear that the o##erin$ o# spoils ta%en #rom %insmen may be a pollution unless commanded by the $od himsel#9 >ery true) 1$ain( as to the de,astation o# Hellenic territory or the burnin$ o# houses( what is to be the practice9 3ay I ha,e the pleasure( he said( o# hearin$ your opinion9 Both should be #orbidden( in my jud$ment+ I would ta%e the annual produce and no more) *hall I tell you why9 Pray do) 2hy( you see( there is a di##erence in the names 6discord6 and 6war(6 and I ima$ine that there is also a di##erence in their natures+ the one is e&pressi,e o# what is internal and domestic( the other o# what is e&ternal and #orei$n+ and the #irst o# the two is termed discord( and only the second( war) That is a ,ery proper distinction( he replied) 1nd may I not obser,e with e-ual propriety that the Hellenic race is all united to$ether by ties o# blood and #riendship( and alien and stran$e to the barbarians9 >ery $ood( he said) 1nd there#ore when Hellenes #i$ht with barbarians and barbarians with Hellenes( they will be described by us as bein$ at war when they #i$ht( and by nature enemies( and this %ind o# anta$onism should be called war+ but when Hellenes #i$ht with one another we shall say that Hellas is then in a state o# disorder and discord( they bein$ by nature #riends and such enmity is to be called discord) I a$ree) "onsider then( I said( when that which we ha,e ac%nowled$ed to be discord occurs( and a city is di,ided( i# both parties destroy the lands and burn the houses o# one another( how wic%ed does the stri#e appear4 No true lo,er o# his country would brin$ himsel# to tear in pieces his own nurse and motherD There mi$ht be reason in the con-ueror

depri,in$ the con-uered o# their har,est( but still they would ha,e the idea o# peace in their hearts and would not mean to $o on #i$htin$ #or e,er) Aes( he said( that is a better temper than the other) 1nd will not the city( which you are #oundin$( be an Hellenic city9 It ou$ht to be( he replied) Then will not the citi/ens be $ood and ci,ili/ed9 Aes( ,ery ci,ili/ed) 1nd will they not be lo,ers o# Hellas( and thin% o# Hellas as their own land( and share in the common temples9 3ost certainly) 1nd any di##erence which arises amon$ them will be re$arded by them as discord only --a -uarrel amon$ #riends( which is not to be called a war9 "ertainly not) Then they will -uarrel as those who intend some day to be reconciled9 "ertainly) They will use #riendly correction( but will not ensla,e or destroy their opponents+ they will be correctors( not enemies9 Just so) 1nd as they are Hellenes themsel,es they will not de,astate Hellas( nor will they burn houses( not e,en suppose that the whole population o# a city --men( women( and children --are e-ually their enemies( #or they %now that the $uilt o# war is always con#ined to a #ew persons and that the many are their #riends) 1nd #or all these reasons they will be unwillin$ to waste their lands and ra/e their houses+ their enmity to them will only last until the many innocent su##erers ha,e compelled the $uilty #ew to $i,e satis#action9 I a$ree( he said( that our citi/ens should thus deal with their Hellenic enemies+ and with barbarians as the Hellenes now deal with one another) Then let us enact this law also #or our $uardiansD-that they are neither to de,astate the lands o# Hellenes nor to burn their houses) 1$reed+ and we may a$ree also in thin%in$ that these( all our pre,ious enactments( are ,ery $ood) But still I must say( *ocrates( that i# you are allowed to $o on in this way you will entirely #or$et the other -uestion which at the commencement o# this discussion you thrust asideD --Is such an order o# thin$s possible( and how( i# at all9 @or I am -uite ready to ac%nowled$e that the plan which you propose( i# only #easible( would do all sorts o# $ood to the *tate) I will add( what you ha,e omitted( that your citi/ens will be the bra,est o# warriors( and will ne,er lea,e their ran%s( #or they will all %now one another( and each will call the other #ather( brother( son+ and i# you suppose the women to join their

armies( whether in the same ran% or in the rear( either as a terror to the enemy( or as au&iliaries in case o# need( I %now that they will then be absolutely in,incible+ and there are many domestic tic ad,anta$es which mi$ht also be mentioned and which I also #ully ac%nowled$eD but( as I admit all these ad,anta$es and as many more as you please( i# only this *tate o# yours were to come into e&istence( we need say no more about them+ assumin$ then the e&istence o# the *tate( let us now turn to the -uestion o# possibility and ways and means --the rest may be le#t) I# I loiter #or a moment( you instantly ma%e a raid upon me( I said( and ha,e no mercy+ I ha,e hardly escaped the #irst and second wa,es( and you seem not to be aware that you are now brin$in$ upon me the third( which is the $reatest and hea,iest) 2hen you ha,e seen and heard the third wa,e( I thin% you be more considerate and will ac%nowled$e that some #ear and hesitation was natural respectin$ a proposal so e&traordinary as that which I ha,e now to state and in,esti$ate) The more appeals o# this sort which you ma%e( he said( the more determined are we that you shall tell us how such a *tate is possibleD spea% out and at once) 'et me be$in by remindin$ you that we #ound our way hither in the search a#ter justice and injustice) True( he replied+ but what o# that9 I was only $oin$ to as% whether( i# we ha,e disco,ered them( we are to re-uire that the just man should in nothin$ #ail o# absolute justice+ or may we be satis#ied with an appro&imation( and the attainment in him o# a hi$her de$ree o# justice than is to be #ound in other men9 The appro&imation will be enou$h) 2e are en-uirin$ into the nature o# absolute justice and into the character o# the per#ectly just( and into injustice and the per#ectly unjust( that we mi$ht ha,e an ideal) 2e were to loo% at these in order that we mi$ht jud$e o# our own happiness and unhappiness accordin$ to the standard which they e&hibited and the de$ree in which we resembled them( but not with any ,iew o# showin$ that they could e&ist in #act) True( he said) 2ould a painter be any the worse because( a#ter ha,in$ delineated with consummate art an ideal o# a per#ectly beauti#ul man( he was unable to show that any such man could e,er ha,e e&isted9 He would be none the worse) 2ell( and were we not creatin$ an ideal o# a per#ect *tate9 To be sure) 1nd is our theory a worse theory because we are unable to pro,e the possibility o# a city bein$ ordered in the manner described9 *urely not( he replied) That is the truth( I said) But i#( at your re-uest( I am to try and

show how and under what conditions the possibility is hi$hest( I must as% you( ha,in$ this in ,iew( to repeat your #ormer admissions) 2hat admissions9 I want to %now whether ideals are e,er #ully realised in lan$ua$e9 oes not the word e&press more than the #act( and must not the actual( whate,er a man may thin%( always( in the nature o# thin$s( #all short o# the truth9 2hat do you say9 I a$ree) Then you must not insist on my pro,in$ that the actual *tate will in e,ery respect coincide with the idealD i# we are only able to disco,er how a city may be $o,erned nearly as we proposed( you will admit that we ha,e disco,ered the possibility which you demand+ and will be contented) I am sure that I should be contented --will not you9 Aes( I will) 'et me ne&t endea,our to show what is that #ault in *tates which is the cause o# their present maladministration( and what is the least chan$e which will enable a *tate to pass into the truer #orm+ and let the chan$e( i# possible( be o# one thin$ only( or i# not( o# two+ at any rate( let the chan$es be as #ew and sli$ht as possible) "ertainly( he replied) I thin%( I said( that there mi$ht be a re#orm o# the *tate i# only one chan$e were made( which is not a sli$ht or easy thou$h still a possible one) 2hat is it9 he said) Now then( I said( I $o to meet that which I li%en to the $reatest o# the wa,es+ yet shall the word be spo%en( e,en thou$h the wa,e brea% and drown me in lau$hter and dishonour+ and do you mar% my words) Proceed) I saidD !ntil philosophers are %in$s( or the %in$s and princes o# this world ha,e the spirit and power o# philosophy( and political $reatness and wisdom meet in one( and those commoner natures who pursue either to the e&clusion o# the other are compelled to stand aside( cities will ne,er ha,e rest #rom their e,ils( --nor the human race( as I belie,e( --and then only will this our *tate ha,e a possibility o# li#e and behold the li$ht o# day) *uch was the thou$ht( my dear .laucon( which I would #ain ha,e uttered i# it had not seemed too e&tra,a$ant+ #or to be con,inced that in no other *tate can there be happiness pri,ate or public is indeed a hard thin$) *ocrates( what do you mean9 I would ha,e you consider that the word which you ha,e uttered is one at which numerous persons( and ,ery respectable persons too( in a #i$ure pullin$ o## their coats all in a moment( and sei/in$ any weapon that comes to hand( will run at you mi$ht and main( be#ore you %now where you are( intendin$ to do hea,en %nows what+ and i# you don6t prepare an answer( and put yoursel# in motion( you will be prepared by their #ine wits(6 and no mista%e)

Aou $ot me into the scrape( I said) 1nd I was -uite ri$ht+ howe,er( I will do all I can to $et you out o# it+ but I can only $i,e you $ood-will and $ood ad,ice( and( perhaps( I may be able to #it answers to your -uestions better than another --that is all) 1nd now( ha,in$ such an au&iliary( you must do your best to show the unbelie,ers that you are ri$ht) I ou$ht to try( I said( since you o##er me such in,aluable assistance) 1nd I thin% that( i# there is to be a chance o# our escapin$( we must e&plain to them whom we mean when we say that philosophers are to rule in the *tate+ then we shall be able to de#end oursel,esD There will be disco,ered to be some natures who ou$ht to study philosophy and to be leaders in the *tate+ and others who are not born to be philosophers( and are meant to be #ollowers rather than leaders) Then now #or a de#inition( he said) @ollow me( I said( and I hope that I may in some way or other be able to $i,e you a satis#actory e&planation) Proceed) I dare say that you remember( and there#ore I need not remind you( that a lo,er( i# lie is worthy o# the name( ou$ht to show his lo,e( not to some one part o# that which he lo,es( but to the whole) I really do not understand( and there#ore be$ o# you to assist my memory) 1nother person( I said( mi$ht #airly reply as you do+ but a man o# pleasure li%e yoursel# ou$ht to %now that all who are in the #lower o# youth do somehow or other raise a pan$ or emotion in a lo,er6s breast( and are thou$ht by him to be worthy o# his a##ectionate re$ards) Is not this a way which you ha,e with the #airD one has a snub nose( and you praise his charmin$ #ace+ the hoo%-nose o# another has( you say( a royal loo%+ while he who is neither snub nor hoo%ed has the $race o# re$ularityD the dar% ,isa$e is manly( the #air are children o# the $ods+ and as to the sweet 6honey pale(6 as they are called( what is the ,ery name but the in,ention o# a lo,er who tal%s in diminuti,es( and is not ad,erse to paleness i# appearin$ on the chee% o# youth9 In a word( there is no e&cuse which you will not ma%e( and nothin$ which you will not say( in order not to lose a sin$le #lower that blooms in the sprin$-time o# youth) I# you ma%e me an authority in matters o# lo,e( #or the sa%e o# the ar$ument( I assent) 1nd what do you say o# lo,ers o# wine9 o you not see them doin$ the same9 They are $lad o# any prete&t o# drin%in$ any wine) >ery $ood) 1nd the same is true o# ambitious men+ i# they cannot command an army( they are willin$ to command a #ile+ and i# they cannot be honoured by really $reat and important persons( they are $lad to be honoured by lesser and meaner people( but honour o# some %ind they must ha,e)

E&actly) Once more let me as%D oes he who desires any class o# $oods( desire the whole class or a part only9 The whole) 1nd may we not say o# the philosopher that he is a lo,er( not o# a part o# wisdom only( but o# the whole9 Aes( o# the whole) 1nd he who disli%es learnin$s( especially in youth( when he has no power o# jud$in$ what is $ood and what is not( such an one we maintain not to be a philosopher or a lo,er o# %nowled$e( just as he who re#uses his #ood is not hun$ry( and may be said to ha,e a bad appetite and not a $ood one9 >ery true( he said) 2hereas he who has a taste #or e,ery sort o# %nowled$e and who is curious to learn and is ne,er satis#ied( may be justly termed a philosopher9 1m I not ri$ht9 .laucon saidD I# curiosity ma%es a philosopher( you will #ind many a stran$e bein$ will ha,e a title to the name) 1ll the lo,ers o# si$hts ha,e a deli$ht in learnin$( and must there#ore be included) 3usical amateurs( too( are a #ol% stran$ely out o# place amon$ philosophers( #or they are the last persons in the world who would come to anythin$ li%e a philosophical discussion( i# they could help( while they run about at the ionysiac #esti,als as i# they had let out their ears to hear e,ery chorus+ whether the per#ormance is in town or country --that ma%es no di##erence --they are there) Now are we to maintain that all these and any who ha,e similar tastes( as well as the pro#essors o# -uite minor arts( are philosophers9 "ertainly not( I replied+ they are only an imitation) He saidD 2ho then are the true philosophers9 Those( I said( who are lo,ers o# the ,ision o# truth) That is also $ood( he said+ but I should li%e to %now what you mean9 To another( I replied( I mi$ht ha,e a di##iculty in e&plainin$+ but I am sure that you will admit a proposition which I am about to ma%e) 2hat is the proposition9 That since beauty is the opposite o# u$liness( they are two9 "ertainly) 1nd inasmuch as they are two( each o# them is one9 True a$ain) 1nd o# just and unjust( $ood and e,il( and o# e,ery other class( the same remar% holdsD ta%en sin$ly( each o# them one+ but #rom the ,arious combinations o# them with actions and thin$s and with one another( they are seen in all sorts o# li$hts and appear many9 >ery true) 1nd this is the distinction which I draw between the si$ht-lo,in$(

art-lo,in$( practical class and those o# whom I am spea%in$( and who are alone worthy o# the name o# philosophers) How do you distin$uish them9 he said) The lo,ers o# sounds and si$hts( I replied( are( as I concei,e( #ond o# #ine tones and colours and #orms and all the arti#icial products that are made out o# them( but their mind is incapable o# seein$ or lo,in$ absolute beauty) True( he replied) @ew are they who are able to attain to the si$ht o# this) >ery true) 1nd he who( ha,in$ a sense o# beauti#ul thin$s has no sense o# absolute beauty( or who( i# another lead him to a %nowled$e o# that beauty is unable to #ollow --o# such an one I as%( Is he awa%e or in a dream only9 Re#lectD is not the dreamer( sleepin$ or wa%in$( one who li%ens dissimilar thin$s( who puts the copy in the place o# the real object9 I should certainly say that such an one was dreamin$) But ta%e the case o# the other( who reco$nises the e&istence o# absolute beauty and is able to distin$uish the idea #rom the objects which participate in the idea( neither puttin$ the objects in the place o# the idea nor the idea in the place o# the objects --is he a dreamer( or is he awa%e9 He is wide awa%e) 1nd may we not say that the mind o# the one who %nows has %nowled$e( and that the mind o# the other( who opines only( has opinion "ertainly) But suppose that the latter should -uarrel with us and dispute our statement( can we administer any soothin$ cordial or ad,ice to him( without re,ealin$ to him that there is sad disorder in his wits9 2e must certainly o##er him some $ood ad,ice( he replied) "ome( then( and let us thin% o# somethin$ to say to him) *hall we be$in by assurin$ him that he is welcome to any %nowled$e which he may ha,e( and that we are rejoiced at his ha,in$ it9 But we should li%e to as% him a -uestionD oes he who has %nowled$e %now somethin$ or nothin$9 5Aou must answer #or him)7 I answer that he %nows somethin$) *omethin$ that is or is not9 *omethin$ that is+ #or how can that which is not e,er be %nown9 1nd are we assured( a#ter loo%in$ at the matter #rom many points o# ,iew( that absolute bein$ is or may be absolutely %nown( but that the utterly non-e&istent is utterly un%nown9 Nothin$ can be more certain) .ood) But i# there be anythin$ which is o# such a nature as to be

and not to be( that will ha,e a place intermediate between pure bein$ and the absolute ne$ation o# bein$9 Aes( between them) 1nd( as %nowled$e corresponded to bein$ and i$norance o# necessity to not-bein$( #or that intermediate between bein$ and not-bein$ there has to be disco,ered a correspondin$ intermediate between i$norance and %nowled$e( i# there be such9 "ertainly) o we admit the e&istence o# opinion9 !ndoubtedly) 1s bein$ the same with %nowled$e( or another #aculty9 1nother #aculty) Then opinion and %nowled$e ha,e to do with di##erent %inds o# matter correspondin$ to this di##erence o# #aculties9 Aes) 1nd %nowled$e is relati,e to bein$ and %nows bein$) But be#ore I proceed #urther I will ma%e a di,ision) 2hat di,ision9 I will be$in by placin$ #aculties in a class by themsel,esD they are powers in us( and in all other thin$s( by which we do as we do) *i$ht and hearin$( #or e&ample( I should call #aculties) Ha,e I clearly e&plained the class which I mean9 Aes( I -uite understand) Then let me tell you my ,iew about them) I do not see them( and there#ore the distinctions o# #ire( colour( and the li%e( which enable me to discern the di##erences o# some thin$s( do not apply to them) In spea%in$ o# a #aculty I thin% only o# its sphere and its result+ and that which has the same sphere and the same result I call the same #aculty( but that which has another sphere and another result I call di##erent) 2ould that be your way o# spea%in$9 Aes) 1nd will you be so ,ery $ood as to answer one more -uestion9 2ould you say that %nowled$e is a #aculty( or in what class would you place it9 "ertainly %nowled$e is a #aculty( and the mi$htiest o# all #aculties) 1nd is opinion also a #aculty9 "ertainly( he said+ #or opinion is that with which we are able to #orm an opinion) 1nd yet you were ac%nowled$in$ a little while a$o that %nowled$e is not the same as opinion9 2hy( yes( he saidD how can any reasonable bein$ e,er identi#y that which is in#allible with that which errs9

1n e&cellent answer( pro,in$( I said( that we are -uite conscious o# a distinction between them) Aes) Then %nowled$e and opinion ha,in$ distinct powers ha,e also distinct spheres or subject-matters9 That is certain) Bein$ is the sphere or subject-matter o# %nowled$e( and %nowled$e is to %now the nature o# bein$9 Aes) 1nd opinion is to ha,e an opinion9 Aes) 1nd do we %now what we opine9 or is the subject-matter o# opinion the same as the subject-matter o# %nowled$e9 Nay( he replied( that has been already dispro,en+ i# di##erence in #aculty implies di##erence in the sphere or subject matter( and i#( as we were sayin$( opinion and %nowled$e are distinct #aculties( then the sphere o# %nowled$e and o# opinion cannot be the same) Then i# bein$ is the subject-matter o# %nowled$e( somethin$ else must be the subject-matter o# opinion9 Aes( somethin$ else) 2ell then( is not-bein$ the subject-matter o# opinion9 or( rather( how can there be an opinion at all about not-bein$9 Re#lectD when a man has an opinion( has he not an opinion about somethin$9 "an he ha,e an opinion which is an opinion about nothin$9 Impossible) He who has an opinion has an opinion about some one thin$9 Aes) 1nd not-bein$ is not one thin$ but( properly spea%in$( nothin$9 True) O# not-bein$( i$norance was assumed to be the necessary correlati,e+ o# bein$( %nowled$e9 True( he said) Then opinion is not concerned either with bein$ or with not-bein$9 Not with either) 1nd can there#ore neither be i$norance nor %nowled$e9 That seems to be true) But is opinion to be sou$ht without and beyond either o# them( in a $reater clearness than %nowled$e( or in a $reater dar%ness than i$norance9 In neither) Then I suppose that opinion appears to you to be dar%er than %nowled$e(

but li$hter than i$norance9 Both+ and in no small de$ree) 1nd also to be within and between them9 Aes) Then you would in#er that opinion is intermediate9 No -uestion) But were we not sayin$ be#ore( that i# anythin$ appeared to be o# a sort which is and is not at the same time( that sort o# thin$ would appear also to lie in the inter,al between pure bein$ and absolute not-bein$+ and that the correspondin$ #aculty is neither %nowled$e nor i$norance( but will be #ound in the inter,al between them9 True) 1nd in that inter,al there has now been disco,ered somethin$ which we call opinion9 There has) Then what remains to be disco,ered is the object which parta%es e-ually o# the nature o# bein$ and not-bein$( and cannot ri$htly be termed either( pure and simple+ this un%nown term( when disco,ered( we may truly call the subject o# opinion( and assi$n each to its proper #aculty( -the e&tremes to the #aculties o# the e&tremes and the mean to the #aculty o# the mean) True) This bein$ premised( I would as% the $entleman who is o# opinion that there is no absolute or unchan$eable idea o# beauty --in whose opinion the beauti#ul is the mani#old --he( I say( your lo,er o# beauti#ul si$hts( who cannot bear to be told that the beauti#ul is one( and the just is one( or that anythin$ is one --to him I would appeal( sayin$( 2ill you be so ,ery %ind( sir( as to tell us whether( o# all these beauti#ul thin$s( there is one which will not be #ound u$ly+ or o# the just( which will not be #ound unjust+ or o# the holy( which will not also be unholy9 No( he replied+ the beauti#ul will in some point o# ,iew be #ound u$ly+ and the same is true o# the rest) 1nd may not the many which are doubles be also hal,es9 --doubles( that is( o# one thin$( and hal,es o# another9 Cuite true) 1nd thin$s $reat and small( hea,y and li$ht( as they are termed( will not be denoted by these any more than by the opposite names9 True+ both these and the opposite names will always attach to all o# them) 1nd can any one o# those many thin$s which are called by particular names be said to be this rather than not to be this9 He repliedD They are li%e the punnin$ riddles which are as%ed at #easts

or the children6s pu//le about the eunuch aimin$ at the bat( with what he hit him( as they say in the pu//le( and upon what the bat was sittin$) The indi,idual objects o# which I am spea%in$ are also a riddle( and ha,e a double senseD nor can you #i& them in your mind( either as bein$ or not-bein$( or both( or neither) Then what will you do with them9 I said) "an they ha,e a better place than between bein$ and not-bein$9 @or they are clearly not in $reater dar%ness or ne$ation than not-bein$( or more #ull o# li$ht and e&istence than bein$) That is -uite true( he said) Thus then we seem to ha,e disco,ered that the many ideas which the multitude entertain about the beauti#ul and about all other thin$s are tossin$ about in some re$ion which is hal#way between pure bein$ and pure not-bein$9 2e ha,e) Aes+ and we had be#ore a$reed that anythin$ o# this %ind which we mi$ht #ind was to be described as matter o# opinion( and not as matter o# %nowled$e+ bein$ the intermediate #lu& which is cau$ht and detained by the intermediate #aculty) Cuite true) Then those who see the many beauti#ul( and who yet neither see absolute beauty( nor can #ollow any $uide who points the way thither+ who see the many just( and not absolute justice( and the li%e( --such persons may be said to ha,e opinion but not %nowled$e9 That is certain) But those who see the absolute and eternal and immutable may be said to %now( and not to ha,e opinion only9 Neither can that be denied) The one lo,es and embraces the subjects o# %nowled$e( the other those o# opinion9 The latter are the same( as I dare say will remember( who listened to sweet sounds and $a/ed upon #air colours( but would not tolerate the e&istence o# absolute beauty) Aes( I remember) *hall we then be $uilty o# any impropriety in callin$ them lo,ers o# opinion rather than lo,ers o# wisdom( and will they be ,ery an$ry with us #or thus describin$ them9 I shall tell them not to be an$ry+ no man should be an$ry at what is true) But those who lo,e the truth in each thin$ are to be called lo,ers o# wisdom and not lo,ers o# opinion) 1ssuredly) ----------------------------------------------------------------------

BOOG >I *ocrates - .'1!"ON 1nd thus( .laucon( a#ter the ar$ument has $one a weary way( the true and the #alse philosophers ha,e at len$th appeared in ,iew) I do not thin%( he said( that the way could ha,e been shortened) I suppose not( I said+ and yet I belie,e that we mi$ht ha,e had a better ,iew o# both o# them i# the discussion could ha,e been con#ined to this one subject and i# there were not many other -uestions awaitin$ us( which he who desires to see in what respect the li#e o# the just di##ers #rom that o# the unjust must consider) 1nd what is the ne&t -uestion9 he as%ed) *urely( I said( the one which #ollows ne&t in order) Inasmuch as philosophers only are able to $rasp the eternal and unchan$eable( and those who wander in the re$ion o# the many and ,ariable are not philosophers( I must as% you which o# the two classes should be the rulers o# our *tate9 1nd how can we ri$htly answer that -uestion9 2hiche,er o# the two are best able to $uard the laws and institutions o# our *tate --let them be our $uardians) >ery $ood) Neither( I said( can there be any -uestion that the $uardian who is to %eep anythin$ should ha,e eyes rather than no eyes9 There can be no -uestion o# that) 1nd are not those who are ,erily and indeed wantin$ in the %nowled$e o# the true bein$ o# each thin$( and who ha,e in their souls no clear pattern( and are unable as with a painter6s eye to loo% at the absolute truth and to that ori$inal to repair( and ha,in$ per#ect ,ision o# the other world to order the laws about beauty( $oodness( justice in this( i# not already ordered( and to $uard and preser,e the order o# them --are not such persons( I as%( simply blind9 Truly( he replied( they are much in that condition) 1nd shall they be our $uardians when there are others who( besides bein$ their e-uals in e&perience and #allin$ short o# them in no particular o# ,irtue( also %now the ,ery truth o# each thin$9 There can be no reason( he said( #or rejectin$ those who ha,e this $reatest o# all $reat -ualities+ they must always ha,e the #irst place unless they #ail in some other respect) *uppose then( I said( that we determine how #ar they can unite this and the other e&cellences) By all means)

In the #irst place( as we be$an by obser,in$( the nature o# the philosopher has to be ascertained) 2e must come to an understandin$ about him( and( when we ha,e done so( then( i# I am not mista%en( we shall also ac%nowled$e that such an union o# -ualities is possible( and that those in whom they are united( and those only( should be rulers in the *tate) 2hat do you mean9 'et us suppose that philosophical minds always lo,e %nowled$e o# a sort which shows them the eternal nature not ,aryin$ #rom $eneration and corruption) 1$reed) 1nd #urther( I said( let us a$ree that they are lo,ers o# all true bein$+ there is no part whether $reater or less( or more or less honourable( which they are willin$ to renounce+ as we said be#ore o# the lo,er and the man o# ambition) True) 1nd i# they are to be what we were describin$( is there not another -uality which they should also possess9 2hat -uality9 Truth#ulnessD they will ne,er intentionally recei,e into their mind #alsehood( which is their detestation( and they will lo,e the truth) Aes( that may be sa#ely a##irmed o# them) 63ay be(6 my #riend( I replied( is not the word+ say rather 6must be a##irmedD6 #or he whose nature is amorous o# anythin$ cannot help lo,in$ all that belon$s or is a%in to the object o# his a##ections) Ri$ht( he said) 1nd is there anythin$ more a%in to wisdom than truth9 How can there be9 "an the same nature be a lo,er o# wisdom and a lo,er o# #alsehood9 Ne,er) The true lo,er o# learnin$ then must #rom his earliest youth( as #ar as in him lies( desire all truth9 1ssuredly) But then a$ain( as we %now by e&perience( he whose desires are stron$ in one direction will ha,e them wea%er in others+ they will be li%e a stream which has been drawn o## into another channel) True) He whose desires are drawn towards %nowled$e in e,ery #orm will be absorbed in the pleasures o# the soul( and will hardly #eel bodily pleasure --I mean( i# he be a true philosopher and not a sham one) That is most certain) *uch an one is sure to be temperate and the re,erse o# co,etous+ #or the moti,es which ma%e another man desirous o# ha,in$ and spendin$(

ha,e no place in his character) >ery true) 1nother criterion o# the philosophical nature has also to be considered) 2hat is that9 There should be no secret corner o# illiberality+ nothin$ can more anta$onistic than meanness to a soul which is e,er lon$in$ a#ter the whole o# thin$s both di,ine and human) 3ost true( he replied) Then how can he who has ma$ni#icence o# mind and is the spectator o# all time and all e&istence( thin% much o# human li#e9 He cannot) Or can such an one account death #ear#ul9 No indeed) Then the cowardly and mean nature has no part in true philosophy9 "ertainly not) Or a$ainD can he who is harmoniously constituted( who is not co,etous or mean( or a boaster( or a coward-can he( I say( e,er be unjust or hard in his dealin$s9 Impossible) Then you will soon obser,e whether a man is just and $entle( or rude and unsociable+ these are the si$ns which distin$uish e,en in youth the philosophical nature #rom the unphilosophical) True) There is another point which should be remar%ed) 2hat point9 2hether he has or has not a pleasure in learnin$+ #or no one will lo,e that which $i,es him pain( and in which a#ter much toil he ma%es little pro$ress) "ertainly not) 1nd a$ain( i# he is #or$et#ul and retains nothin$ o# what he learns( will he not be an empty ,essel9 That is certain) 'abourin$ in ,ain( he must end in hatin$ himsel# and his #ruitless occupation9 Aes) Then a soul which #or$ets cannot be ran%ed amon$ $enuine philosophic natures+ we must insist that the philosopher should ha,e a $ood memory9 "ertainly) 1nd once more( the inharmonious and unseemly nature can only tend to disproportion9 !ndoubtedly) 1nd do you consider truth to be a%in to proportion or to disproportion9

To proportion) Then( besides other -ualities( we must try to #ind a naturally well-proportioned and $racious mind( which will mo,e spontaneously towards the true bein$ o# e,erythin$) "ertainly) 2ell( and do not all these -ualities( which we ha,e been enumeratin$( $o to$ether( and are they not( in a manner( necessary to a soul( which is to ha,e a #ull and per#ect participation o# bein$9 They are absolutely necessary( he replied) 1nd must not that be a blameless study which he only can pursue who has the $i#t o# a $ood memory( and is -uic% to learn( --noble( $racious( the #riend o# truth( justice( coura$e( temperance( who are his %indred9 The $od o# jealousy himsel#( he said( could #ind no #ault with such a study) 1nd to men li%e him( I said( when per#ected by years and education( and to these only you will entrust the *tate) *ocrates - 1 EI31NT!* Here 1deimantus interposed and saidD To these statements( *ocrates( no one can o##er a reply+ but when you tal% in this way( a stran$e #eelin$ passes o,er the minds o# your hearersD They #ancy that they are led astray a little at each step in the ar$ument( owin$ to their own want o# s%ill in as%in$ and answerin$ -uestions+ these littles accumulate( and at the end o# the discussion they are #ound to ha,e sustained a mi$hty o,erthrow and all their #ormer notions appear to be turned upside down) 1nd as uns%il#ul players o# drau$hts are at last shut up by their more s%il#ul ad,ersaries and ha,e no piece to mo,e( so they too #ind themsel,es shut up at last+ #or they ha,e nothin$ to say in this new $ame o# which words are the counters+ and yet all the time they are in the ri$ht) The obser,ation is su$$ested to me by what is now occurrin$) @or any one o# us mi$ht say( that althou$h in words he is not able to meet you at each step o# the ar$ument( he sees as a #act that the ,otaries o# philosophy( when they carry on the study( not only in youth as a part o# education( but as the pursuit o# their maturer years( most o# them become stran$e monsters( not to say utter ro$ues( and that those who may be considered the best o# them are made useless to the world by the ,ery study which you e&tol) 2ell( and do you thin% that those who say so are wron$9 I cannot tell( he replied+ but I should li%e to %now what is your opinion) Hear my answer+ I am o# opinion that they are -uite ri$ht) Then how can you be justi#ied in sayin$ that cities will not cease #rom e,il until philosophers rule in them( when philosophers are ac%nowled$ed

by us to be o# no use to them9 Aou as% a -uestion( I said( to which a reply can only be $i,en in a parable) Aes( *ocrates+ and that is a way o# spea%in$ to which you are not at all accustomed( I suppose) I percei,e( I said( that you are ,astly amused at ha,in$ plun$ed me into such a hopeless discussion+ but now hear the parable( and then you will be still more amused at the mea$reness o# my ima$inationD #or the manner in which the best men are treated in their own *tates is so $rie,ous that no sin$le thin$ on earth is comparable to it+ and there#ore( i# I am to plead their cause( I must ha,e recourse to #iction( and put to$ether a #i$ure made up o# many thin$s( li%e the #abulous unions o# $oats and sta$s which are #ound in pictures) Ima$ine then a #leet or a ship in which there is a captain who is taller and stron$er than any o# the crew( but he is a little dea# and has a similar in#irmity in si$ht( and his %nowled$e o# na,i$ation is not much better) The sailors are -uarrellin$ with one another about the steerin$ --e,ery one is o# opinion that he has a ri$ht to steer( thou$h he has ne,er learned the art o# na,i$ation and cannot tell who tau$ht him or when he learned( and will #urther assert that it cannot be tau$ht( and they are ready to cut in pieces any one who says the contrary) They thron$ about the captain( be$$in$ and prayin$ him to commit the helm to them+ and i# at any time they do not pre,ail( but others are pre#erred to them( they %ill the others or throw them o,erboard( and ha,in$ #irst chained up the noble captain6s senses with drin% or some narcotic dru$( they mutiny and ta%e possession o# the ship and ma%e #ree with the stores+ thus( eatin$ and drin%in$( they proceed on their ,oya$e in such a manner as mi$ht be e&pected o# them) Him who is their partisan and cle,erly aids them in their plot #or $ettin$ the ship out o# the captain6s hands into their own whether by #orce or persuasion( they compliment with the name o# sailor( pilot( able seaman( and abuse the other sort o# man( whom they call a $ood-#or-nothin$+ but that the true pilot must pay attention to the year and seasons and s%y and stars and winds( and whate,er else belon$s to his art( i# he intends to be really -uali#ied #or the command o# a ship( and that he must and will be the steerer( whether other people li%e or not-the possibility o# this union o# authority with the steerer6s art has ne,er seriously entered into their thou$hts or been made part o# their callin$) Now in ,essels which are in a state o# mutiny and by sailors who are mutineers( how will the true pilot be re$arded9 2ill he not be called by them a prater( a star-$a/er( a $ood-#or-nothin$9 O# course( said 1deimantus) Then you will hardly need( I said( to hear the interpretation o# the #i$ure( which describes the true philosopher in his relation to the *tate+ #or you understand already) "ertainly) Then suppose you now ta%e this parable to the $entleman who is surprised

at #indin$ that philosophers ha,e no honour in their cities+ e&plain it to him and try to con,ince him that their ha,in$ honour would be #ar more e&traordinary) I will) *ay to him( that( in deemin$ the best ,otaries o# philosophy to be useless to the rest o# the world( he is ri$ht+ but also tell him to attribute their uselessness to the #ault o# those who will not use them( and not to themsel,es) The pilot should not humbly be$ the sailors to be commanded by him --that is not the order o# nature+ neither are 6the wise to $o to the doors o# the rich6 --the in$enious author o# this sayin$ told a lie --but the truth is( that( when a man is ill( whether he be rich or poor( to the physician he must $o( and he who wants to be $o,erned( to him who is able to $o,ern) The ruler who is $ood #or anythin$ ou$ht not to be$ his subjects to be ruled by him+ althou$h the present $o,ernors o# man%ind are o# a di##erent stamp+ they may be justly compared to the mutinous sailors( and the true helmsmen to those who are called by them $ood-#or-nothin$s and star-$a/ers) Precisely so( he said) @or these reasons( and amon$ men li%e these( philosophy( the noblest pursuit o# all( is not li%ely to be much esteemed by those o# the opposite #action+ not that the $reatest and most lastin$ injury is done to her by her opponents( but by her own pro#essin$ #ollowers( the same o# whom you suppose the accuser to say( that the $reater number o# them are arrant ro$ues( and the best are useless+ in which opinion I a$reed) Aes) 1nd the reason why the $ood are useless has now been e&plained9 True) Then shall we proceed to show that the corruption o# the majority is also una,oidable( and that this is not to be laid to the char$e o# philosophy any more than the other9 By all means) 1nd let us as% and answer in turn( #irst $oin$ bac% to the description o# the $entle and noble nature) Truth( as you will remember( was his leader( whom he #ollowed always and in all thin$s+ #ailin$ in this( he was an impostor( and had no part or lot in true philosophy) Aes( that was said) 2ell( and is not this one -uality( to mention no others( $reatly at ,ariance with present notions o# him9 "ertainly( he said) 1nd ha,e we not a ri$ht to say in his de#ence( that the true lo,er o# %nowled$e is always stri,in$ a#ter bein$ --that is his nature+ he will not rest in the multiplicity o# indi,iduals which is an appearance only( but will $o on --the %een ed$e will not be blunted( nor the #orce o# his desire abate until he ha,e attained the %nowled$e o#

the true nature o# e,ery essence by a sympathetic and %indred power in the soul( and by that power drawin$ near and min$lin$ and becomin$ incorporate with ,ery bein$( ha,in$ be$otten mind and truth( he will ha,e %nowled$e and will li,e and $row truly( and then( and not till then( will he cease #rom his tra,ail) Nothin$( he said( can be more just than such a description o# him) 1nd will the lo,e o# a lie be any part o# a philosopher6s nature9 2ill he not utterly hate a lie9 He will) 1nd when truth is the captain( we cannot suspect any e,il o# the band which he leads9 Impossible) Justice and health o# mind will be o# the company( and temperance will #ollow a#ter9 True( he replied) Neither is there any reason why I should a$ain set in array the philosopher6s ,irtues( as you will doubtless remember that coura$e( ma$ni#icence( apprehension( memory( were his natural $i#ts) 1nd you objected that( althou$h no one could deny what I then said( still( i# you lea,e words and loo% at #acts( the persons who are thus described are some o# them mani#estly useless( and the $reater number utterly depra,ed+ we were then led to en-uire into the $rounds o# these accusations( and ha,e now arri,ed at the point o# as%in$ why are the majority bad( which -uestion o# necessity brou$ht us bac% to the e&amination and de#inition o# the true philosopher) E&actly) 1nd we ha,e ne&t to consider the o# the philosophic nature( why so many are spoiled and so #ew escape spoilin$ --I am spea%in$ o# those who were said to be useless but not wic%ed --and( when we ha,e done with them( we will spea% o# the imitators o# philosophy( what manner o# men are they who aspire a#ter a pro#ession which is abo,e them and o# which they are unworthy( and then( by their mani#old inconsistencies( brin$ upon philosophy( and upon all philosophers( that uni,ersal reprobation o# which we spea%) 2hat are these corruptions9 he said) I will see i# I can e&plain them to you) E,ery one will admit that a nature ha,in$ in per#ection all the -ualities which we re-uired in a philosopher( is a rare plant which is seldom seen amon$ men) Rare indeed) 1nd what numberless and power#ul causes tend to destroy these rare natures4 2hat causes9 In the #irst place there are their own ,irtues( their coura$e( temperance( and the rest o# them( e,ery one o# which praise worthy -ualities 5and

this is a most sin$ular circumstance7 destroys and distracts #rom philosophy the soul which is the possessor o# them) That is ,ery sin$ular( he replied) Then there are all the ordinary $oods o# li#e --beauty( wealth( stren$th( ran%( and $reat connections in the *tate --you understand the sort o# thin$s --these also ha,e a corruptin$ and distractin$ e##ect) I understand+ but I should li%e to %now more precisely what you mean about them) .rasp the truth as a whole( I said( and in the ri$ht way+ you will then ha,e no di##iculty in apprehendin$ the precedin$ remar%s( and they will no lon$er appear stran$e to you) 1nd how am I to do so9 he as%ed) 2hy( I said( we %now that all $erms or seeds( whether ,e$etable or animal( when they #ail to meet with proper nutriment or climate or soil( in proportion to their ,i$our( are all the more sensiti,e to the want o# a suitable en,ironment( #or e,il is a $reater enemy to what is $ood than what is not) >ery true) There is reason in supposin$ that the #inest natures( when under alien conditions( recei,e more injury than the in#erior( because the contrast is $reater) "ertainly) 1nd may we not say( 1deimantus( that the most $i#ted minds( when they are ill-educated( become pre-eminently bad9 o not $reat crimes and the spirit o# pure e,il sprin$ out o# a #ulness o# nature ruined by education rather than #rom any in#eriority( whereas wea% natures are scarcely capable o# any ,ery $reat $ood or ,ery $reat e,il9 There I thin% that you are ri$ht) 1nd our philosopher #ollows the same analo$y-he is li%e a plant which( ha,in$ proper nurture( must necessarily $row and mature into all ,irtue( but( i# sown and planted in an alien soil( becomes the most no&ious o# all weeds( unless he be preser,ed by some di,ine power) o you really thin%( as people so o#ten say( that our youth are corrupted by *ophists( or that pri,ate teachers o# the art corrupt them in any de$ree worth spea%in$ o#9 1re not the public who say these thin$s the $reatest o# all *ophists9 1nd do they not educate to per#ection youn$ and old( men and women ali%e( and #ashion them a#ter their own hearts9 2hen is this accomplished9 he said) 2hen they meet to$ether( and the world sits down at an assembly( or in a court o# law( or a theatre( or a camp( or in any other popular resort( and there is a $reat uproar( and they praise some thin$s which are bein$ said or done( and blame other thin$s( e-ually e&a$$eratin$ both( shoutin$ and clappin$ their hands( and the echo o# the roc%s and the place in which they are assembled redoubles the sound o# the

praise or blame --at such a time will not a youn$ man6s heart( as they say( leap within him9 2ill any pri,ate trainin$ enable him to stand #irm a$ainst the o,erwhelmin$ #lood o# popular opinion9 or will he be carried away by the stream9 2ill he not ha,e the notions o# $ood and e,il which the public in $eneral ha,e --he will do as they do( and as they are( such will he be9 Aes( *ocrates+ necessity will compel him) 1nd yet( I said( there is a still $reater necessity( which has not been mentioned) 2hat is that9 The $entle #orce o# attainder or con#iscation or death which( as you are aware( these new *ophists and educators who are the public( apply when their words are powerless) Indeed they do+ and in ri$ht $ood earnest) Now what opinion o# any other *ophist( or o# any pri,ate person( can be e&pected to o,ercome in such an une-ual contest9 None( he replied) No( indeed( I said( e,en to ma%e the attempt is a $reat piece o# #olly+ there neither is( nor has been( nor is e,er li%ely to be( any di##erent type o# character which has had no other trainin$ in ,irtue but that which is supplied by public opinion --I spea%( my #riend( o# human ,irtue only+ what is more than human( as the pro,erb says( is not includedD #or I would not ha,e you i$norant that( in the present e,il state o# $o,ernments( whate,er is sa,ed and comes to $ood is sa,ed by the power o# .od( as we may truly say) I -uite assent( he replied) Then let me cra,e your assent also to a #urther obser,ation) 2hat are you $oin$ to say9 2hy( that all those mercenary indi,iduals( whom the many call *ophists and whom they deem to be their ad,ersaries( do( in #act( teach nothin$ but the opinion o# the many( that is to say( the opinions o# their assemblies+ and this is their wisdom) I mi$ht compare them to a man who should study the tempers and desires o# a mi$hty stron$ beast who is #ed by him-he would learn how to approach and handle him( also at what times and #rom what causes he is dan$erous or the re,erse( and what is the meanin$ o# his se,eral cries( and by what sounds( when another utters them( he is soothed or in#uriated+ and you may suppose #urther( that when( by continually attendin$ upon him( he has become per#ect in all this( he calls his %nowled$e wisdom( and ma%es o# it a system or art( which he proceeds to teach( althou$h he has no real notion o# what he means by the principles or passions o# which he is spea%in$( but calls this honourable and that dishonourable( or $ood or e,il( or just or unjust( all in accordance with the tastes and tempers o# the $reat brute) .ood he pronounces to be that in which the beast deli$hts and e,il to be that which he disli%es+ and he can $i,e no other account o# them e&cept that the just and noble are the necessary( ha,in$ ne,er himsel# seen( and ha,in$ no power o# e&plainin$

to others the nature o# either( or the di##erence between them( which is immense) By hea,en( would not such an one be a rare educator9 Indeed( he would) 1nd in what way does he who thin%s that wisdom is the discernment o# the tempers and tastes o# the motley multitude( whether in paintin$ or music( or( #inally( in politics( di##er #rom him whom I ha,e been describin$ @or when a man consorts with the many( and e&hibits to them his poem or other wor% o# art or the ser,ice which he has done the *tate( ma%in$ them his jud$es when he is not obli$ed( the so-called necessity o# iomede will obli$e him to produce whate,er they praise) 1nd yet the reasons are utterly ludicrous which they $i,e in con#irmation o# their own notions about the honourable and $ood) id you e,er hear any o# them which were not9 No( nor am I li%ely to hear) Aou reco$nise the truth o# what I ha,e been sayin$9 Then let me as% you to consider #urther whether the world will e,er be induced to belie,e in the e&istence o# absolute beauty rather than o# the many beauti#ul( or o# the absolute in each %ind rather than o# the many in each %ind9 "ertainly not) Then the world cannot possibly be a philosopher9 Impossible) 1nd there#ore philosophers must ine,itably #all under the censure o# the world9 They must) 1nd o# indi,iduals who consort with the mob and see% to please them9 That is e,ident) Then( do you see any way in which the philosopher can be preser,ed in his callin$ to the end9 and remember what we were sayin$ o# him( that he was to ha,e -uic%ness and memory and coura$e and ma$ni#icence --these were admitted by us to be the true philosopher6s $i#ts) Aes) 2ill not such an one #rom his early childhood be in all thin$s #irst amon$ all( especially i# his bodily endowments are li%e his mental ones9 "ertainly( he said) 1nd his #riends and #ellow-citi/ens will want to use him as he $ets older #or their own purposes9 No -uestion) @allin$ at his #eet( they will ma%e re-uests to him and do him honour and #latter him( because they want to $et into their hands now( the power which he will one day possess) That o#ten happens( he said) 1nd what will a man such as he be li%ely to do under such circumstances(

especially i# he be a citi/en o# a $reat city( rich and noble( and a tall proper youth9 2ill he not be #ull o# boundless aspirations( and #ancy himsel# able to mana$e the a##airs o# Hellenes and o# barbarians( and ha,in$ $ot such notions into his head will he not dilate and ele,ate himsel# in the #ulness o# ,ain pomp and senseless pride9 To be sure he will) Now( when he is in this state o# mind( i# some one $ently comes to him and tells him that he is a #ool and must $et understandin$( which can only be $ot by sla,in$ #or it( do you thin% that( under such ad,erse circumstances( he will be easily induced to listen9 @ar otherwise) 1nd e,en i# there be some one who throu$h inherent $oodness or natural reasonableness has had his eyes opened a little and is humbled and ta%en capti,e by philosophy( how will his #riends beha,e when they thin% that they are li%ely to lose the ad,anta$e which they were hopin$ to reap #rom his companionship9 2ill they not do and say anythin$ to pre,ent him #rom yieldin$ to his better nature and to render his teacher powerless( usin$ to this end pri,ate intri$ues as well as public prosecutions9 There can be no doubt o# it) 1nd how can one who is thus circumstanced e,er become a philosopher9 Impossible) Then were we not ri$ht in sayin$ that e,en the ,ery -ualities which ma%e a man a philosopher may( i# he be ill-educated( di,ert him #rom philosophy( no less than riches and their accompaniments and the other so-called $oods o# li#e9 2e were -uite ri$ht) Thus( my e&cellent #riend( is brou$ht about all that ruin and #ailure which I ha,e been describin$ o# the natures best adapted to the best o# all pursuits+ they are natures which we maintain to be rare at any time+ this bein$ the class out o# which come the men who are the authors o# the $reatest e,il to *tates and indi,iduals+ and also o# the $reatest $ood when the tide carries them in that direction+ but a small man ne,er was the doer o# any $reat thin$ either to indi,iduals or to *tates) That is most true( he said) 1nd so philosophy is le#t desolate( with her marria$e rite incompleteD #or her own ha,e #allen away and #orsa%en her( and while they are leadin$ a #alse and unbecomin$ li#e( other unworthy persons( seein$ that she has no %insmen to be her protectors( enter in and dishonour her+ and #asten upon her the reproaches which( as you say( her repro,ers utter( who a##irm o# her ,otaries that some are $ood #or nothin$( and that the $reater number deser,e the se,erest punishment) That is certainly what people say) Aes+ and what else would you e&pect( I said( when you thin% o# the puny creatures who( seein$ this land open to them --a land well stoc%ed

with #air names and showy titles --li%e prisoners runnin$ out o# prison into a sanctuary( ta%e a leap out o# their trades into philosophy+ those who do so bein$ probably the cle,erest hands at their own miserable cra#ts9 @or( althou$h philosophy be in this e,il case( still there remains a di$nity about her which is not to be #ound in the arts) 1nd many are thus attracted by her whose natures are imper#ect and whose souls are maimed and dis#i$ured by their meannesses( as their bodies are by their trades and cra#ts) Is not this una,oidable9 Aes) 1re they not e&actly li%e a bald little tin%er who has just $ot out o# durance and come into a #ortune+ he ta%es a bath and puts on a new coat( and is dec%ed out as a bride$room $oin$ to marry his master6s dau$hter( who is le#t poor and desolate9 1 most e&act parallel) 2hat will be the issue o# such marria$es9 2ill they not be ,ile and bastard9 There can be no -uestion o# it) 1nd when persons who are unworthy o# education approach philosophy and ma%e an alliance with her who is a ran% abo,e them what sort o# ideas and opinions are li%ely to be $enerated9 2ill they not be sophisms capti,atin$ to the ear( ha,in$ nothin$ in them $enuine( or worthy o# or a%in to true wisdom9 No doubt( he said) Then( 1deimantus( I said( the worthy disciples o# philosophy will be but a small remnantD perchance some noble and well-educated person( detained by e&ile in her ser,ice( who in the absence o# corruptin$ in#luences remains de,oted to her+ or some lo#ty soul born in a mean city( the politics o# which he contemns and ne$lects+ and there may be a $i#ted #ew who lea,e the arts( which they justly despise( and come to her+ --or perad,enture there are some who are restrained by our #riend Thea$es6 bridle+ #or e,erythin$ in the li#e o# Thea$es conspired to di,ert him #rom philosophy+ but ill-health %ept him away #rom politics) 3y own case o# the internal si$n is hardly worth mentionin$( #or rarely( i# e,er( has such a monitor been $i,en to any other man) Those who belon$ to this small class ha,e tasted how sweet and blessed a possession philosophy is( and ha,e also seen enou$h o# the madness o# the multitude+ and they %now that no politician is honest( nor is there any champion o# justice at whose side they may #i$ht and be sa,ed) *uch an one may be compared to a man who has #allen amon$ wild beasts --he will not join in the wic%edness o# his #ellows( but neither is he able sin$ly to resist all their #ierce natures( and there#ore seein$ that he would be o# no use to the *tate or to his #riends( and re#lectin$ that he would ha,e to throw away his li#e without doin$ any $ood either to himsel# or others( he holds his peace( and $oes his own way) He is li%e one who( in the storm o# dust and sleet which the dri,in$ wind hurries alon$( retires under the shelter o# a wall+ and seein$ the rest o# man%ind #ull o# wic%edness( he is content( i# only he can li,e his own li#e and be pure #rom e,il or unri$hteousness( and depart in peace and $ood-will( with bri$ht hopes)

Aes( he said( and he will ha,e done a $reat wor% be#ore he departs) 1 $reat wor% --yes+ but not the $reatest( unless he #ind a *tate suitable to him+ #or in a *tate which is suitable to him( he will ha,e a lar$er $rowth and be the sa,iour o# his country( as well as o# himsel#) The causes why philosophy is in such an e,il name ha,e now been su##iciently e&plainedD the injustice o# the char$es a$ainst her has been shown-is there anythin$ more which you wish to say9 Nothin$ more on that subject( he replied+ but I should li%e to %now which o# the $o,ernments now e&istin$ is in your opinion the one adapted to her) Not any o# them( I said+ and that is precisely the accusation which I brin$ a$ainst them --not one o# them is worthy o# the philosophic nature( and hence that nature is warped and estran$ed+ --as the e&otic seed which is sown in a #orei$n land becomes denaturali/ed( and is wont to be o,erpowered and to lose itsel# in the new soil( e,en so this $rowth o# philosophy( instead o# persistin$( de$enerates and recei,es another character) But i# philosophy e,er #inds in the *tate that per#ection which she hersel# is( then will be seen that she is in truth di,ine( and that all other thin$s( whether natures o# men or institutions( are but human+ --and now( I %now that you are $oin$ to as%( what that *tate is) No( he said+ there you are wron$( #or I was $oin$ to as% another -uestion --whether it is the *tate o# which) we are the #ounders and in,entors( or some other9 Aes( I replied( ours in most respects+ but you may remember my sayin$ be#ore( that some li,in$ authority would always be re-uired in the *tate ha,in$ the same idea o# the constitution which $uided you when as le$islator you were layin$ down the laws) That was said( he replied) Aes( but not in a satis#actory manner+ you #ri$htened us by interposin$ objections( which certainly showed that the discussion would be lon$ and di##icult+ and what still remains is the re,erse o# easy) 2hat is there remainin$9 The -uestion how the study o# philosophy may be so ordered as not to be the ruin o# the *tateD 1ll $reat attempts are attended with ris%+ 6hard is the $ood(6 as men say) *till( he said( let the point be cleared up( and the en-uiry will then be complete) I shall not be hindered( I said( by any want o# will( but( i# at all( by a want o# powerD my /eal you may see #or yoursel,es+ and please to remar% in what I am about to say how boldly and unhesitatin$ly I declare that *tates should pursue philosophy( not as they do now(

but in a di##erent spirit) In what manner9 1t present( I said( the students o# philosophy are -uite youn$+ be$innin$ when they are hardly past childhood( they de,ote only the time sa,ed #rom moneyma%in$ and house%eepin$ to such pursuits+ and e,en those o# them who are reputed to ha,e most o# the philosophic spirit( when they come within si$ht o# the $reat di##iculty o# the subject( I mean dialectic( ta%e themsel,es o##) In a#ter li#e when in,ited by some one else( they may( perhaps( $o and hear a lecture( and about this they ma%e much ado( #or philosophy is not considered by them to be their proper businessD at last( when they $row old( in most cases they are e&tin$uished more truly than Heracleitus6 sun( inasmuch as they ne,er li$ht up a$ain) But what ou$ht to be their course9 Just the opposite) In childhood and youth their study( and what philosophy they learn( should be suited to their tender yearsD durin$ this period while they are $rowin$ up towards manhood( the chie# and special care should be $i,en to their bodies that they may ha,e them to use in the ser,ice o# philosophy+ as li#e ad,ances and the intellect be$ins to mature( let them increase the $ymnastics o# the soul+ but when the stren$th o# our citi/ens #ails and is past ci,il and military duties( then let them ran$e at will and en$a$e in no serious labour( as we intend them to li,e happily here( and to crown this li#e with a similar happiness in another) How truly in earnest you are( *ocrates4 he said+ I am sure o# that+ and yet most o# your hearers( i# I am not mista%en( are li%ely to be still more earnest in their opposition to you( and will ne,er be con,inced+ Thrasymachus least o# all) o not ma%e a -uarrel( I said( between Thrasymachus and me( who ha,e recently become #riends( althou$h( indeed( we were ne,er enemies+ #or I shall $o on stri,in$ to the utmost until I either con,ert him and other men( or do somethin$ which may pro#it them a$ainst the day when they li,e a$ain( and hold the li%e discourse in another state o# e&istence) Aou are spea%in$ o# a time which is not ,ery near) Rather( I replied( o# a time which is as nothin$ in comparison with eternity) Ne,ertheless( I do not wonder that the many re#use to belie,e+ #or they ha,e ne,er seen that o# which we are now spea%in$ realised+ they ha,e seen only a con,entional imitation o# philosophy( consistin$ o# words arti#icially brou$ht to$ether( not li%e these o# ours ha,in$ a natural unity) But a human bein$ who in word and wor% is per#ectly moulded( as #ar as he can be( into the proportion and li%eness o# ,irtue --such a man rulin$ in a city which bears the same ima$e( they ha,e ne,er yet seen( neither one nor many o# them --do you thin% that they e,er did9 No indeed) No( my #riend( and they ha,e seldom( i# e,er( heard #ree and noble

sentiments+ such as men utter when they are earnestly and by e,ery means in their power see%in$ a#ter truth #or the sa%e o# %nowled$e( while they loo% coldly on the subtleties o# contro,ersy( o# which the end is opinion and stri#e( whether they meet with them in the courts o# law or in society) They are stran$ers( he said( to the words o# which you spea%) 1nd this was what we #oresaw( and this was the reason why truth #orced us to admit( not without #ear and hesitation( that neither cities nor *tates nor indi,iduals will e,er attain per#ection until the small class o# philosophers whom we termed useless but not corrupt are pro,identially compelled( whether they will or not( to ta%e care o# the *tate( and until a li%e necessity be laid on the *tate to obey them+ or until %in$s( or i# not %in$s( the sons o# %in$s or princes( are di,inely inspired 6 d with a true lo,e o# true philosophy) That either or both o# these alternati,es are impossible( I see no reason to a##irmD i# they were so( we mi$ht indeed be justly ridiculed as dreamers and ,isionaries) 1m I not ri$ht9 Cuite ri$ht) I# then( in the countless a$es o# the past( or at the present hour in some #orei$n clime which is #ar away and beyond our %en( the per#ected philosopher is or has been or herea#ter shall be compelled by a superior power to ha,e the char$e o# the *tate( we are ready to assert to the death( that this our constitution has been( and is --yea( and will be whene,er the 3use o# Philosophy is -ueen) There is no impossibility in all this+ that there is a di##iculty( we ac%nowled$e oursel,es) 3y opinion a$rees with yours( he said) But do you mean to say that this is not the opinion o# the multitude9 I should ima$ine not( he replied) O my #riend( I said( do not attac% the multitudeD they will chan$e their minds( i#( not in an a$$ressi,e spirit( but $ently and with the ,iew o# soothin$ them and remo,in$ their disli%e o# o,er-education( you show them your philosophers as they really are and describe as you were just now doin$ their character and pro#ession( and then man%ind will see that he o# whom you are spea%in$ is not such as they supposed --i# they ,iew him in this new li$ht( they will surely chan$e their notion o# him( and answer in another strain) 2ho can be at enmity with one who lo,es them( who that is himsel# $entle and #ree #rom en,y will be jealous o# one in whom there is no jealousy9 Nay( let me answer #or you( that in a #ew this harsh temper may be #ound but not in the majority o# man%ind) I -uite a$ree with you( he said) 1nd do you not also thin%( as I do( that the harsh #eelin$ which the many entertain towards philosophy ori$inates in the pretenders( who rush in unin,ited( and are always abusin$ them( and #indin$ #ault with them( who ma%e persons instead o# thin$s the theme o# their con,ersation9 and nothin$ can be more unbecomin$ in philosophers than this)

It is most unbecomin$) @or he( 1deimantus( whose mind is #i&ed upon true bein$( has surely no time to loo% down upon the a##airs o# earth( or to be #illed with malice and en,y( contendin$ a$ainst men+ his eye is e,er directed towards thin$s #i&ed and immutable( which he sees neither injurin$ nor injured by one another( but all in order mo,in$ accordin$ to reason+ these he imitates( and to these he will( as #ar as he can( con#orm himsel#) "an a man help imitatin$ that with which he holds re,erential con,erse9 Impossible) 1nd the philosopher holdin$ con,erse with the di,ine order( becomes orderly and di,ine( as #ar as the nature o# man allows+ but li%e e,ery one else( he will su##er #rom detraction) O# course) 1nd i# a necessity be laid upon him o# #ashionin$( not only himsel#( but human nature $enerally( whether in *tates or indi,iduals( into that which he beholds elsewhere( will he( thin% you( be an uns%il#ul arti#icer o# justice( temperance( and e,ery ci,il ,irtue9 1nythin$ but uns%il#ul) 1nd i# the world percei,es that what we are sayin$ about him is the truth( will they be an$ry with philosophy9 2ill they disbelie,e us( when we tell them that no *tate can be happy which is not desi$ned by artists who imitate the hea,enly pattern9 They will not be an$ry i# they understand( he said) But how will they draw out the plan o# which you are spea%in$9 They will be$in by ta%in$ the *tate and the manners o# men( #rom which( as #rom a tablet( they will rub out the picture( and lea,e a clean sur#ace) This is no easy tas%) But whether easy or not( herein will lie the di##erence between them and e,ery other le$islator( --they will ha,e nothin$ to do either with indi,idual or *tate( and will inscribe no laws( until they ha,e either #ound( or themsel,es made( a clean sur#ace) They will be ,ery ri$ht( he said) Ha,in$ e##ected this( they will proceed to trace an outline o# the constitution9 No doubt) 1nd when they are #illin$ in the wor%( as I concei,e( they will o#ten turn their eyes upwards and downwardsD I mean that they will #irst loo% at absolute justice and beauty and temperance( and a$ain at the human copy+ and will min$le and temper the ,arious elements o# li#e into the ima$e o# a man+ and thus they will concei,e accordin$ to that other ima$e( which( when e&istin$ amon$ men( Homer calls the #orm and li%eness o# .od) >ery true( he said) 1nd one #eature they will erase( and another they will put in( they

ha,e made the ways o# men( as #ar as possible( a$reeable to the ways o# .od9 Indeed( he said( in no way could they ma%e a #airer picture) 1nd now( I said( are we be$innin$ to persuade those whom you described as rushin$ at us with mi$ht and main( that the painter o# constitutions is such an one as we are praisin$+ at whom they were so ,ery indi$nant because to his hands we committed the *tate+ and are they $rowin$ a little calmer at what they ha,e just heard9 3uch calmer( i# there is any sense in them) 2hy( where can they still #ind any $round #or objection9 2ill they doubt that the philosopher is a lo,er o# truth and bein$9 They would not be so unreasonable) Or that his nature( bein$ such as we ha,e delineated( is a%in to the hi$hest $ood9 Neither can they doubt this) But a$ain( will they tell us that such a nature( placed under #a,ourable circumstances( will not be per#ectly $ood and wise i# any e,er was9 Or will they pre#er those whom we ha,e rejected9 *urely not) Then will they still be an$ry at our sayin$( that( until philosophers bear rule( *tates and indi,iduals will ha,e no rest #rom e,il( nor will this our ima$inary *tate e,er be realised9 I thin% that they will be less an$ry) *hall we assume that they are not only less an$ry but -uite $entle( and that they ha,e been con,erted and #or ,ery shame( i# #or no other reason( cannot re#use to come to terms9 By all means( he said) Then let us suppose that the reconciliation has been e##ected) 2ill any one deny the other point( that there may be sons o# %in$s or princes who are by nature philosophers9 *urely no man( he said) 1nd when they ha,e come into bein$ will any one say that they must o# necessity be destroyed+ that they can hardly be sa,ed is not denied e,en by us+ but that in the whole course o# a$es no sin$le one o# them can escape --who will ,enture to a##irm this9 2ho indeed4 But( said I( one is enou$h+ let there be one man who has a city obedient to his will( and he mi$ht brin$ into e&istence the ideal polity about which the world is so incredulous) Aes( one is enou$h) The ruler may impose the laws and institutions which we ha,e been describin$( and the citi/ens may possibly be willin$ to obey them9

"ertainly) 1nd that others should appro,e o# what we appro,e( is no miracle or impossibility9 I thin% not) But we ha,e su##iciently shown( in what has preceded( that all this( i# only possible( is assuredly #or the best) 2e ha,e) 1nd now we say not only that our laws( i# they could be enacted( would be #or the best( but also that the enactment o# them( thou$h di##icult( is not impossible) >ery $ood) 1nd so with pain and toil we ha,e reached the end o# one subject( but more remains to be discussed+ --how and by what studies and pursuits will the sa,iours o# the constitution be created( and at what a$es are they to apply themsel,es to their se,eral studies9 "ertainly) I omitted the troublesome business o# the possession o# women( and the procreation o# children( and the appointment o# the rulers( because I %new that the per#ect *tate would be eyed with jealousy and was di##icult o# attainment+ but that piece o# cle,erness was not o# much ser,ice to me( #or I had to discuss them all the same) The women and children are now disposed o#( but the other -uestion o# the rulers must be in,esti$ated #rom the ,ery be$innin$) 2e were sayin$( as you will remember( that they were to be lo,ers o# their country( tried by the test o# pleasures and pains( and neither in hardships( nor in dan$ers( nor at any other critical moment were to lose their patriotism --he was to be rejected who #ailed( but he who always came #orth pure( li%e $old tried in the re#iner6s #ire( was to be made a ruler( and to recei,e honours and rewards in li#e and a#ter death) This was the sort o# thin$ which was bein$ said( and then the ar$ument turned aside and ,eiled her #ace+ not li%in$ to stir the -uestion which has now arisen) I per#ectly remember( he said) Aes( my #riend( I said( and I then shran% #rom ha/ardin$ the bold word+ but now let me dare to say --that the per#ect $uardian must be a philosopher) Aes( he said( let that be a##irmed) 1nd do not suppose that there will be many o# them+ #or the $i#ts which were deemed by us to be essential rarely $row to$ether+ they are mostly #ound in shreds and patches) 2hat do you mean9 he said) Aou are aware( I replied( that -uic% intelli$ence( memory( sa$acity( cle,erness( and similar -ualities( do not o#ten $row to$ether( and that persons who possess them and are at the same time hi$h-spirited and ma$nanimous are not so constituted by nature as to li,e orderly

and in a peace#ul and settled manner+ they are dri,en any way by their impulses( and all solid principle $oes out o# them) >ery true( he said) On the other hand( those stead#ast natures which can better be depended upon( which in a battle are impre$nable to #ear and immo,able( are e-ually immo,able when there is anythin$ to be learned+ they are always in a torpid state( and are apt to yawn and $o to sleep o,er any intellectual toil) Cuite true) 1nd yet we were sayin$ that both -ualities were necessary in those to whom the hi$her education is to be imparted( and who are to share in any o##ice or command) "ertainly( he said) 1nd will they be a class which is rarely #ound9 Aes( indeed) Then the aspirant must not only be tested in those labours and dan$ers and pleasures which we mentioned be#ore( but there is another %ind o# probation which we did not mention --he must be e&ercised also in many %inds o# %nowled$e( to see whether the soul will be able to endure the hi$hest o# all( will #aint under them( as in any other studies and e&ercises) Aes( he said( you are -uite ri$ht in testin$ him) But what do you mean by the hi$hest o# all %nowled$e9 Aou may remember( I said( that we di,ided the soul into three parts+ and distin$uished the se,eral natures o# justice( temperance( coura$e( and wisdom9 Indeed( he said( i# I had #or$otten( I should not deser,e to hear more) 1nd do you remember the word o# caution which preceded the discussion o# them9 To what do you re#er9 2e were sayin$( i# I am not mista%en( that he who wanted to see them in their per#ect beauty must ta%e a lon$er and more circuitous way( at the end o# which they would appear+ but that we could add on a popular e&position o# them on a le,el with the discussion which had preceded) 1nd you replied that such an e&position would be enou$h #or you( and so the en-uiry was continued in what to me seemed to be a ,ery inaccurate manner+ whether you were satis#ied or not( it is #or you to say) Aes( he said( I thou$ht and the others thou$ht that you $a,e us a #air measure o# truth) But( my #riend( I said( a measure o# such thin$s 2hich in any de$ree #alls short o# the whole truth is not #air measure+ #or nothin$ imper#ect

is the measure o# anythin$( althou$h persons are too apt to be contented and thin% that they need search no #urther) Not an uncommon case when people are indolent) Aes( I said+ and there cannot be any worse #ault in a $uardian o# the *tate and o# the laws) True) The $uardian then( I said( must be re-uired to ta%e the lon$er circuit( and toll at learnin$ as well as at $ymnastics( or he will ne,er reach the hi$hest %nowled$e o# all which( as we were just now sayin$( is his proper callin$) 2hat( he said( is there a %nowled$e still hi$her than this --hi$her than justice and the other ,irtues9 Aes( I said( there is) 1nd o# the ,irtues too we must behold not the outline merely( as at present --nothin$ short o# the most #inished picture should satis#y us) 2hen little thin$s are elaborated with an in#inity o# pains( in order that they may appear in their #ull beauty and utmost clearness( how ridiculous that we should not thin% the hi$hest truths worthy o# attainin$ the hi$hest accuracy4 1 ri$ht noble thou$ht+ but do you suppose that we shall re#rain #rom as%in$ you what is this hi$hest %nowled$e9 Nay( I said( as% i# you will+ but I am certain that you ha,e heard the answer many times( and now you either do not understand me or( as I rather thin%( you are disposed to be troublesome+ #or you ha,e o# been told that the idea o# $ood is the hi$hest %nowled$e( and that all other thin$s become use#ul and ad,anta$eous only by their use o# this) Aou can hardly be i$norant that o# this I was about to spea%( concernin$ which( as you ha,e o#ten heard me say( we %now so little+ and( without which( any other %nowled$e or possession o# any %ind will pro#it us nothin$) o you thin% that the possession o# all other thin$s is o# any ,alue i# we do not possess the $ood9 or the %nowled$e o# all other thin$s i# we ha,e no %nowled$e o# beauty and $oodness9 1ssuredly not) Aou are #urther aware that most people a##irm pleasure to be the $ood( but the #iner sort o# wits say it is %nowled$e Aes) 1nd you are aware too that the latter cannot e&plain what they mean by %nowled$e( but are obli$ed a#ter all to say %nowled$e o# the $ood9 How ridiculous4 Aes( I said( that they should be$in by reproachin$ us with our i$norance o# the $ood( and then presume our %nowled$e o# it --#or the $ood they de#ine to be %nowled$e o# the $ood( just as i# we understood them when they use the term 6$ood6 --this is o# course ridiculous) 3ost true( he said)

1nd those who ma%e pleasure their $ood are in e-ual perple&ity+ #or they are compelled to admit that there are bad pleasures as well as $ood) "ertainly) 1nd there#ore to ac%nowled$e that bad and $ood are the same9 True) There can be no doubt about the numerous di##iculties in which this -uestion is in,ol,ed) There can be none) @urther( do we not see that many are willin$ to do or to ha,e or to seem to be what is just and honourable without the reality+ but no one is satis#ied with the appearance o# $ood --the reality is what they see%+ in the case o# the $ood( appearance is despised by e,ery one) >ery true( he said) O# this then( which e,ery soul o# man pursues and ma%es the end o# all his actions( ha,in$ a presentiment that there is such an end( and yet hesitatin$ because neither %nowin$ the nature nor ha,in$ the same assurance o# this as o# other thin$s( and there#ore losin$ whate,er $ood there is in other thin$s( --o# a principle such and so $reat as this ou$ht the best men in our *tate( to whom e,erythin$ is entrusted( to be in the dar%ness o# i$norance9 "ertainly not( he said) I am sure( I said( that he who does not %now now the beauti#ul and the just are li%ewise $ood will be but a sorry $uardian o# them+ and I suspect that no one who is i$norant o# the $ood will ha,e a true %nowled$e o# them) That( he said( is a shrewd suspicion o# yours) 1nd i# we only ha,e a $uardian who has this %nowled$e our *tate will be per#ectly ordered9 O# course( he replied+ but I wish that you would tell me whether you concei,e this supreme principle o# the $ood to be %nowled$e or pleasure( or di##erent #rom either) 1ye( I said( I %new all alon$ that a #astidious $entleman li%e you would not be contented with the thou$hts o# other people about these matters) True( *ocrates+ but I must say that one who li%e you has passed a li#etime in the study o# philosophy should not be always repeatin$ the opinions o# others( and ne,er tellin$ his own) 2ell( but has any one a ri$ht to say positi,ely what he does not %now9 Not( he said( with the assurance o# positi,e certainty+ he has no ri$ht to do thatD but he may say what he thin%s( as a matter o# opinion)

1nd do you not %now( I said( that all mere opinions are bad( and the best o# them blind9 Aou would not deny that those who ha,e any true notion without intelli$ence are only li%e blind men who #eel their way alon$ the road9 >ery true) 1nd do you wish to behold what is blind and croo%ed and base( when others will tell you o# bri$htness and beauty9 .laucon - *O"R1TE* *till( I must implore you( *ocrates( said .laucon( not to turn away just as you are reachin$ the $oal+ i# you will only $i,e such an e&planation o# the $ood as you ha,e already $i,en o# justice and temperance and the other ,irtues( we shall be satis#ied) Aes( my #riend( and I shall be at least e-ually satis#ied( but I cannot help #earin$ that I shall #all( and that my indiscreet /eal will brin$ ridicule upon me) No( sweet sirs( let us not at present as% what is the actual nature o# the $ood( #or to reach what is now in my thou$hts would be an e##ort too $reat #or me) But o# the child o# the $ood who is li%est him( I would #ain spea%( i# I could be sure that you wished to hear --otherwise( not) By all means( he said( tell us about the child( and you shall remain in our debt #or the account o# the parent) I do indeed wish( I replied( that I could pay( and you recei,e( the account o# the parent( and not( as now( o# the o##sprin$ only+ ta%e( howe,er( this latter by way o# interest( and at the same time ha,e a care that i do not render a #alse account( althou$h I ha,e no intention o# decei,in$ you) Aes( we will ta%e all the care that we canD proceed) Aes( I said( but I must #irst come to an understandin$ with you( and remind you o# what I ha,e mentioned in the course o# this discussion( and at many other times) 2hat9 The old story( that there is a many beauti#ul and a many $ood( and so o# other thin$s which we describe and de#ine+ to all o# them 6many6 is applied) True( he said) 1nd there is an absolute beauty and an absolute $ood( and o# other thin$s to which the term 6many6 is applied there is an absolute+ #or they may be brou$ht under a sin$le idea( which is called the essence o# each) >ery true) The many( as we say( are seen but not %nown( and the ideas are %nown but not seen)

E&actly) 1nd what is the or$an with which we see the ,isible thin$s9 The si$ht( he said) 1nd with the hearin$( I said( we hear( and with the other senses percei,e the other objects o# sense9 True) But ha,e you remar%ed that si$ht is by #ar the most costly and comple& piece o# wor%manship which the arti#icer o# the senses e,er contri,ed9 No( I ne,er ha,e( he said) Then re#lect+ has the ear or ,oice need o# any third or additional nature in order that the one may be able to hear and the other to be heard9 Nothin$ o# the sort) No( indeed( I replied+ and the same is true o# most( i# not all( the other senses --you would not say that any o# them re-uires such an addition9 "ertainly not) But you see that without the addition o# some other nature there is no seein$ or bein$ seen9 How do you mean9 *i$ht bein$( as I concei,e( in the eyes( and he who has eyes wantin$ to see+ colour bein$ also present in them( still unless there be a third nature specially adapted to the purpose( the owner o# the eyes will see nothin$ and the colours will be in,isible) O# what nature are you spea%in$9 O# that which you term li$ht( I replied) True( he said) Noble( then( is the bond which lin%s to$ether si$ht and ,isibility( and $reat beyond other bonds by no small di##erence o# nature+ #or li$ht is their bond( and li$ht is no i$noble thin$9 Nay( he said( the re,erse o# i$noble) 1nd which( I said( o# the $ods in hea,en would you say was the lord o# this element9 2hose is that li$ht which ma%es the eye to see per#ectly and the ,isible to appear9 Aou mean the sun( as you and all man%ind say) 3ay not the relation o# si$ht to this deity be described as #ollows9 How9 Neither si$ht nor the eye in which si$ht resides is the sun9 No) Aet o# all the or$ans o# sense the eye is the most li%e the sun9

By #ar the most li%e) 1nd the power which the eye possesses is a sort o# e##luence which is dispensed #rom the sun9 E&actly) Then the sun is not si$ht( but the author o# si$ht who is reco$nised by si$ht) True( he said) 1nd this is he whom I call the child o# the $ood( whom the $ood be$at in his own li%eness( to be in the ,isible world( in relation to si$ht and the thin$s o# si$ht( what the $ood is in the intellectual world in relation to mind and the thin$s o# mind) 2ill you be a little more e&plicit9 he said) 2hy( you %now( I said( that the eyes( when a person directs them towards objects on which the li$ht o# day is no lon$er shinin$( but the moon and stars only( see dimly( and are nearly blind+ they seem to ha,e no clearness o# ,ision in them9 >ery true) But when they are directed towards objects on which the sun shines( they see clearly and there is si$ht in them9 "ertainly) 1nd the soul is li%e the eyeD when restin$ upon that on which truth and bein$ shine( the soul percei,es and understands and is radiant with intelli$ence+ but when turned towards the twili$ht o# becomin$ and perishin$( then she has opinion only( and $oes blin%in$ about( and is #irst o# one opinion and then o# another( and seems to ha,e no intelli$ence9 Just so) Now( that which imparts truth to the %nown and the power o# %nowin$ to the %nower is what I would ha,e you term the idea o# $ood( and this you will deem to be the cause o# science( and o# truth in so #ar as the latter becomes the subject o# %nowled$e+ beauti#ul too( as are both truth and %nowled$e( you will be ri$ht in esteemin$ this other nature as more beauti#ul than either+ and( as in the pre,ious instance( li$ht and si$ht may be truly said to be li%e the sun( and yet not to be the sun( so in this other sphere( science and truth may be deemed to be li%e the $ood( but not the $ood+ the $ood has a place o# honour yet hi$her) 2hat a wonder o# beauty that must be( he said( which is the author o# science and truth( and yet surpasses them in beauty+ #or you surely cannot mean to say that pleasure is the $ood9 .od #orbid( I replied+ but may I as% you to consider the ima$e in another point o# ,iew9 In what point o# ,iew9 Aou would say( would you not( that the sun is only the author o# ,isibility

in all ,isible thin$s( but o# $eneration and nourishment and $rowth( thou$h he himsel# is not $eneration9 "ertainly) In li%e manner the $ood may be said to be not only the author o# %nowled$e to all thin$s %nown( but o# their bein$ and essence( and yet the $ood is not essence( but #ar e&ceeds essence in di$nity and power) .laucon said( with a ludicrous earnestnessD By the li$ht o# hea,en( how ama/in$4 Aes( I said( and the e&a$$eration may be set down to you+ #or you made me utter my #ancies) 1nd pray continue to utter them+ at any rate let us hear i# there is anythin$ more to be said about the similitude o# the sun) Aes( I said( there is a $reat deal more) Then omit nothin$( howe,er sli$ht) I will do my best( I said+ but I should thin% that a $reat deal will ha,e to be omitted) Aou ha,e to ima$ine( then( that there are two rulin$ powers( and that one o# them is set o,er the intellectual world( the other o,er the ,isible) I do not say hea,en( lest you should #ancy that I am playin$ upon the name 56ourhano/( orhato/67) 3ay I suppose that you ha,e this distinction o# the ,isible and intelli$ible #i&ed in your mind9 I ha,e) Now ta%e a line which has been cut into two une-ual parts( and di,ide each o# them a$ain in the same proportion( and suppose the two main di,isions to answer( one to the ,isible and the other to the intelli$ible( and then compare the subdi,isions in respect o# their clearness and want o# clearness( and you will #ind that the #irst section in the sphere o# the ,isible consists o# ima$es) 1nd by ima$es I mean( in the #irst place( shadows( and in the second place( re#lections in water and in solid( smooth and polished bodies and the li%eD o you understand9 Aes( I understand) Ima$ine( now( the other section( o# which this is only the resemblance( to include the animals which we see( and e,erythin$ that $rows or is made) >ery $ood) 2ould you not admit that both the sections o# this di,ision ha,e di##erent de$rees o# truth( and that the copy is to the ori$inal as the sphere o# opinion is to the sphere o# %nowled$e9 3ost undoubtedly) Ne&t proceed to consider the manner in which the sphere o# the intellectual is to be di,ided)

In what manner9 ThusD --There are two subdi,isions( in the lower or which the soul uses the #i$ures $i,en by the #ormer di,ision as ima$es+ the en-uiry can only be hypothetical( and instead o# $oin$ upwards to a principle descends to the other end+ in the hi$her o# the two( the soul passes out o# hypotheses( and $oes up to a principle which is abo,e hypotheses( ma%in$ no use o# ima$es as in the #ormer case( but proceedin$ only in and throu$h the ideas themsel,es) I do not -uite understand your meanin$( he said) Then I will try a$ain+ you will understand me better when I ha,e made some preliminary remar%s) Aou are aware that students o# $eometry( arithmetic( and the %indred sciences assume the odd and the e,en and the #i$ures and three %inds o# an$les and the li%e in their se,eral branches o# science+ these are their hypotheses( which they and e,erybody are supposed to %now( and there#ore they do not dei$n to $i,e any account o# them either to themsel,es or others+ but they be$in with them( and $o on until they arri,e at last( and in a consistent manner( at their conclusion9 Aes( he said( I %now) 1nd do you not %now also that althou$h they ma%e use o# the ,isible #orms and reason about them( they are thin%in$ not o# these( but o# the ideals which they resemble+ not o# the #i$ures which they draw( but o# the absolute s-uare and the absolute diameter( and so on --the #orms which they draw or ma%e( and which ha,e shadows and re#lections in water o# their own( are con,erted by them into ima$es( but they are really see%in$ to behold the thin$s themsel,es( which can only be seen with the eye o# the mind9 That is true) 1nd o# this %ind I spo%e as the intelli$ible( althou$h in the search a#ter it the soul is compelled to use hypotheses+ not ascendin$ to a #irst principle( because she is unable to rise abo,e the re$ion o# hypothesis( but employin$ the objects o# which the shadows below are resemblances in their turn as ima$es( they ha,in$ in relation to the shadows and re#lections o# them a $reater distinctness( and there#ore a hi$her ,alue) I understand( he said( that you are spea%in$ o# the pro,ince o# $eometry and the sister arts) 1nd when I spea% o# the other di,ision o# the intelli$ible( you will understand me to spea% o# that other sort o# %nowled$e which reason hersel# attains by the power o# dialectic( usin$ the hypotheses not as #irst principles( but only as hypotheses --that is to say( as steps and points o# departure into a world which is abo,e hypotheses( in order that she may soar beyond them to the #irst principle o# the whole+ and clin$in$ to this and then to that which depends on this( by successi,e steps she descends a$ain without the aid o# any sensible object( #rom ideas( throu$h ideas( and in ideas she ends) I understand you( he replied+ not per#ectly( #or you seem to me to

be describin$ a tas% which is really tremendous+ but( at any rate( I understand you to say that %nowled$e and bein$( which the science o# dialectic contemplates( are clearer than the notions o# the arts( as they are termed( which proceed #rom hypotheses onlyD these are also contemplated by the understandin$( and not by the sensesD yet( because they start #rom hypotheses and do not ascend to a principle( those who contemplate them appear to you not to e&ercise the hi$her reason upon them( althou$h when a #irst principle is added to them they are co$ni/able by the hi$her reason) 1nd the habit which is concerned with $eometry and the co$nate sciences I suppose that you would term understandin$ and not reason( as bein$ intermediate between opinion and reason) Aou ha,e -uite concei,ed my meanin$( I said+ and now( correspondin$ to these #our di,isions( let there be #our #aculties in the soul-reason answerin$ to the hi$hest( understandin$ to the second( #aith 5or con,iction7 to the third( and perception o# shadows to the last-and let there be a scale o# them( and let us suppose that the se,eral #aculties ha,e clearness in the same de$ree that their objects ha,e truth) I understand( he replied( and $i,e my assent( and accept your arran$ement) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG >II *ocrates - .'1!"ON 1nd now( I said( let me show in a #i$ure how #ar our nature is enli$htened or unenli$htenedD --Behold4 human bein$s li,in$ in a under$round den( which has a mouth open towards the li$ht and reachin$ all alon$ the den+ here they ha,e been #rom their childhood( and ha,e their le$s and nec%s chained so that they cannot mo,e( and can only see be#ore them( bein$ pre,ented by the chains #rom turnin$ round their heads) 1bo,e and behind them a #ire is bla/in$ at a distance( and between the #ire and the prisoners there is a raised way+ and you will see( i# you loo%( a low wall built alon$ the way( li%e the screen which marionette players ha,e in #ront o# them( o,er which they show the puppets) I see) 1nd do you see( I said( men passin$ alon$ the wall carryin$ all sorts o# ,essels( and statues and #i$ures o# animals made o# wood and stone and ,arious materials( which appear o,er the wall9 *ome o# them are tal%in$( others silent) Aou ha,e shown me a stran$e ima$e( and they are stran$e prisoners) 'i%e oursel,es( I replied+ and they see only their own shadows( or the shadows o# one another( which the #ire throws on the opposite wall o# the ca,e9 True( he said+ how could they see anythin$ but the shadows i# they

were ne,er allowed to mo,e their heads9 1nd o# the objects which are bein$ carried in li%e manner they would only see the shadows9 Aes( he said) 1nd i# they were able to con,erse with one another( would they not suppose that they were namin$ what was actually be#ore them9 >ery true) 1nd suppose #urther that the prison had an echo which came #rom the other side( would they not be sure to #ancy when one o# the passers-by spo%e that the ,oice which they heard came #rom the passin$ shadow9 No -uestion( he replied) To them( I said( the truth would be literally nothin$ but the shadows o# the ima$es) That is certain) 1nd now loo% a$ain( and see what will naturally #ollow it6 the prisoners are released and disabused o# their error) 1t #irst( when any o# them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand up and turn his nec% round and wal% and loo% towards the li$ht( he will su##er sharp pains+ the $lare will distress him( and he will be unable to see the realities o# which in his #ormer state he had seen the shadows+ and then concei,e some one sayin$ to him( that what he saw be#ore was an illusion( but that now( when he is approachin$ nearer to bein$ and his eye is turned towards more real e&istence( he has a clearer ,ision( -what will be his reply9 1nd you may #urther ima$ine that his instructor is pointin$ to the objects as they pass and re-uirin$ him to name them( -will he not be perple&ed9 2ill he not #ancy that the shadows which he #ormerly saw are truer than the objects which are now shown to him9 @ar truer) 1nd i# he is compelled to loo% strai$ht at the li$ht( will he not ha,e a pain in his eyes which will ma%e him turn away to ta%e and ta%e in the objects o# ,ision which he can see( and which he will concei,e to be in reality clearer than the thin$s which are now bein$ shown to him9 True( he now 1nd suppose once more( that he is reluctantly dra$$ed up a steep and ru$$ed ascent( and held #ast until he 6s #orced into the presence o# the sun himsel#( is he not li%ely to be pained and irritated9 2hen he approaches the li$ht his eyes will be da//led( and he will not be able to see anythin$ at all o# what are now called realities) Not all in a moment( he said) He will re-uire to $row accustomed to the si$ht o# the upper world) 1nd #irst he will see the shadows best( ne&t the re#lections o# men and other objects in the water( and then the objects themsel,es+ then he will $a/e upon the li$ht o# the moon and the stars and the span$led hea,en+ and he will see the s%y and the stars by ni$ht better than

the sun or the li$ht o# the sun by day9 "ertainly) 'ast o# he will be able to see the sun( and not mere re#lections o# him in the water( but he will see him in his own proper place( and not in another+ and he will contemplate him as he is) "ertainly) He will then proceed to ar$ue that this is he who $i,es the season and the years( and is the $uardian o# all that is in the ,isible world( and in a certain way the cause o# all thin$s which he and his #ellows ha,e been accustomed to behold9 "learly( he said( he would #irst see the sun and then reason about him) 1nd when he remembered his old habitation( and the wisdom o# the den and his #ellow-prisoners( do you not suppose that he would #elicitate himsel# on the chan$e( and pity them9 "ertainly( he would) 1nd i# they were in the habit o# con#errin$ honours amon$ themsel,es on those who were -uic%est to obser,e the passin$ shadows and to remar% which o# them went be#ore( and which #ollowed a#ter( and which were to$ether+ and who were there#ore best able to draw conclusions as to the #uture( do you thin% that he would care #or such honours and $lories( or en,y the possessors o# them9 2ould he not say with Homer( Better to be the poor ser,ant o# a poor master( and to endure anythin$( rather than thin% as they do and li,e a#ter their manner9 Aes( he said( I thin% that he would rather su##er anythin$ than entertain these #alse notions and li,e in this miserable manner) Ima$ine once more( I said( such an one comin$ suddenly out o# the sun to be replaced in his old situation+ would he not be certain to ha,e his eyes #ull o# dar%ness9 To be sure( he said) 1nd i# there were a contest( and he had to compete in measurin$ the shadows with the prisoners who had ne,er mo,ed out o# the den( while his si$ht was still wea%( and be#ore his eyes had become steady 5and the time which would be needed to ac-uire this new habit o# si$ht mi$ht be ,ery considerable7 would he not be ridiculous9 3en would say o# him that up he went and down he came without his eyes+ and that it was better not e,en to thin% o# ascendin$+ and i# any one tried to loose another and lead him up to the li$ht( let them only catch the o##ender( and they would put him to death) No -uestion( he said) This entire alle$ory( I said( you may now append( dear .laucon( to the pre,ious ar$ument+ the prison-house is the world o# si$ht( the li$ht o# the #ire is the sun( and you will not misapprehend me i#

you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent o# the soul into the intellectual world accordin$ to my poor belie#( which( at your desire( I ha,e e&pressed whether ri$htly or wron$ly .od %nows) But( whether true or #alse( my opinion is that in the world o# %nowled$e the idea o# $ood appears last o# all( and is seen only with an e##ort+ and( when seen( is also in#erred to be the uni,ersal author o# all thin$s beauti#ul and ri$ht( parent o# li$ht and o# the lord o# li$ht in this ,isible world( and the immediate source o# reason and truth in the intellectual+ and that this is the power upon which he who would act rationally( either in public or pri,ate li#e must ha,e his eye #i&ed) I a$ree( he said( as #ar as I am able to understand you) 3oreo,er( I said( you must not wonder that those who attain to this beati#ic ,ision are unwillin$ to descend to human a##airs+ #or their souls are e,er hastenin$ into the upper world where they desire to dwell+ which desire o# theirs is ,ery natural( i# our alle$ory may be trusted) Aes( ,ery natural) 1nd is there anythin$ surprisin$ in one who passes #rom di,ine contemplations to the e,il state o# man( misbeha,in$ himsel# in a ridiculous manner+ i#( while his eyes are blin%in$ and be#ore he has become accustomed to the surroundin$ dar%ness( he is compelled to #i$ht in courts o# law( or in other places( about the ima$es or the shadows o# ima$es o# justice( and is endea,ourin$ to meet the conceptions o# those who ha,e ne,er yet seen absolute justice9 1nythin$ but surprisin$( he replied) 1ny one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments o# the eyes are o# two %inds( and arise #rom two causes( either #rom comin$ out o# the li$ht or #rom $oin$ into the li$ht( which is true o# the mind6s eye( -uite as much as o# the bodily eye+ and he who remembers this when he sees any one whose ,ision is perple&ed and wea%( will not be too ready to lau$h+ he will #irst as% whether that soul o# man has come out o# the bri$hter li$ht( and is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dar%( or ha,in$ turned #rom dar%ness to the day is da//led by e&cess o# li$ht) 1nd he will count the one happy in his condition and state o# bein$( and he will pity the other+ or( i# he ha,e a mind to lau$h at the soul which comes #rom below into the li$ht( there will be more reason in this than in the lau$h which $reets him who returns #rom abo,e out o# the li$ht into the den) That( he said( is a ,ery just distinction) But then( i# I am ri$ht( certain pro#essors o# education must be wron$ when they say that they can put a %nowled$e into the soul which was not there be#ore( li%e si$ht into blind eyes) They undoubtedly say this( he replied) 2hereas( our ar$ument shows that the power and capacity o# learnin$ e&ists in the soul already+ and that just as the eye was unable to turn #rom dar%ness to li$ht without the whole body( so too the instrument

o# %nowled$e can only by the mo,ement o# the whole soul be turned #rom the world o# becomin$ into that o# bein$( and learn by de$rees to endure the si$ht o# bein$( and o# the bri$htest and best o# bein$( or in other words( o# the $ood) >ery true) 1nd must there not be some art which will e##ect con,ersion in the easiest and -uic%est manner+ not implantin$ the #aculty o# si$ht( #or that e&ists already( but has been turned in the wron$ direction( and is loo%in$ away #rom the truth9 Aes( he said( such an art may be presumed) 1nd whereas the other so-called ,irtues o# the soul seem to be a%in to bodily -ualities( #or e,en when they are not ori$inally innate they can be implanted later by habit and e&ercise( the o# wisdom more than anythin$ else contains a di,ine element which always remains( and by this con,ersion is rendered use#ul and pro#itable+ or( on the other hand( hurt#ul and useless) id you ne,er obser,e the narrow intelli$ence #lashin$ #rom the %een eye o# a cle,er ro$ue --how ea$er he is( how clearly his paltry soul sees the way to his end+ he is the re,erse o# blind( but his %een eyesi$ht is #orced into the ser,ice o# e,il( and he is mischie,ous in proportion to his cle,erness) >ery true( he said) But what i# there had been a circumcision o# such natures in the days o# their youth+ and they had been se,ered #rom those sensual pleasures( such as eatin$ and drin%in$( which( li%e leaden wei$hts( were attached to them at their birth( and which dra$ them down and turn the ,ision o# their souls upon the thin$s that are below --i#( I say( they had been released #rom these impediments and turned in the opposite direction( the ,ery same #aculty in them would ha,e seen the truth as %eenly as they see what their eyes are turned to now) >ery li%ely) Aes( I said+ and there is another thin$ which is li%ely) or rather a necessary in#erence #rom what has preceded( that neither the uneducated and unin#ormed o# the truth( nor yet those who ne,er ma%e an end o# their education( will be able ministers o# *tate+ not the #ormer( because they ha,e no sin$le aim o# duty which is the rule o# all their actions( pri,ate as well as public+ nor the latter( because they will not act at all e&cept upon compulsion( #ancyin$ that they are already dwellin$ apart in the islands o# the blest) >ery true( he replied) Then( I said( the business o# us who are the #ounders o# the *tate will be to compel the best minds to attain that %nowled$e which we ha,e already shown to be the $reatest o# all-they must continue to ascend until they arri,e at the $ood+ but when they ha,e ascended and seen enou$h we must not allow them to do as they do now) 2hat do you mean9 I mean that they remain in the upper worldD but this must not be allowed+ they must be made to descend a$ain amon$ the prisoners in the den(

and parta%e o# their labours and honours( whether they are worth ha,in$ or not) But is not this unjust9 he said+ ou$ht we to $i,e them a worse li#e( when they mi$ht ha,e a better9 Aou ha,e a$ain #or$otten( my #riend( I said( the intention o# the le$islator( who did not aim at ma%in$ any one class in the *tate happy abo,e the rest+ the happiness was to be in the whole *tate( and he held the citi/ens to$ether by persuasion and necessity( ma%in$ them bene#actors o# the *tate( and there#ore bene#actors o# one another+ to this end he created them( not to please themsel,es( but to be his instruments in bindin$ up the *tate) True( he said( I had #or$otten) Obser,e( .laucon( that there will be no injustice in compellin$ our philosophers to ha,e a care and pro,idence o# others+ we shall e&plain to them that in other *tates( men o# their class are not obli$ed to share in the toils o# politicsD and this is reasonable( #or they $row up at their own sweet will( and the $o,ernment would rather not ha,e them) Bein$ sel#-tau$ht( they cannot be e&pected to show any $ratitude #or a culture which they ha,e ne,er recei,ed) But we ha,e brou$ht you into the world to be rulers o# the hi,e( %in$s o# yoursel,es and o# the other citi/ens( and ha,e educated you #ar better and more per#ectly than they ha,e been educated( and you are better able to share in the double duty) 2here#ore each o# you( when his turn comes( must $o down to the $eneral under$round abode( and $et the habit o# seein$ in the dar%) 2hen you ha,e ac-uired the habit( you will see ten thousand times better than the inhabitants o# the den( and you will %now what the se,eral ima$es are( and what they represent( because you ha,e seen the beauti#ul and just and $ood in their truth) 1nd thus our *tate which is also yours will be a reality( and not a dream only( and will be administered in a spirit unli%e that o# other *tates( in which men #i$ht with one another about shadows only and are distracted in the stru$$le #or power( which in their eyes is a $reat $ood) 2hereas the truth is that the *tate in which the rulers are most reluctant to $o,ern is always the best and most -uietly $o,erned( and the *tate in which they are most ea$er( the worst) Cuite true( he replied) 1nd will our pupils( when they hear this( re#use to ta%e their turn at the toils o# *tate( when they are allowed to spend the $reater part o# their time with one another in the hea,enly li$ht9 Impossible( he answered+ #or they are just men( and the commands which we impose upon them are just+ there can be no doubt that e,ery one o# them will ta%e o##ice as a stern necessity( and not a#ter the #ashion o# our present rulers o# *tate) Aes( my #riend( I said+ and there lies the point) Aou must contri,e #or your #uture rulers another and a better li#e than that o# a ruler( and then you may ha,e a well-ordered *tate+ #or only in the *tate which o##ers this( will they rule who are truly rich( not in sil,er

and $old( but in ,irtue and wisdom( which are the true blessin$s o# li#e) 2hereas i# they $o to the administration o# public a##airs( poor and hun$erin$ a#ter the6 own pri,ate ad,anta$e( thin%in$ that hence they are to snatch the chie# $ood( order there can ne,er be+ #or they will be #i$htin$ about o##ice( and the ci,il and domestic broils which thus arise will be the ruin o# the rulers themsel,es and o# the whole *tate) 3ost true( he replied) 1nd the only li#e which loo%s down upon the li#e o# political ambition is that o# true philosophy) o you %now o# any other9 Indeed( I do not( he said) 1nd those who $o,ern ou$ht not to be lo,ers o# the tas%9 @or( i# they are( there will be ri,al lo,ers( and they will #i$ht) No -uestion) 2ho then are those whom we shall compel to be $uardians9 *urely they will be the men who are wisest about a##airs o# *tate( and by whom the *tate is best administered( and who at the same time ha,e other honours and another and a better li#e than that o# politics9 They are the men( and I will choose them( he replied) 1nd now shall we consider in what way such $uardians will be produced( and how they are to be brou$ht #rom dar%ness to li$ht( --as some are said to ha,e ascended #rom the world below to the $ods9 By all means( he replied) The process( I said( is not the turnin$ o,er o# an oyster-shell( but the turnin$ round o# a soul passin$ #rom a day which is little better than ni$ht to the true day o# bein$( that is( the ascent #rom below( which we a##irm to be true philosophy9 Cuite so) 1nd should we not en-uire what sort o# %nowled$e has the power o# e##ectin$ such a chan$e9 "ertainly) 2hat sort o# %nowled$e is there which would draw the soul #rom becomin$ to bein$9 1nd another consideration has just occurred to meD Aou will remember that our youn$ men are to be warrior athletes Aes( that was said) Then this new %ind o# %nowled$e must ha,e an additional -uality9 2hat -uality9 !se#ulness in war) Aes( i# possible) There were two parts in our #ormer scheme o# education( were there not9 Just so) There was $ymnastic which presided o,er the $rowth and decay o# the

body( and may there#ore be re$arded as ha,in$ to do with $eneration and corruption9 True) Then that is not the %nowled$e which we are see%in$ to disco,er9 No) But what do you say o# music( which also entered to a certain e&tent into our #ormer scheme9 3usic( he said( as you will remember( was the counterpart o# $ymnastic( and trained the $uardians by the in#luences o# habit( by harmony ma%in$ them harmonious( by rhythm rhythmical( but not $i,in$ them science+ and the words( whether #abulous or possibly true( had %indred elements o# rhythm and harmony in them) But in music there was nothin$ which tended to that $ood which you are now see%in$) Aou are most accurate( I said( in your recollection+ in music there certainly was nothin$ o# the %ind) But what branch o# %nowled$e is there( my dear .laucon( which is o# the desired nature+ since all the use#ul arts were rec%oned mean by us9 !ndoubtedly+ and yet i# music and $ymnastic are e&cluded( and the arts are also e&cluded( what remains9 2ell( I said( there may be nothin$ le#t o# our special subjects+ and then we shall ha,e to ta%e somethin$ which is not special( but o# uni,ersal application) 2hat may that be9 1 somethin$ which all arts and sciences and intelli$ences use in common( and which e,ery one #irst has to learn amon$ the elements o# education) 2hat is that9 The little matter o# distin$uishin$ one( two( and three --in a word( number and calculationD --do not all arts and sciences necessarily parta%e o# them9 Aes) Then the art o# war parta%es o# them9 To the sure) Then Palamedes( whene,er he appears in tra$edy( pro,es 1$amemnon ridiculously un#it to be a $eneral) id you ne,er remar% how he declares that he had in,ented number( and had numbered the ships and set in array the ran%s o# the army at Troy+ which implies that they had ne,er been numbered be#ore( and 1$amemnon must be supposed literally to ha,e been incapable o# countin$ his own #eet --how could he i# he was i$norant o# number9 1nd i# that is true( what sort o# $eneral must he ha,e been9 I should say a ,ery stran$e one( i# this was as you say) "an we deny that a warrior should ha,e a %nowled$e o# arithmetic9

"ertainly he should( i# he is to ha,e the smallest understandin$ o# military tactics( or indeed( I should rather say( i# he is to be a man at all) I should li%e to %now whether you ha,e the same notion which I ha,e o# this study9 2hat is your notion9 It appears to me to be a study o# the %ind which we are see%in$( and which leads naturally to re#lection( but ne,er to ha,e been ri$htly used+ #or the true use o# it is simply to draw the soul towards bein$) 2ill you e&plain your meanin$9 he said) I will try( I said+ and I wish you would share the en-uiry with me( and say 6yes6 or 6no6 when I attempt to distin$uish in my own mind what branches o# %nowled$e ha,e this attractin$ power( in order that we may ha,e clearer proo# that arithmetic is( as I suspect( one o# them) E&plain( he said) I mean to say that objects o# sense are o# two %inds+ some o# them do not in,ite thou$ht because the sense is an ade-uate jud$e o# them+ while in the case o# other objects sense is so untrustworthy that #urther en-uiry is imperati,ely demanded) Aou are clearly re#errin$( he said( to the manner in which the senses are imposed upon by distance( and by paintin$ in li$ht and shade) No( I said( that is not at all my meanin$) Then what is your meanin$9 2hen spea%in$ o# unin,itin$ objects( I mean those which do not pass #rom one sensation to the opposite+ in,itin$ objects are those which do+ in this latter case the sense comin$ upon the object( whether at a distance or near( $i,es no more ,i,id idea o# anythin$ in particular than o# its opposite) 1n illustration will ma%e my meanin$ clearerD --here are three #in$ers --a little #in$er( a second #in$er( and a middle #in$er) >ery $ood) Aou may suppose that they are seen -uite closeD 1nd here comes the point) 2hat is it9 Each o# them e-ually appears a #in$er( whether seen in the middle or at the e&tremity( whether white or blac%( or thic% or thin --it ma%es no di##erence+ a #in$er is a #in$er all the same) In these cases a man is not compelled to as% o# thou$ht the -uestion( what is a #in$er9 #or the si$ht ne,er intimates to the mind that a #in$er is other than a #in$er) True) 1nd there#ore( I said( as we mi$ht e&pect( there is nothin$ here which in,ites or e&cites intelli$ence)

There is not( he said) But is this e-ually true o# the $reatness and smallness o# the #in$ers9 "an si$ht ade-uately percei,e them9 and is no di##erence made by the circumstance that one o# the #in$ers is in the middle and another at the e&tremity9 1nd in li%e manner does the touch ade-uately percei,e the -ualities o# thic%ness or thinness( or so#tness or hardness9 1nd so o# the other senses+ do they $i,e per#ect intimations o# such matters9 Is not their mode o# operation on this wise --the sense which is concerned with the -uality o# hardness is necessarily concerned also with the -uality o# so#tness( and only intimates to the soul that the same thin$ is #elt to be both hard and so#t9 Aou are -uite ri$ht( he said) 1nd must not the soul be perple&ed at this intimation which the sense $i,es o# a hard which is also so#t9 2hat( a$ain( is the meanin$ o# li$ht and hea,y( i# that which is li$ht is also hea,y( and that which is hea,y( li$ht9 Aes( he said( these intimations which the soul recei,es are ,ery curious and re-uire to be e&plained) Aes( I said( and in these perple&ities the soul naturally summons to her aid calculation and intelli$ence( that she may see whether the se,eral objects announced to her are one or two) True) 1nd i# they turn out to be two( is not each o# them one and di##erent9 "ertainly) 1nd i# each is one( and both are two( she will concei,e the two as in a state o# di,ision( #or i# there were undi,ided they could only be concei,ed o# as one9 True) The eye certainly did see both small and $reat( but only in a con#used manner+ they were not distin$uished) Aes) 2hereas the thin%in$ mind( intendin$ to li$ht up the chaos( was compelled to re,erse the process( and loo% at small and $reat as separate and not con#used) >ery true) 2as not this the be$innin$ o# the en-uiry 62hat is $reat96 and 62hat is small96 E&actly so) 1nd thus arose the distinction o# the ,isible and the intelli$ible) 3ost true) This was what I meant when I spo%e o# impressions which in,ited the intellect( or the re,erse --those which are simultaneous with opposite

impressions( in,ite thou$ht+ those which are not simultaneous do not) I understand( he said( and a$ree with you) 1nd to which class do unity and number belon$9 I do not %now( he replied) Thin% a little and you will see that what has preceded will supply the answer+ #or i# simple unity could be ade-uately percei,ed by the si$ht or by any other sense( then( as we were sayin$ in the case o# the #in$er( there would be nothin$ to attract towards bein$+ but when there is some contradiction always present( and one is the re,erse o# one and in,ol,es the conception o# plurality( then thou$ht be$ins to be aroused within us( and the soul perple&ed and wantin$ to arri,e at a decision as%s 62hat is absolute unity96 This is the way in which the study o# the one has a power o# drawin$ and con,ertin$ the mind to the contemplation o# true bein$) 1nd surely( he said( this occurs notably in the case o# one+ #or we see the same thin$ to be both one and in#inite in multitude9 Aes( I said+ and this bein$ true o# one must be e-ually true o# all number9 "ertainly) 1nd all arithmetic and calculation ha,e to do with number9 Aes) 1nd they appear to lead the mind towards truth9 Aes( in a ,ery remar%able manner) Then this is %nowled$e o# the %ind #or which we are see%in$( ha,in$ a double use( military and philosophical+ #or the man o# war must learn the art o# number or he will not %now how to array his troops( and the philosopher also( because he has to rise out o# the sea o# chan$e and lay hold o# true bein$( and there#ore he must be an arithmetician) That is true) 1nd our $uardian is both warrior and philosopher9 "ertainly) Then this is a %ind o# %nowled$e which le$islation may #itly prescribe+ and we must endea,our to persuade those who are prescribe to be the principal men o# our *tate to $o and learn arithmetic( not as amateurs( but they must carry on the study until they see the nature o# numbers with the mind only+ nor a$ain( li%e merchants or retail-traders( with a ,iew to buyin$ or sellin$( but #or the sa%e o# their military use( and o# the soul hersel#+ and because this will be the easiest way #or her to pass #rom becomin$ to truth and bein$) That is e&cellent( he said) Aes( I said( and now ha,in$ spo%en o# it( I must add how charmin$ the science is4 and in how many ways it conduces to our desired end( i# pursued in the spirit o# a philosopher( and not o# a shop%eeper4 How do you mean9 I mean( as I was sayin$( that arithmetic has a ,ery $reat and ele,atin$

e##ect( compellin$ the soul to reason about abstract number( and rebellin$ a$ainst the introduction o# ,isible or tan$ible objects into the ar$ument) Aou %now how steadily the masters o# the art repel and ridicule any one who attempts to di,ide absolute unity when he is calculatin$( and i# you di,ide( they multiply( ta%in$ care that one shall continue one and not become lost in #ractions) That is ,ery true) Now( suppose a person were to say to themD O my #riends( what are these wonder#ul numbers about which you are reasonin$( in which( as you say( there is a unity such as you demand( and each unit is e-ual( in,ariable( indi,isible( --what would they answer9 They would answer( as I should concei,e( that they were spea%in$ o# those numbers which can only be realised in thou$ht) Then you see that this %nowled$e may be truly called necessary( necessitatin$ as it clearly does the use o# the pure intelli$ence in the attainment o# pure truth9 Aes+ that is a mar%ed characteristic o# it) 1nd ha,e you #urther obser,ed( that those who ha,e a natural talent #or calculation are $enerally -uic% at e,ery other %ind o# %nowled$e+ and e,en the dull i# they ha,e had an arithmetical trainin$( althou$h they may deri,e no other ad,anta$e #rom it( always become much -uic%er than they would otherwise ha,e been) >ery true( he said) 1nd indeed( you will not easily #ind a more di##icult study( and not many as di##icult) Aou will not) 1nd( #or all these reasons( arithmetic is a %ind o# %nowled$e in which the best natures should be trained( and which must not be $i,en up) I a$ree) 'et this then be made one o# our subjects o# education) 1nd ne&t( shall we en-uire whether the %indred science also concerns us9 Aou mean $eometry9 E&actly so) "learly( he said( we are concerned with that part o# $eometry which relates to war+ #or in pitchin$ a camp( or ta%in$ up a position( or closin$ or e&tendin$ the lines o# an army( or any other military manoeu,re( whether in actual battle or on a march( it will ma%e all the di##erence whether a $eneral is or is not a $eometrician) Aes( I said( but #or that purpose a ,ery little o# either $eometry or calculation will be enou$h+ the -uestion relates rather to the $reater and more ad,anced part o# $eometry --whether that tends in any de$ree to ma%e more easy the ,ision o# the idea o# $ood+ and thither( as I was sayin$( all thin$s tend which compel the soul to turn her $a/e towards that place( where is the #ull per#ection o# bein$( which

she ou$ht( by all means( to behold) True( he said) Then i# $eometry compels us to ,iew bein$( it concerns us+ i# becomin$ only( it does not concern us9 Aes( that is what we assert) Aet anybody who has the least ac-uaintance with $eometry will not deny that such a conception o# the science is in #lat contradiction to the ordinary lan$ua$e o# $eometricians) How so9 They ha,e in ,iew practice only( and are always spea%in$9 in a narrow and ridiculous manner( o# s-uarin$ and e&tendin$ and applyin$ and the li%e --they con#use the necessities o# $eometry with those o# daily li#e+ whereas %nowled$e is the real object o# the whole science) "ertainly( he said) Then must not a #urther admission be made9 2hat admission9 That the %nowled$e at which $eometry aims is %nowled$e o# the eternal( and not o# au$ht perishin$ and transient) That( he replied( may be readily allowed( and is true) Then( my noble #riend( $eometry will draw the soul towards truth( and create the spirit o# philosophy( and raise up that which is now unhappily allowed to #all down) Nothin$ will be more li%ely to ha,e such an e##ect) Then nothin$ should be more sternly laid down than that the inhabitants o# your #air city should by all means learn $eometry) 3oreo,er the science has indirect e##ects( which are not small) O# what %ind9 he said) There are the military ad,anta$es o# which you spo%e( I said+ and in all departments o# %nowled$e( as e&perience pro,es( any one who has studied $eometry is in#initely -uic%er o# apprehension than one who has not) Aes indeed( he said( there is an in#inite di##erence between them) Then shall we propose this as a second branch o# %nowled$e which our youth will study9 'et us do so( he replied) 1nd suppose we ma%e astronomy the third --what do you say9 I am stron$ly inclined to it( he said+ the obser,ation o# the seasons and o# months and years is as essential to the $eneral as it is to the #armer or sailor) I am amused( I said( at your #ear o# the world( which ma%es you $uard a$ainst the appearance o# insistin$ upon useless studies+ and I -uite

admit the di##iculty o# belie,in$ that in e,ery man there is an eye o# the soul which( when by other pursuits lost and dimmed( is by these puri#ied and re-illumined+ and is more precious #ar than ten thousand bodily eyes( #or by it alone is truth seen) Now there are two classes o# personsD one class o# those who will a$ree with you and will ta%e your words as a re,elation+ another class to whom they will be utterly unmeanin$( and who will naturally deem them to be idle tales( #or they see no sort o# pro#it which is to be obtained #rom them) 1nd there#ore you had better decide at once with which o# the two you are proposin$ to ar$ue) Aou will ,ery li%ely say with neither( and that your chie# aim in carryin$ on the ar$ument is your own impro,ement+ at the same time you do not $rud$e to others any bene#it which they may recei,e) I thin% that I should pre#er to carry on the ar$ument mainly on my own behal#) Then ta%e a step bac%ward( #or we ha,e $one wron$ in the order o# the sciences) 2hat was the mista%e9 he said) 1#ter plane $eometry( I said( we proceeded at once to solids in re,olution( instead o# ta%in$ solids in themsel,es+ whereas a#ter the second dimension the third( which is concerned with cubes and dimensions o# depth( ou$ht to ha,e #ollowed) That is true( *ocrates+ but so little seems to be %nown as yet about these subjects) 2hy( yes( I said( and #or two reasonsD --in the #irst place( no $o,ernment patronises them+ this leads to a want o# ener$y in the pursuit o# them( and they are di##icult+ in the second place( students cannot learn them unless they ha,e a director) But then a director can hardly be #ound( and e,en i# he could( as matters now stand( the students( who are ,ery conceited( would not attend to him) That( howe,er( would be otherwise i# the whole *tate became the director o# these studies and $a,e honour to them+ then disciples would want to come( and there would be continuous and earnest search( and disco,eries would be made+ since e,en now( disre$arded as they are by the world( and maimed o# their #air proportions( and althou$h none o# their ,otaries can tell the use o# them( still these studies #orce their way by their natural charm( and ,ery li%ely( i# they had the help o# the *tate( they would some day emer$e into li$ht) Aes( he said( there is a remar%able charm in them) But I do not clearly understand the chan$e in the order) @irst you be$an with a $eometry o# plane sur#aces9 Aes( I said) 1nd you placed astronomy ne&t( and then you made a step bac%ward9 Aes( and I ha,e delayed you by my hurry+ the ludicrous state o# solid $eometry( which( in natural order( should ha,e #ollowed( made me pass

o,er this branch and $o on to astronomy( or motion o# solids) True( he said) Then assumin$ that the science now omitted would come into e&istence i# encoura$ed by the *tate( let us $o on to astronomy( which will be #ourth) The ri$ht order( he replied) 1nd now( *ocrates( as you rebu%ed the ,ul$ar manner in which I praised astronomy be#ore( my praise shall be $i,en in your own spirit) @or e,ery one( as I thin%( must see that astronomy compels the soul to loo% upwards and leads us #rom this world to another) E,ery one but mysel#( I said+ to e,ery one else this may be clear( but not to me) 1nd what then would you say9 I should rather say that those who ele,ate astronomy into philosophy appear to me to ma%e us loo% downwards and not upwards) 2hat do you mean9 he as%ed) Aou( I replied( ha,e in your mind a truly sublime conception o# our %nowled$e o# the thin$s abo,e) 1nd I dare say that i# a person were to throw his head bac% and study the #retted ceilin$( you would still thin% that his mind was the percipient( and not his eyes) 1nd you are ,ery li%ely ri$ht( and I may be a simpletonD but( in my opinion( that %nowled$e only which is o# bein$ and o# the unseen can ma%e the soul loo% upwards( and whether a man $apes at the hea,ens or blin%s on the $round( see%in$ to learn some particular o# sense( I would deny that he can learn( #or nothin$ o# that sort is matter o# science+ his soul is loo%in$ downwards( not upwards( whether his way to %nowled$e is by water or by land( whether he #loats( or only lies on his bac%) I ac%nowled$e( he said( the justice o# your rebu%e) *till( I should li%e to ascertain how astronomy can be learned in any manner more conduci,e to that %nowled$e o# which we are spea%in$9 I will tell you( I saidD The starry hea,en which we behold is wrou$ht upon a ,isible $round( and there#ore( althou$h the #airest and most per#ect o# ,isible thin$s( must necessarily be deemed in#erior #ar to the true motions o# absolute swi#tness and absolute slowness( which are relati,e to each other( and carry with them that which is contained in them( in the true number and in e,ery true #i$ure) Now( these are to be apprehended by reason and intelli$ence( but not by si$ht) True( he replied) The span$led hea,ens should be used as a pattern and with a ,iew to that hi$her %nowled$e+ their beauty is li%e the beauty o# #i$ures or pictures e&cellently wrou$ht by the hand o# aedalus( or some other $reat artist( which we may chance to behold+ any $eometrician who saw them would appreciate the e&-uisiteness o# their wor%manship( but he would ne,er dream o# thin%in$ that in them he could #ind the true e-ual or the true double( or the truth o# any other proportion)

No( he replied( such an idea would be ridiculous) 1nd will not a true astronomer ha,e the same #eelin$ when he loo%s at the mo,ements o# the stars9 2ill he not thin% that hea,en and the thin$s in hea,en are #ramed by the "reator o# them in the most per#ect manner9 But he will ne,er ima$ine that the proportions o# ni$ht and day( or o# both to the month( or o# the month to the year( or o# the stars to these and to one another( and any other thin$s that are material and ,isible can also be eternal and subject to no de,iation --that would be absurd+ and it is e-ually absurd to ta%e so much pains in in,esti$atin$ their e&act truth) I -uite a$ree( thou$h I ne,er thou$ht o# this be#ore) Then( I said( in astronomy( as in $eometry( we should employ problems( and let the hea,ens alone i# we would approach the subject in the ri$ht way and so ma%e the natural $i#t o# reason to be o# any real use) That( he said( is a wor% in#initely beyond our present astronomers) Aes( I said+ and there are many other thin$s which must also ha,e a similar e&tension $i,en to them( i# our le$islation is to be o# any ,alue) But can you tell me o# any other suitable study9 No( he said( not without thin%in$) 3otion( I said( has many #orms( and not one only+ two o# them are ob,ious enou$h e,en to wits no better than ours+ and there are others( as I ima$ine( which may be le#t to wiser persons) But where are the two9 There is a second( I said( which is the counterpart o# the one already named) 1nd what may that be9 The second( I said( would seem relati,ely to the ears to be what the #irst is to the eyes+ #or I concei,e that as the eyes are desi$ned to loo% up at the stars( so are the ears to hear harmonious motions+ and these are sister sciences --as the Pytha$oreans say( and we( .laucon( a$ree with them9 Aes( he replied) But this( I said( is a laborious study( and there#ore we had better $o and learn o# them+ and they will tell us whether there are any other applications o# these sciences) 1t the same time( we must not lose si$ht o# our own hi$her object) 2hat is that9 There is a per#ection which all %nowled$e ou$ht to reach( and which our pupils ou$ht also to attain( and not to #all short o#( as I was sayin$ that they did in astronomy) @or in the science o# harmony( as you probably %now( the same thin$ happens) The teachers o# harmony compare the sounds and consonances which are heard only( and their labour( li%e that o# the astronomers( is in ,ain)

Aes( by hea,en4 he said+ and 6tis as $ood as a play to hear them tal%in$ about their condensed notes( as they call them+ they put their ears close alon$side o# the strin$s li%e persons catchin$ a sound #rom their nei$hbour6s wall --one set o# them declarin$ that they distin$uish an intermediate note and ha,e #ound the least inter,al which should be the unit o# measurement+ the others insistin$ that the two sounds ha,e passed into the same --either party settin$ their ears be#ore their understandin$) Aou mean( I said( those $entlemen who tease and torture the strin$s and rac% them on the pe$s o# the instrumentD mi$ht carry on the metaphor and spea% a#ter their manner o# the blows which the plectrum $i,es( and ma%e accusations a$ainst the strin$s( both o# bac%wardness and #orwardness to sound+ but this would be tedious( and there#ore I will only say that these are not the men( and that I am re#errin$ to the Pytha$oreans( o# whom I was just now proposin$ to en-uire about harmony) @or they too are in error( li%e the astronomers+ they in,esti$ate the numbers o# the harmonies which are heard( but they ne,er attain to problems-that is to say( they ne,er reach the natural harmonies o# number( or re#lect why some numbers are harmonious and others not) That( he said( is a thin$ o# more than mortal %nowled$e) 1 thin$( I replied( which I would rather call use#ul+ that is( i# sou$ht a#ter with a ,iew to the beauti#ul and $ood+ but i# pursued in any other spirit( useless) >ery true( he said) Now( when all these studies reach the point o# inter-communion and connection with one another( and come to be considered in their mutual a##inities( then( I thin%( but not till then( will the pursuit o# them ha,e a ,alue #or our objects+ otherwise there is no pro#it in them) I suspect so+ but you are spea%in$( *ocrates( o# a ,ast wor%) 2hat do you mean9 I said+ the prelude or what9 o you not %now that all this is but the prelude to the actual strain which we ha,e to learn9 @or you surely would not re$ard the s%illed mathematician as a dialectician9 1ssuredly not( he said+ I ha,e hardly e,er %nown a mathematician who was capable o# reasonin$) But do you ima$ine that men who are unable to $i,e and ta%e a reason will ha,e the %nowled$e which we re-uire o# them9 Neither can this be supposed) 1nd so( .laucon( I said( we ha,e at last arri,ed at the hymn o# dialectic) This is that strain which is o# the intellect only( but which the #aculty o# si$ht will ne,ertheless be #ound to imitate+ #or si$ht( as you may remember( was ima$ined by us a#ter a while to behold the real animals and stars( and last o# all the sun himsel#) 1nd so with

dialectic+ when a person starts on the disco,ery o# the absolute by the li$ht o# reason only( and without any assistance o# sense( and perse,eres until by pure intelli$ence he arri,es at the perception o# the absolute $ood( he at last #inds himsel# at the end o# the intellectual world( as in the case o# si$ht at the end o# the ,isible) E&actly( he said) Then this is the pro$ress which you call dialectic9 True) But the release o# the prisoners #rom chains( and their translation #rom the shadows to the ima$es and to the li$ht( and the ascent #rom the under$round den to the sun( while in his presence they are ,ainly tryin$ to loo% on animals and plants and the li$ht o# the sun( but are able to percei,e e,en with their wea% eyes the ima$es in the water 5which are di,ine7( and are the shadows o# true e&istence 5not shadows o# ima$es cast by a li$ht o# #ire( which compared with the sun is only an ima$e7 --this power o# ele,atin$ the hi$hest principle in the soul to the contemplation o# that which is best in e&istence( with which we may compare the raisin$ o# that #aculty which is the ,ery li$ht o# the body to the si$ht o# that which is bri$htest in the material and ,isible world --this power is $i,en( as I was sayin$( by all that study and pursuit o# the arts which has been described) I a$ree in what you are sayin$( he replied( which may be hard to belie,e( yet( #rom another point o# ,iew( is harder still to deny) This( howe,er( is not a theme to be treated o# in passin$ only( but will ha,e to be discussed a$ain and a$ain) 1nd so( whether our conclusion be true or #alse( let us assume all this( and proceed at once #rom the prelude or preamble to the chie# strain( and describe that in li%e manner) *ay( then( what is the nature and what are the di,isions o# dialectic( and what are the paths which lead thither+ #or these paths will also lead to our #inal rest9 ear .laucon( I said( you will not be able to #ollow me here( thou$h I would do my best( and you should behold not an ima$e only but the absolute truth( accordin$ to my notion) 2hether what I told you would or would not ha,e been a reality I cannot ,enture to say+ but you would ha,e seen somethin$ li%e reality+ o# that I am con#ident) oubtless( he replied) But I must also remind you( that the power o# dialectic alone can re,eal this( and only to one who is a disciple o# the pre,ious sciences) O# that assertion you may be as con#ident as o# the last) 1nd assuredly no one will ar$ue that there is any other method o# comprehendin$ by any re$ular process all true e&istence or o# ascertainin$ what each thin$ is in its own nature+ #or the arts in $eneral are concerned with the desires or opinions o# men( or are culti,ated with a ,iew to production and construction( or #or the preser,ation o# such productions and constructions+ and as to the mathematical sciences which( as we were sayin$( ha,e some apprehension o# true bein$ --$eometry and the li%e --they only dream about bein$( but ne,er can they behold

the wa%in$ reality so lon$ as they lea,e the hypotheses which they use une&amined( and are unable to $i,e an account o# them) @or when a man %nows not his own #irst principle( and when the conclusion and intermediate steps are also constructed out o# he %nows not what( how can he ima$ine that such a #abric o# con,ention can e,er become science9 Impossible( he said) Then dialectic( and dialectic alone( $oes directly to the #irst principle and is the only science which does away with hypotheses in order to ma%e her $round secure+ the eye o# the soul( which is literally buried in an outlandish slou$h( is by her $entle aid li#ted upwards+ and she uses as handmaids and helpers in the wor% o# con,ersion( the sciences which we ha,e been discussin$) "ustom terms them sciences( but they ou$ht to ha,e some other name( implyin$ $reater clearness than opinion and less clearness than scienceD and this( in our pre,ious s%etch( was called understandin$) But why should we dispute about names when we ha,e realities o# such importance to consider9 2hy indeed( he said( when any name will do which e&presses the thou$ht o# the mind with clearness9 1t any rate( we are satis#ied( as be#ore( to ha,e #our di,isions+ two #or intellect and two #or opinion( and to call the #irst di,ision science( the second understandin$( the third belie#( and the #ourth perception o# shadows( opinion bein$ concerned with becomin$( and intellect with bein$+ and so to ma%e a proportionD -1s bein$ is to becomin$( so is pure intellect to opinion) 1nd as intellect is to opinion( so is science to belie#( and understandin$ to the perception o# shadows) But let us de#er the #urther correlation and subdi,ision o# the subjects o# opinion and o# intellect( #or it will be a lon$ en-uiry( many times lon$er than this has been) 1s #ar as I understand( he said( I a$ree) 1nd do you also a$ree( I said( in describin$ the dialectician as one who attains a conception o# the essence o# each thin$9 1nd he who does not possess and is there#ore unable to impart this conception( in whate,er de$ree he #ails( may in that de$ree also be said to #ail in intelli$ence9 2ill you admit so much9 Aes( he said+ how can I deny it9 1nd you would say the same o# the conception o# the $ood9 !ntil the person is able to abstract and de#ine rationally the idea o# $ood( and unless he can run the $auntlet o# all objections( and is ready to dispro,e them( not by appeals to opinion( but to absolute truth( ne,er #alterin$ at any step o# the ar$ument --unless he can do all this( you would say that he %nows neither the idea o# $ood nor any other $ood+ he apprehends only a shadow( i# anythin$ at all( which is $i,en by opinion and not by science+ --dreamin$ and slumberin$ in this li#e( be#ore he is well awa%e here( he arri,es at the world

below( and has his #inal -uietus) In all that I should most certainly a$ree with you) 1nd surely you would not ha,e the children o# your ideal *tate( whom you are nurturin$ and educatin$ --i# the ideal e,er becomes a reality --you would not allow the #uture rulers to be li%e posts( ha,in$ no reason in them( and yet to be set in authority o,er the hi$hest matters9 "ertainly not) Then you will ma%e a law that they shall ha,e such an education as will enable them to attain the $reatest s%ill in as%in$ and answerin$ -uestions9 Aes( he said( you and I to$ether will ma%e it) ialectic( then( as you will a$ree( is the copin$-stone o# the sciences( and is set o,er them+ no other science can be placed hi$her --the nature o# %nowled$e can no #urther $o9 I a$ree( he said) But to whom we are to assi$n these studies( and in what way they are to be assi$ned( are -uestions which remain to be considered9 Aes( clearly) Aou remember( I said( how the rulers were chosen be#ore9 "ertainly( he said) The same natures must still be chosen( and the pre#erence a$ain $i,en to the surest and the bra,est( and( i# possible( to the #airest+ and( ha,in$ noble and $enerous tempers( they should also ha,e the natural $i#ts which will #acilitate their education) 1nd what are these9 *uch $i#ts as %eenness and ready powers o# ac-uisition+ #or the mind more o#ten #aints #rom the se,erity o# study than #rom the se,erity o# $ymnasticsD the toil is more entirely the mind6s own( and is not shared with the body) >ery true( he replied) @urther( he o# whom we are in search should ha,e a $ood memory( and be an unwearied solid man who is a lo,er o# labour in any line+ or he will ne,er be able to endure the $reat amount o# bodily e&ercise and to $o throu$h all the intellectual discipline and study which we re-uire o# him) "ertainly( he said+ he must ha,e natural $i#ts) The mista%e at present is( that those who study philosophy ha,e no ,ocation( and this( as I was be#ore sayin$( is the reason why she has #allen into disreputeD her true sons should ta%e her by the hand and not bastards) 2hat do you mean9 In the #irst place( her ,otary should not ha,e a lame or haltin$ industry --I mean( that he should not be hal# industrious and hal# idleD as(

#or e&ample( when a man is a lo,er o# $ymnastic and huntin$( and all other bodily e&ercises( but a hater rather than a lo,er o# the labour o# learnin$ or listenin$ or en-uirin$) Or the occupation to which he de,otes himsel# may be o# an opposite %ind( and he may ha,e the other sort o# lameness) "ertainly( he said) 1nd as to truth( I said( is not a soul e-ually to be deemed halt and lame which hates ,oluntary #alsehood and is e&tremely indi$nant at hersel# and others when they tell lies( but is patient o# in,oluntary #alsehood( and does not mind wallowin$ li%e a swinish beast in the mire o# i$norance( and has no shame at bein$ detected9 To be sure) 1nd( a$ain( in respect o# temperance( coura$e( ma$ni#icence( and e,ery other ,irtue( should we not care#ully distin$uish between the true son and the bastard9 #or where there is no discernment o# such -ualities *tates and indi,iduals unconsciously err and the *tate ma%es a ruler( and the indi,idual a #riend( o# one who( bein$ de#ecti,e in some part o# ,irtue( is in a #i$ure lame or a bastard) That is ,ery true( he said) 1ll these thin$s( then( will ha,e to be care#ully considered by us+ and i# only those whom we introduce to this ,ast system o# education and trainin$ are sound in body and mind( justice hersel# will ha,e nothin$ to say a$ainst us( and we shall be the sa,iours o# the constitution and o# the *tate+ but( i# our pupils are men o# another stamp( the re,erse will happen( and we shall pour a still $reater #lood o# ridicule on philosophy than she has to endure at present) That would not be creditable) "ertainly not( I said+ and yet perhaps( in thus turnin$ jest into earnest I am e-ually ridiculous) In what respect9 I had #or$otten( I said( that we were not serious( and spo%e with too much e&citement) @or when I saw philosophy so undeser,edly trampled under #oot o# men I could not help #eelin$ a sort o# indi$nation at the authors o# her dis$raceD and my an$er made me too ,ehement) Indeed4 I was listenin$( and did not thin% so) But I( who am the spea%er( #elt that I was) 1nd now let me remind you that( althou$h in our #ormer selection we chose old men( we must not do so in this) *olon was under a delusion when he said that a man when he $rows old may learn many thin$s --#or he can no more learn much than he can run much+ youth is the time #or any e&traordinary toil) O# course) 1nd( there#ore( calculation and $eometry and all the other elements o# instruction( which are a preparation #or dialectic( should be presented to the mind in childhood+ not( howe,er( under any notion o# #orcin$ our system o# education)

2hy not9 Because a #reeman ou$ht not to be a sla,e in the ac-uisition o# %nowled$e o# any %ind) Bodily e&ercise( when compulsory( does no harm to the body+ but %nowled$e which is ac-uired under compulsion obtains no hold on the mind) >ery true) Then( my $ood #riend( I said( do not use compulsion( but let early education be a sort o# amusement+ you will then be better able to #ind out the natural bent) That is a ,ery rational notion( he said) o you remember that the children( too( were to be ta%en to see the battle on horsebac%+ and that i# there were no dan$er they were to be brou$ht close up and( li%e youn$ hounds( ha,e a taste o# blood $i,en them9 Aes( I remember) The same practice may be #ollowed( I said( in all these thin$s --labours( lessons( dan$ers --and he who is most at home in all o# them ou$ht to be enrolled in a select number) 1t what a$e9 1t the a$e when the necessary $ymnastics are o,erD the period whether o# two or three years which passes in this sort o# trainin$ is useless #or any other purpose+ #or sleep and e&ercise are unpropitious to learnin$+ and the trial o# who is #irst in $ymnastic e&ercises is one o# the most important tests to which our youth are subjected) "ertainly( he replied) 1#ter that time those who are selected #rom the class o# twenty years old will be promoted to hi$her honour( and the sciences which they learned without any order in their early education will now be brou$ht to$ether( and they will be able to see the natural relationship o# them to one another and to true bein$) Aes( he said( that is the only %ind o# %nowled$e which ta%es lastin$ root) Aes( I said+ and the capacity #or such %nowled$e is the $reat criterion o# dialectical talentD the comprehensi,e mind is always the dialectical) I a$ree with you( he said) These( I said( are the points which you must consider+ and those who ha,e most o# this comprehension( and who are more stead#ast in their learnin$( and in their military and other appointed duties( when they ha,e arri,ed at the a$e o# thirty ha,e to be chosen by you out o# the select class( and ele,ated to hi$her honour+ and you will ha,e to pro,e them by the help o# dialectic( in order to learn which o# them is able to $i,e up the use o# si$ht and the other senses( and in company with truth to attain absolute bein$D 1nd here( my #riend( $reat caution is re-uired)

2hy $reat caution9 o you not remar%( I said( how $reat is the e,il which dialectic has introduced9 2hat e,il9 he said) The students o# the art are #illed with lawlessness) Cuite true( he said) o you thin% that there is anythin$ so ,ery unnatural or ine&cusable in their case9 or will you ma%e allowance #or them9 In what way ma%e allowance9 I want you( I said( by way o# parallel( to ima$ine a supposititious son who is brou$ht up in $reat wealth+ he is one o# a $reat and numerous #amily( and has many #latterers) 2hen he $rows up to manhood( he learns that his alle$ed are not his real parents+ but who the real are he is unable to disco,er) "an you $uess how he will be li%ely to beha,e towards his #latterers and his supposed parents( #irst o# all durin$ the period when he is i$norant o# the #alse relation( and then a$ain when he %nows9 Or shall I $uess #or you9 I# you please) Then I should say( that while he is i$norant o# the truth he will be li%ely to honour his #ather and his mother and his supposed relations more than the #latterers+ he will be less inclined to ne$lect them when in need( or to do or say anythin$ a$ainst them+ and he will be less willin$ to disobey them in any important matter) He will) But when he has made the disco,ery( I should ima$ine that he would diminish his honour and re$ard #or them( and would become more de,oted to the #latterers+ their in#luence o,er him would $reatly increase+ he would now li,e a#ter their ways( and openly associate with them( and( unless he were o# an unusually $ood disposition( he would trouble himsel# no more about his supposed parents or other relations) 2ell( all that is ,ery probable) But how is the ima$e applicable to the disciples o# philosophy9 In this wayD you %now that there are certain principles about justice and honour( which were tau$ht us in childhood( and under their parental authority we ha,e been brou$ht up( obeyin$ and honourin$ them) That is true) There are also opposite ma&ims and habits o# pleasure which #latter and attract the soul( but do not in#luence those o# us who ha,e any sense o# ri$ht( and they continue to obey and honour the ma&ims o# their #athers) True) Now( when a man is in this state( and the -uestionin$ spirit as%s what is #air or honourable( and he answers as the le$islator has tau$ht him( and then ar$uments many and di,erse re#ute his words( until he

is dri,en into belie,in$ that nothin$ is honourable any more than dishonourable( or just and $ood any more than the re,erse( and so o# all the notions which he most ,alued( do you thin% that he will still honour and obey them as be#ore9 Impossible) 1nd when he ceases to thin% them honourable and natural as hereto#ore( and he #ails to disco,er the true( can he be e&pected to pursue any li#e other than that which #latters his desires9 He cannot) 1nd #rom bein$ a %eeper o# the law he is con,erted into a brea%er o# it9 !n-uestionably) Now all this is ,ery natural in students o# philosophy such as I ha,e described( and also( as I was just now sayin$( most e&cusable) Aes( he said+ and( I may add( pitiable) There#ore( that your #eelin$s may not be mo,ed to pity about our citi/ens who are now thirty years o# a$e( e,ery care must be ta%en in introducin$ them to dialectic) "ertainly) There is a dan$er lest they should taste the dear deli$ht too early+ #or youn$sters( as you may ha,e obser,ed( when they #irst $et the taste in their mouths( ar$ue #or amusement( and are always contradictin$ and re#utin$ others in imitation o# those who re#ute them+ li%e puppy-do$s( they rejoice in pullin$ and tearin$ at all who come near them) Aes( he said( there is nothin$ which they li%e better) 1nd when they ha,e made many con-uests and recei,ed de#eats at the hands o# many( they ,iolently and speedily $et into a way o# not belie,in$ anythin$ which they belie,ed be#ore( and hence( not only they( but philosophy and all that relates to it is apt to ha,e a bad name with the rest o# the world) Too true( he said) But when a man be$ins to $et older( he will no lon$er be $uilty o# such insanity+ he will imitate the dialectician who is see%in$ #or truth( and not the eristic( who is contradictin$ #or the sa%e o# amusement+ and the $reater moderation o# his character will increase instead o# diminishin$ the honour o# the pursuit) >ery true( he said) 1nd did we not ma%e special pro,ision #or this( when we said that the disciples o# philosophy were to be orderly and stead#ast( not( as now( any chance aspirant or intruder9 >ery true) *uppose( I said( the study o# philosophy to ta%e the place o# $ymnastics and to be continued dili$ently and earnestly and e&clusi,ely #or twice the number o# years which were passed in bodily e&ercise --will that

be enou$h9 2ould you say si& or #our years9 he as%ed) *ay #i,e years( I replied+ at the end o# the time they must be sent down a$ain into the den and compelled to hold any military or other o##ice which youn$ men are -uali#ied to holdD in this way they will $et their e&perience o# li#e( and there will be an opportunity o# tryin$ whether( when they are drawn all manner o# ways by temptation( they will stand #irm or #linch) 1nd how lon$ is this sta$e o# their li,es to last9 @i#teen years( I answered+ and when they ha,e reached #i#ty years o# a$e( then let those who still sur,i,e and ha,e distin$uished themsel,es in e,ery action o# their li,es and in e,ery branch o# %nowled$e come at last to their consummation+ the time has now arri,ed at which they must raise the eye o# the soul to the uni,ersal li$ht which li$htens all thin$s( and behold the absolute $ood+ #or that is the( pattern accordin$ to which they are to order the *tate and the li,es o# indi,iduals( and the remainder o# their own li,es also+ ma%in$ philosophy their chie# pursuit( but( when their turn comes( toilin$ also at politics and rulin$ #or the public $ood( not as thou$h they were per#ormin$ some heroic action( but simply as a matter o# duty+ and when they ha,e brou$ht up in each $eneration others li%e themsel,es and le#t them in their place to be $o,ernors o# the *tate( then they will depart to the Islands o# the Blest and dwell there+ and the city will $i,e them public memorials and sacri#ices and honour them( i# the Pythian oracle consent( as demi-$ods( but i# not( as in any case blessed and di,ine) Aou are a sculptor( *ocrates( and ha,e made statues o# our $o,ernors #aultless in beauty) Aes( I said( .laucon( and o# our $o,ernesses too+ #or you must not suppose that what I ha,e been sayin$ applies to men only and not to women as #ar as their natures can $o) There you are ri$ht( he said( since we ha,e made them to share in all thin$s li%e the men) 2ell( I said( and you would a$ree 5would you not97 that what has been said about the *tate and the $o,ernment is not a mere dream( and althou$h di##icult not impossible( but only possible in the way which has been supposed+ that is to say( when the true philosopher %in$s are born in a *tate( one or more o# them( despisin$ the honours o# this present world which they deem mean and worthless( esteemin$ abo,e all thin$s ri$ht and the honour that sprin$s #rom ri$ht( and re$ardin$ justice as the $reatest and most necessary o# all thin$s( whose ministers they are( and whose principles will be e&alted by them when they set in order their own city9 How will they proceed9 They will be$in by sendin$ out into the country all the inhabitants o# the city who are more than ten years old( and will ta%e possession

o# their children( who will be una##ected by the habits o# their parents+ these they will train in their own habits and laws( I mean in the laws which we ha,e $i,en themD and in this way the *tate and constitution o# which we were spea%in$ will soonest and most easily attain happiness( and the nation which has such a constitution will $ain most) Aes( that will be the best way) 1nd I thin%( *ocrates( that you ha,e ,ery well described how( i# e,er( such a constitution mi$ht come into bein$) Enou$h then o# the per#ect *tate( and o# the man who bears its ima$e --there is no di##iculty in seein$ how we shall describe him) There is no di##iculty( he replied+ and I a$ree with you in thin%in$ that nothin$ more need be said) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG >III *ocrates - .'1!"ON 1nd so( .laucon( we ha,e arri,ed at the conclusion that in the per#ect *tate wi,es and children are to be in common+ and that all education and the pursuits o# war and peace are also to be common( and the best philosophers and the bra,est warriors are to be their %in$s9 That( replied .laucon( has been ac%nowled$ed) Aes( I said+ and we ha,e #urther ac%nowled$ed that the $o,ernors( when appointed themsel,es( will ta%e their soldiers and place them in houses such as we were describin$( which are common to all( and contain nothin$ pri,ate( or indi,idual+ and about their property( you remember what we a$reed9 Aes( I remember that no one was to ha,e any o# the ordinary possessions o# man%ind+ they were to be warrior athletes and $uardians( recei,in$ #rom the other citi/ens( in lieu o# annual payment( only their maintenance( and they were to ta%e care o# themsel,es and o# the whole *tate) True( I said+ and now that this di,ision o# our tas% is concluded( let us #ind the point at which we di$ressed( that we may return into the old path) There is no di##iculty in returnin$+ you implied( then as now( that you had #inished the description o# the *tateD you said that such a *tate was $ood( and that the man was $ood who answered to it( althou$h( as now appears( you had more e&cellent thin$s to relate both o# *tate and man) 1nd you said #urther( that i# this was the true #orm( then the others were #alse+ and o# the #alse #orms( you said( as I remember( that there were #our principal ones( and that their de#ects( and the de#ects o# the indi,iduals correspondin$ to them( were worth e&aminin$) 2hen we had seen all the indi,iduals( and #inally a$reed as to who was the best and who was the worst o# them( we were to consider whether

the best was not also the happiest( and the worst the most miserable) I as%ed you what were the #our #orms o# $o,ernment o# which you spo%e( and then Polemarchus and 1deimantus put in their word+ and you be$an a$ain( and ha,e #ound your way to the point at which we ha,e now arri,ed) Aour recollection( I said( is most e&act) Then( li%e a wrestler( he replied( you must put yoursel# a$ain in the same position+ and let me as% the same -uestions( and do you $i,e me the same answer which you were about to $i,e me then) Aes( i# I can( I will( I said) I shall particularly wish to hear what were the #our constitutions o# which you were spea%in$) That -uestion( I said( is easily answeredD the #our $o,ernments o# which I spo%e( so #ar as they ha,e distinct names( are( #irst( those o# "rete and *parta( which are $enerally applauded+ what is termed oli$archy comes ne&t+ this is not e-ually appro,ed( and is a #orm o# $o,ernment which teems with e,ilsD thirdly( democracy( which naturally #ollows oli$archy( althou$h ,ery di##erentD and lastly comes tyranny( $reat and #amous( which di##ers #rom them all( and is the #ourth and worst disorder o# a *tate) I do not %now( do you9 o# any other constitution which can be said to ha,e a distinct character) There are lordships and principalities which are bou$ht and sold( and some other intermediate #orms o# $o,ernment) But these are nondescripts and may be #ound e-ually amon$ Hellenes and amon$ barbarians) Aes( he replied( we certainly hear o# many curious #orms o# $o,ernment which e&ist amon$ them) o you %now( I said( that $o,ernments ,ary as the dispositions o# men ,ary( and that there must be as many o# the one as there are o# the other9 @or we cannot suppose that *tates are made o# 6oa% and roc%(6 and not out o# the human natures which are in them( and which in a #i$ure turn the scale and draw other thin$s a#ter them9 Aes( he said( the *tates are as the men are+ they $row out o# human characters) Then i# the constitutions o# *tates are #i,e( the dispositions o# indi,idual minds will also be #i,e9 "ertainly) Him who answers to aristocracy( and whom we ri$htly call just and $ood( we ha,e already described) 2e ha,e) Then let us now proceed to describe the in#erior sort o# natures( bein$ the contentious and ambitious( who answer to the *partan polity+ also the oli$archical( democratical( and tyrannical) 'et us place the most just by the side o# the most unjust( and when we see them we shall be able to compare the relati,e happiness or unhappiness o# him who leads a li#e o# pure justice or pure injustice) The en-uiry

will then be completed) 1nd we shall %now whether we ou$ht to pursue injustice( as Thrasymachus ad,ises( or in accordance with the conclusions o# the ar$ument to pre#er justice) "ertainly( he replied( we must do as you say) *hall we #ollow our old plan( which we adopted with a ,iew to clearness( o# ta%in$ the *tate #irst and then proceedin$ to the indi,idual( and be$in with the $o,ernment o# honour9 --I %now o# no name #or such a $o,ernment other than timocracy( or perhaps timarchy) 2e will compare with this the li%e character in the indi,idual+ and( a#ter that( consider oli$archical man+ and then a$ain we will turn our attention to democracy and the democratical man+ and lastly( we will $o and ,iew the city o# tyranny( and once more ta%e a loo% into the tyrant6s soul( and try to arri,e at a satis#actory decision) That way o# ,iewin$ and jud$in$ o# the matter will be ,ery suitable) @irst( then( I said( let us en-uire how timocracy 5the $o,ernment o# honour7 arises out o# aristocracy 5the $o,ernment o# the best7) "learly( all political chan$es ori$inate in di,isions o# the actual $o,ernin$ power+ a $o,ernment which is united( howe,er small( cannot be mo,ed) >ery true( he said) In what way( then( will our city be mo,ed( and in what manner the two classes o# au&iliaries and rulers disa$ree amon$ themsel,es or with one another9 *hall we( a#ter the manner o# Homer( pray the 3uses to tell us 6how discord #irst arose69 *hall we ima$ine them in solemn moc%ery( to play and jest with us as i# we were children( and to address us in a lo#ty tra$ic ,ein( ma%in$ belie,e to be in earnest9 How would they address us9 1#ter this mannerD --1 city which is thus constituted can hardly be sha%en+ but( seein$ that e,erythin$ which has a be$innin$ has also an end( e,en a constitution such as yours will not last #or e,er( but will in time be dissol,ed) 1nd this is the dissolutionD --In plants that $row in the earth( as well as in animals that mo,e on the earth6s sur#ace( #ertility and sterility o# soul and body occur when the circum#erences o# the circles o# each are completed( which in short-li,ed e&istences pass o,er a short space( and in lon$-li,ed ones o,er a lon$ space) But to the %nowled$e o# human #ecundity and sterility all the wisdom and education o# your rulers will not attain+ the laws which re$ulate them will not be disco,ered by an intelli$ence which is alloyed with sense( but will escape them( and they will brin$ children into the world when they ou$ht not) Now that which is o# di,ine birth has a period which is contained in a per#ect number( but the period o# human birth is comprehended in a number in which #irst increments by in,olution and e,olution 5or s-uared and cubed7 obtainin$ three inter,als and #our terms o# li%e and unli%e( wa&in$ and wanin$ numbers( ma%e all the terms commensurable and a$reeable to one another) The base o# these 5;7 with a third added 5<7 when combined with #i,e 5:K7 and raised to the third power #urnishes two harmonies+ the #irst a s-uare which is a hundred times as $reat 5<KK L < ? 8KK7( and the other a

#i$ure ha,in$ one side e-ual to the #ormer( but oblon$( consistin$ o# a hundred numbers s-uared upon rational diameters o# a s-uare 5i) e) omittin$ #ractions7( the side o# which is #i,e 5F ? F L <E ? 8KK L <EKK7( each o# them bein$ less by one 5than the per#ect s-uare which includes the #ractions( sc) =K7 or less by two per#ect s-uares o# irrational diameters 5o# a s-uare the side o# which is #i,e L =K M =K L 8KK7+ and a hundred cubes o# three 5:F ? 8KK L :FKK M <EKK M <KK L NKKK7) Now this number represents a $eometrical #i$ure which has control o,er the $ood and e,il o# births) @or when your $uardians are i$norant o# the law o# births( and unite bride and bride$room out o# season( the children will not be $oodly or #ortunate) 1nd thou$h only the best o# them will be appointed by their predecessors( still they will be unworthy to hold their #athers6 places( and when they come into power as $uardians( they will soon be #ound to #all in ta%in$ care o# us( the 3uses( #irst by under-,aluin$ music+ which ne$lect will soon e&tend to $ymnastic+ and hence the youn$ men o# your *tate will be less culti,ated) In the succeedin$ $eneration rulers will be appointed who ha,e lost the $uardian power o# testin$ the metal o# your di##erent races( which( li%e Hesiod6s( are o# $old and sil,er and brass and iron) 1nd so iron will be min$led with sil,er( and brass with $old( and hence there will arise dissimilarity and ine-uality and irre$ularity( which always and in all places are causes o# hatred and war) This the 3uses a##irm to be the stoc% #rom which discord has sprun$( where,er arisin$+ and this is their answer to us) Aes( and we may assume that they answer truly) 2hy( yes( I said( o# course they answer truly+ how can the 3uses spea% #alsely9 1nd what do the 3uses say ne&t9 2hen discord arose( then the two races were drawn di##erent waysD the iron and brass #ell to ac-uirin$ money and land and houses and $old and sil,er+ but the $old and sil,er races( not wantin$ money but ha,in$ the true riches in their own nature( inclined towards ,irtue and the ancient order o# thin$s) There was a battle between them( and at last they a$reed to distribute their land and houses amon$ indi,idual owners+ and they ensla,ed their #riends and maintainers( whom they had #ormerly protected in the condition o# #reemen( and made o# them subjects and ser,ants+ and they themsel,es were en$a$ed in war and in %eepin$ a watch a$ainst them) I belie,e that you ha,e ri$htly concei,ed the ori$in o# the chan$e) 1nd the new $o,ernment which thus arises will be o# a #orm intermediate between oli$archy and aristocracy9 >ery true) *uch will be the chan$e( and a#ter the chan$e has been made( how will they proceed9 "learly( the new *tate( bein$ in a mean between oli$archy and the per#ect *tate( will partly #ollow one and partly the other( and will also ha,e some peculiarities) True( he said)

In the honour $i,en to rulers( in the abstinence o# the warrior class #rom a$riculture( handicra#ts( and trade in $eneral( in the institution o# common meals( and in the attention paid to $ymnastics and military trainin$ --in all these respects this *tate will resemble the #ormer) True) But in the #ear o# admittin$ philosophers to power( because they are no lon$er to be had simple and earnest( but are made up o# mi&ed elements+ and in turnin$ #rom them to passionate and less comple& characters( who are by nature #itted #or war rather than peace+ and in the ,alue set by them upon military strata$ems and contri,ances( and in the wa$in$ o# e,erlastin$ wars --this *tate will be #or the most part peculiar) Aes) Aes( I said+ and men o# this stamp will be co,etous o# money( li%e those who li,e in oli$archies+ they will ha,e( a #ierce secret lon$in$ a#ter $old and sil,er( which they will hoard in dar% places( ha,in$ ma$a/ines and treasuries o# their own #or the deposit and concealment o# them+ also castles which are just nests #or their e$$s( and in which they will spend lar$e sums on their wi,es( or on any others whom they please) That is most true( he said) 1nd they are miserly because they ha,e no means o# openly ac-uirin$ the money which they pri/e+ they will spend that which is another man6s on the $rati#ication o# their desires( stealin$ their pleasures and runnin$ away li%e children #rom the law( their #atherD they ha,e been schooled not by $entle in#luences but by #orce( #or they ha,e ne$lected her who is the true 3use( the companion o# reason and philosophy( and ha,e honoured $ymnastic more than music) !ndoubtedly( he said( the #orm o# $o,ernment which you describe is a mi&ture o# $ood and e,il) 2hy( there is a mi&ture( I said+ but one thin$( and one thin$ only( is predominantly seen( --the spirit o# contention and ambition+ and these are due to the pre,alence o# the passionate or spirited element) 1ssuredly( he said) *uch is the ori$in and such the character o# this *tate( which has been described in outline only+ the more per#ect e&ecution was not re-uired( #or a s%etch is enou$h to show the type o# the most per#ectly just and most per#ectly unjust+ and to $o throu$h all the *tates and all the characters o# men( omittin$ none o# them( would be an interminable labour) >ery true( he replied) Now what man answers to this #orm o# $o,ernment-how did he come into bein$( and what is he li%e9 *ocrates - 1 EI31NT!*

I thin%( said 1deimantus( that in the spirit o# contention which characterises him( he is not unli%e our #riend .laucon) Perhaps( I said( he may be li%e him in that one point+ but there are other respects in which he is ,ery di##erent) In what respects9 He should ha,e more o# sel#-assertion and be less culti,ated( and yet a #riend o# culture+ and he should be a $ood listener( but no spea%er) *uch a person is apt to be rou$h with sla,es( unli%e the educated man( who is too proud #or that+ and he will also be courteous to #reemen( and remar%ably obedient to authority+ he is a lo,er o# power and a lo,er o# honour+ claimin$ to be a ruler( not because he is elo-uent( or on any $round o# that sort( but because he is a soldier and has per#ormed #eats o# arms+ he is also a lo,er o# $ymnastic e&ercises and o# the chase) Aes( that is the type o# character which answers to timocracy) *uch an one will despise riches only when he is youn$+ but as he $ets older he will be more and more attracted to them( because he has a piece o# the a,aricious nature in him( and is not sin$leminded towards ,irtue( ha,in$ lost his best $uardian) 2ho was that9 said 1deimantus) Philosophy( I said( tempered with music( who comes and ta%es her abode in a man( and is the only sa,iour o# his ,irtue throu$hout li#e) .ood( he said) *uch( I said( is the timocratical youth( and he is li%e the timocratical *tate) E&actly) His ori$in is as #ollowsD --He is o#ten the youn$ son o# a $ra,e #ather( who dwells in an ill-$o,erned city( o# which he declines the honours and o##ices( and will not $o to law( or e&ert himsel# in any way( but is ready to wai,e his ri$hts in order that he may escape trouble) 1nd how does the son come into bein$9 The character o# the son be$ins to de,elop when he hears his mother complainin$ that her husband has no place in the $o,ernment( o# which the conse-uence is that she has no precedence amon$ other women) @urther( when she sees her husband not ,ery ea$er about money( and instead o# battlin$ and railin$ in the law courts or assembly( ta%in$ whate,er happens to him -uietly+ and when she obser,es that his thou$hts always centre in himsel#( while he treats her with ,ery considerable indi##erence( she is annoyed( and says to her son that his #ather is only hal# a man and #ar too easy-$oin$D addin$ all the other complaints about her own ill-treatment which women are so #ond o# rehearsin$) Aes( said 1deimantus( they $i,e us plenty o# them( and their complaints are so li%e themsel,es)

1nd you %now( I said( that the old ser,ants also( who are supposed to be attached to the #amily( #rom time to time tal% pri,ately in the same strain to the son+ and i# they see any one who owes money to his #ather( or is wron$in$ him in any way( and he #alls to prosecute them( they tell the youth that when he $rows up he must retaliate upon people o# this sort( and be more o# a man than his #ather) He has only to wal% abroad and he hears and sees the same sort o# thin$D those who do their own business in the city are called simpletons( and held in no esteem( while the busy-bodies are honoured and applauded) The result is that the youn$ man( hearin$ and seein$ all these thin$ --hearin$ too( the words o# his #ather( and ha,in$ a nearer ,iew o# his way o# li#e( and ma%in$ comparisons o# him and others --is drawn opposite waysD while his #ather is waterin$ and nourishin$ the rational principle in his soul( the others are encoura$in$ the passionate and appetiti,e+ and he bein$ not ori$inally o# a bad nature( but ha,in$ %ept bad company( is at last brou$ht by their joint in#luence to a middle point( and $i,es up the %in$dom which is within him to the middle principle o# contentiousness and passion( and becomes arro$ant and ambitious) Aou seem to me to ha,e described his ori$in per#ectly) Then we ha,e now( I said( the second #orm o# $o,ernment and the second type o# character9 2e ha,e) Ne&t( let us loo% at another man who( as 1eschylus says( Is set o,er a$ainst another *tate+ or rather( as our plan re-uires( be$in with the *tate) By all means) I belie,e that oli$archy #ollows ne&t in order) 1nd what manner o# $o,ernment do you term oli$archy9 1 $o,ernment restin$ on a ,aluation o# property( in which the rich ha,e power and the poor man is depri,ed o# it) I understand( he replied) Ou$ht I not to be$in by describin$ how the chan$e #rom timocracy to oli$archy arises9 Aes) 2ell( I said( no eyes are re-uired in order to see how the one passes into the other) How9 The accumulation o# $old in the treasury o# pri,ate indi,iduals is ruin the o# timocracy+ they in,ent ille$al modes o# e&penditure+ #or what do they or their wi,es care about the law9 Aes( indeed) 1nd then one( seein$ another $row rich( see%s to ri,al him( and thus the $reat mass o# the citi/ens become lo,ers o# money)

'i%ely enou$h) 1nd so they $row richer and richer( and the more they thin% o# ma%in$ a #ortune the less they thin% o# ,irtue+ #or when riches and ,irtue are placed to$ether in the scales o# the balance( the one always rises as the other #alls) True) 1nd in proportion as riches and rich men are honoured in the *tate( ,irtue and the ,irtuous are dishonoured) "learly) 1nd what is honoured is culti,ated( and that which has no honour is ne$lected) That is ob,ious) 1nd so at last( instead o# lo,in$ contention and $lory( men become lo,ers o# trade and money+ they honour and loo% up to the rich man( and ma%e a ruler o# him( and dishonour the poor man) They do so) They ne&t proceed to ma%e a law which #i&es a sum o# money as the -uali#ication o# citi/enship+ the sum is hi$her in one place and lower in another( as the oli$archy is more or less e&clusi,e+ and they allow no one whose property #alls below the amount #i&ed to ha,e any share in the $o,ernment) These chan$es in the constitution they e##ect by #orce o# arms( i# intimidation has not already done their wor%) >ery true) 1nd this( spea%in$ $enerally( is the way in which oli$archy is established) Aes( he said+ but what are the characteristics o# this #orm o# $o,ernment( and what are the de#ects o# which we were spea%in$9 @irst o# all( I said( consider the nature o# the -uali#ication just thin% what would happen i# pilots were to be chosen accordin$ to their property( and a poor man were re#used permission to steer( e,en thou$h he were a better pilot9 Aou mean that they would shipwrec%9 Aes+ and is not this true o# the $o,ernment o# anythin$9 I should ima$ine so) E&cept a city9 --or would you include a city9 Nay( he said( the case o# a city is the stron$est o# all( inasmuch as the rule o# a city is the $reatest and most di##icult o# all) This( then( will be the #irst $reat de#ect o# oli$archy9 "learly) 1nd here is another de#ect which is -uite as bad) 2hat de#ect9 The ine,itable di,isionD such a *tate is not one( but two *tates( the one o# poor( the other o# rich men+ and they are li,in$ on the

same spot and always conspirin$ a$ainst one another) That( surely( is at least as bad) 1nother discreditable #eature is( that( #or a li%e reason( they are incapable o# carryin$ on any war) Either they arm the multitude( and then they are more a#raid o# them than o# the enemy+ or( i# they do not call them out in the hour o# battle( they are oli$archs indeed( #ew to #i$ht as they are #ew to rule) 1nd at the same time their #ondness #or money ma%es them unwillin$ to pay ta&es) How discreditable4 1nd( as we said be#ore( under such a constitution the same persons ha,e too many callin$s --they are husbandmen( tradesmen( warriors( all in one) oes that loo% well9 1nythin$ but well) There is another e,il which is( perhaps( the $reatest o# all( and to which this *tate #irst be$ins to be liable) 2hat e,il9 1 man may sell all that he has( and another may ac-uire his property+ yet a#ter the sale he may dwell in the city o# which he is no lon$er a part( bein$ neither trader( nor artisan( nor horseman( nor hoplite( but only a poor( helpless creature) Aes( that is an e,il which also #irst be$ins in this *tate) The e,il is certainly not pre,ented there+ #or oli$archies ha,e both the e&tremes o# $reat wealth and utter po,erty) True) But thin% a$ainD In his wealthy days( while he was spendin$ his money( was a man o# this sort a whit more $ood to the *tate #or the purposes o# citi/enship9 Or did he only seem to be a member o# the rulin$ body( althou$h in truth he was neither ruler nor subject( but just a spendthri#t9 1s you say( he seemed to be a ruler( but was only a spendthri#t) 3ay we not say that this is the drone in the house who is li%e the drone in the honeycomb( and that the one is the pla$ue o# the city as the other is o# the hi,e9 Just so( *ocrates) 1nd .od has made the #lyin$ drones( 1deimantus( all without stin$s( whereas o# the wal%in$ drones he has made some without stin$s but others ha,e dread#ul stin$s+ o# the stin$less class are those who in their old a$e end as paupers+ o# the stin$ers come all the criminal class( as they are termed) 3ost true( he said) "learly then( whene,er you see paupers in a *tate( somewhere in that nei$hborhood there are hidden away thie,es( and cutpurses and robbers o# temples( and all sorts o# male#actors)

"learly) 2ell( I said( and in oli$archical *tates do you not #ind paupers9 Aes( he said+ nearly e,erybody is a pauper who is not a ruler) 1nd may we be so bold as to a##irm that there are also many criminals to be #ound in them( ro$ues who ha,e stin$s( and whom the authorities are care#ul to restrain by #orce9 "ertainly( we may be so bold) The e&istence o# such persons is to be attributed to want o# education( ill-trainin$( and an e,il constitution o# the *tate9 True) *uch( then( is the #orm and such are the e,ils o# oli$archy+ and there may be many other e,ils) >ery li%ely) Then oli$archy( or the #orm o# $o,ernment in which the rulers are elected #or their wealth( may now be dismissed) 'et us ne&t proceed to consider the nature and ori$in o# the indi,idual who answers to this *tate) By all means) oes not the timocratical man chan$e into the oli$archical on this wise9 How9 1 time arri,es when the representati,e o# timocracy has a sonD at #irst he be$ins by emulatin$ his #ather and wal%in$ in his #ootsteps( but presently he sees him o# a sudden #ounderin$ a$ainst the *tate as upon a sun%en ree#( and he and all that he has is lost+ he may ha,e been a $eneral or some other hi$h o##icer who is brou$ht to trial under a prejudice raised by in#ormers( and either put to death( or e&iled( or depri,ed o# the pri,ile$es o# a citi/en( and all his property ta%en #rom him) Nothin$ more li%ely) 1nd the son has seen and %nown all this --he is a ruined man( and his #ear has tau$ht him to %noc% ambition and passion head-#oremost #rom his bosom6s throne+ humbled by po,erty he ta%es to money-ma%in$ and by mean and miserly sa,in$s and hard wor% $ets a #ortune to$ether) Is not such an one li%ely to seat the concupiscent and co,etous element on the ,acant throne and to su##er it to play the $reat %in$ within him( $irt with tiara and chain and scimitar9 3ost true( he replied) 1nd when he has made reason and spirit sit down on the $round obediently on either side o# their so,erei$n( and tau$ht them to %now their place( he compels the one to thin% only o# how lesser sums may be turned into lar$er ones( and will not allow the other to worship and admire anythin$ but riches and rich men( or to be ambitious o# anythin$ so

much as the ac-uisition o# wealth and the means o# ac-uirin$ it) O# all chan$es( he said( there is none so speedy or so sure as the con,ersion o# the ambitious youth into the a,aricious one) 1nd the a,aricious( I said( is the oli$archical youth9 Aes( he said+ at any rate the indi,idual out o# whom he came is li%e the *tate out o# which oli$archy came) 'et us then consider whether there is any li%eness between them) >ery $ood) @irst( then( they resemble one another in the ,alue which they set upon wealth9 "ertainly) 1lso in their penurious( laborious character+ the indi,idual only satis#ies his necessary appetites( and con#ines his e&penditure to them+ his other desires he subdues( under the idea that they are unpro#itable) True) He is a shabby #ellow( who sa,es somethin$ out o# e,erythin$ and ma%es a purse #or himsel#+ and this is the sort o# man whom the ,ul$ar applaud) Is he not a true ima$e o# the *tate which he represents9 He appears to me to be so+ at any rate money is hi$hly ,alued by him as well as by the *tate) Aou see that he is not a man o# culti,ation( I said) I ima$ine not( he said+ had he been educated he would ne,er ha,e made a blind $od director o# his chorus( or $i,en him chie# honour) E&cellent4 I said) Aet considerD 3ust we not #urther admit that owin$ to this want o# culti,ation there will be #ound in him droneli%e desires as o# pauper and ro$ue( which are #orcibly %ept down by his $eneral habit o# li#e9 True) o you %now where you will ha,e to loo% i# you want to disco,er his ro$ueries9 2here must I loo%9 Aou should see him where he has some $reat opportunity o# actin$ dishonestly( as in the $uardianship o# an orphan) 1ye) It will be clear enou$h then that in his ordinary dealin$s which $i,e him a reputation #or honesty he coerces his bad passions by an en#orced ,irtue+ not ma%in$ them see that they are wron$( or tamin$ them by reason( but by necessity and #ear constrainin$ them( and because he trembles #or his possessions) To be sure)

Aes( indeed( my dear #riend( but you will #ind that the natural desires o# the drone commonly e&ist in him all the same whene,er he has to spend what is not his own) Aes( and they will be stron$ in him too) The man( then( will be at war with himsel#+ he will be two men( and not one+ but( in $eneral( his better desires will be #ound to pre,ail o,er his in#erior ones) True) @or these reasons such an one will be more respectable than most people+ yet the true ,irtue o# a unanimous and harmonious soul will #lee #ar away and ne,er come near him) I should e&pect so) 1nd surely( the miser indi,idually will be an i$noble competitor in a *tate #or any pri/e o# ,ictory( or other object o# honourable ambition+ he will not spend his money in the contest #or $lory+ so a#raid is he o# awa%enin$ his e&pensi,e appetites and in,itin$ them to help and join in the stru$$le+ in true oli$archical #ashion he #i$hts with a small part only o# his resources( and the result commonly is that he loses the pri/e and sa,es his money) >ery true) "an we any lon$er doubt( then( that the miser and money-ma%er answers to the oli$archical *tate9 There can be no doubt) Ne&t comes democracy+ o# this the ori$in and nature ha,e still to be considered by us+ and then we will en-uire into the ways o# the democratic man( and brin$ him up #or jud$ement) That( he said( is our method) 2ell( I said( and how does the chan$e #rom oli$archy into democracy arise9 Is it not on this wise9 --The $ood at which such a *tate alms is to become as rich as possible( a desire which is insatiable9 2hat then9 The rulers( bein$ aware that their power rests upon their wealth( re#use to curtail by law the e&tra,a$ance o# the spendthri#t youth because they $ain by their ruin+ they ta%e interest #rom them and buy up their estates and thus increase their own wealth and importance9 To be sure) There can be no doubt that the lo,e o# wealth and the spirit o# moderation cannot e&ist to$ether in citi/ens o# the same *tate to any considerable e&tent+ one or the other will be disre$arded) That is tolerably clear) 1nd in oli$archical *tates( #rom the $eneral spread o# carelessness and e&tra,a$ance( men o# $ood #amily ha,e o#ten been reduced to be$$ary9 Aes( o#ten)

1nd still they remain in the city+ there they are( ready to stin$ and #ully armed( and some o# them owe money( some ha,e #or#eited their citi/enship+ a third class are in both predicaments+ and they hate and conspire a$ainst those who ha,e $ot their property( and a$ainst e,erybody else( and are ea$er #or re,olution) That is true) On the other hand( the men o# business( stoopin$ as they wal%( and pretendin$ not e,en to see those whom they ha,e already ruined( insert their stin$ --that is( their money --into some one else who is not on his $uard a$ainst them( and reco,er the parent sum many times o,er multiplied into a #amily o# childrenD and so they ma%e drone and pauper to abound in the *tate) Aes( he said( there are plenty o# them --that is certain) The e,il bla/es up li%e a #ire+ and they will not e&tin$uish it( either by restrictin$ a man6s use o# his own property( or by another remedyD 2hat other9 One which is the ne&t best( and has the ad,anta$e o# compellin$ the citi/ens to loo% to their charactersD --'et there be a $eneral rule that e,ery one shall enter into ,oluntary contracts at his own ris%( and there will be less o# this scandalous money-ma%in$( and the e,ils o# which we were spea%in$ will be $reatly lessened in the *tate) Aes( they will be $reatly lessened) 1t present the $o,ernors( induced by the moti,es which I ha,e named( treat their subjects badly+ while they and their adherents( especially the youn$ men o# the $o,ernin$ class( are habituated to lead a li#e o# lu&ury and idleness both o# body and mind+ they do nothin$( and are incapable o# resistin$ either pleasure or pain) >ery true) They themsel,es care only #or ma%in$ money( and are as indi##erent as the pauper to the culti,ation o# ,irtue) Aes( -uite as indi##erent) *uch is the state o# a##airs which pre,ails amon$ them) 1nd o#ten rulers and their subjects may come in one another6s way( whether on a pil$rima$e or a march( as #ellow-soldiers or #ellow-sailors+ aye( and they may obser,e the beha,iour o# each other in the ,ery moment o# dan$er --#or where dan$er is( there is no #ear that the poor will be despised by the rich --and ,ery li%ely the wiry sunburnt poor man may be placed in battle at the side o# a wealthy one who has ne,er spoilt his comple&ion and has plenty o# super#luous #lesh --when he sees such an one pu##in$ and at his wit6s end( how can he a,oid drawin$ the conclusion that men li%e him are only rich because no one has the coura$e to despoil them9 1nd when they meet in pri,ate will not people be sayin$ to one another 6Our warriors are not $ood #or much69 Aes( he said( I am -uite aware that this is their way o# tal%in$)

1nd( as in a body which is diseased the addition o# a touch #rom without may brin$ on illness( and sometimes e,en when there is no e&ternal pro,ocation a commotion may arise within-in the same way where,er there is wea%ness in the *tate there is also li%ely to be illness( o# which the occasions may be ,ery sli$ht( the one party introducin$ #rom without their oli$archical( the other their democratical allies( and then the *tate #alls sic%( and is at war with hersel#+ and may be at times distracted( e,en when there is no e&ternal cause) Aes( surely) 1nd then democracy comes into bein$ a#ter the poor ha,e con-uered their opponents( slau$hterin$ some and banishin$ some( while to the remainder they $i,e an e-ual share o# #reedom and power+ and this is the #orm o# $o,ernment in which the ma$istrates are commonly elected by lot) Aes( he said( that is the nature o# democracy( whether the re,olution has been e##ected by arms( or whether #ear has caused the opposite party to withdraw) 1nd now what is their manner o# li#e( and what sort o# a $o,ernment ha,e they9 #or as the $o,ernment is( such will be the man) "learly( he said) In the #irst place( are they not #ree+ and is not the city #ull o# #reedom and #ran%ness --a man may say and do what he li%es9 6Tis said so( he replied) 1nd where #reedom is( the indi,idual is clearly able to order #or himsel# his own li#e as he pleases9 "learly) Then in this %ind o# *tate there will be the $reatest ,ariety o# human natures9 There will) This( then( seems li%ely to be the #airest o# *tates( bein$ an embroidered robe which is span$led with e,ery sort o# #lower) 1nd just as women and children thin% a ,ariety o# colours to be o# all thin$s most charmin$( so there are many men to whom this *tate( which is span$led with the manners and characters o# man%ind( will appear to be the #airest o# *tates) Aes) Aes( my $ood *ir( and there will be no better in which to loo% #or a $o,ernment) 2hy9 Because o# the liberty which rei$ns there --they ha,e a complete assortment o# constitutions+ and he who has a mind to establish a *tate( as we ha,e been doin$( must $o to a democracy as he would to a ba/aar at which they sell them( and pic% out the one that suits him+ then( when he has made his choice( he may #ound his *tate)

He will be sure to ha,e patterns enou$h) 1nd there bein$ no necessity( I said( #or you to $o,ern in this *tate( e,en i# you ha,e the capacity( or to be $o,erned( unless you li%e( or $o to war when the rest $o to war( or to be at peace when others are at peace( unless you are so disposed --there bein$ no necessity also( because some law #orbids you to hold o##ice or be a dicast( that you should not hold o##ice or be a dicast( i# you ha,e a #ancy --is not this a way o# li#e which #or the moment is supremely deli$ht#ul @or the moment( yes) 1nd is not their humanity to the condemned in some cases -uite charmin$9 Ha,e you not obser,ed how( in a democracy( many persons( althou$h they ha,e been sentenced to death or e&ile( just stay where they are and wal% about the world --the $entleman parades li%e a hero( and nobody sees or cares9 Aes( he replied( many and many a one) *ee too( I said( the #or$i,in$ spirit o# democracy( and the 6don6t care6 about tri#les( and the disre$ard which she shows o# all the #ine principles which we solemnly laid down at the #oundation o# the city --as when we said that( e&cept in the case o# some rarely $i#ted nature( there ne,er will be a $ood man who has not #rom his childhood been used to play amid thin$s o# beauty and ma%e o# them a joy and a study --how $randly does she trample all these #ine notions o# ours under her #eet( ne,er $i,in$ a thou$ht to the pursuits which ma%e a statesman( and promotin$ to honour any one who pro#esses to be the people6s #riend) Aes( she is o# a noble spirit) These and other %indred characteristics are proper to democracy( which is a charmin$ #orm o# $o,ernment( #ull o# ,ariety and disorder( and dispensin$ a sort o# e-uality to e-uals and une-uals ali%e) 2e %now her well) "onsider now( I said( what manner o# man the indi,idual is( or rather consider( as in the case o# the *tate( how he comes into bein$) >ery $ood( he said) Is not this the way --he is the son o# the miserly and oli$archical #ather who has trained him in his own habits9 E&actly) 1nd( li%e his #ather( he %eeps under by #orce the pleasures which are o# the spendin$ and not o# the $ettin$ sort( bein$ those which are called unnecessary9 Ob,iously) 2ould you li%e( #or the sa%e o# clearness( to distin$uish which are the necessary and which are the unnecessary pleasures9 I should) 1re not necessary pleasures those o# which we cannot $et rid( and

o# which the satis#action is a bene#it to us9 1nd they are ri$htly so( because we are #ramed by nature to desire both what is bene#icial and what is necessary( and cannot help it) True) 2e are not wron$ there#ore in callin$ them necessary9 2e are not) 1nd the desires o# which a man may $et rid( i# he ta%es pains #rom his youth upwards --o# which the presence( moreo,er( does no $ood( and in some cases the re,erse o# $ood --shall we not be ri$ht in sayin$ that all these are unnecessary9 Aes( certainly) *uppose we select an e&ample o# either %ind( in order that we may ha,e a $eneral notion o# them9 >ery $ood) 2ill not the desire o# eatin$( that is( o# simple #ood and condiments( in so #ar as they are re-uired #or health and stren$th( be o# the necessary class9 That is what I should suppose) The pleasure o# eatin$ is necessary in two ways+ it does us $ood and it is essential to the continuance o# li#e9 Aes) But the condiments are only necessary in so #ar as they are $ood #or health9 "ertainly) 1nd the desire which $oes beyond this( or more delicate #ood( or other lu&uries( which mi$ht $enerally be $ot rid o#( i# controlled and trained in youth( and is hurt#ul to the body( and hurt#ul to the soul in the pursuit o# wisdom and ,irtue( may be ri$htly called unnecessary9 >ery true) 3ay we not say that these desires spend( and that the others ma%e money because they conduce to production9 "ertainly) 1nd o# the pleasures o# lo,e( and all other pleasures( the same holds $ood9 True) 1nd the drone o# whom we spo%e was he who was sur#eited in pleasures and desires o# this sort( and was the sla,e o# the unnecessary desires( whereas he who was subject o the necessary only was miserly and oli$archical9 >ery true) 1$ain( let us see how the democratical man $rows out o# the oli$archicalD the #ollowin$( as I suspect( is commonly the process) 2hat is the process9

2hen a youn$ man who has been brou$ht up as we were just now describin$( in a ,ul$ar and miserly way( has tasted drones6 honey and has come to associate with #ierce and cra#ty natures who are able to pro,ide #or him all sorts o# re#inements and ,arieties o# pleasure --then( as you may ima$ine( the chan$e will be$in o# the oli$archical principle within him into the democratical9 Ine,itably) 1nd as in the city li%e was helpin$ li%e( and the chan$e was e##ected by an alliance #rom without assistin$ one di,ision o# the citi/ens( so too the youn$ man is chan$ed by a class o# desires comin$ #rom without to assist the desires within him( that which is and ali%e a$ain helpin$ that which is a%in and ali%e9 "ertainly) 1nd i# there be any ally which aids the oli$archical principle within him( whether the in#luence o# a #ather or o# %indred( ad,isin$ or rebu%in$ him( then there arises in his soul a #action and an opposite #action( and he $oes to war with himsel#) It must be so) 1nd there are times when the democratical principle $i,es way to the oli$archical( and some o# his desires die( and others are banished+ a spirit o# re,erence enters into the youn$ man6s soul and order is restored) Aes( he said( that sometimes happens) 1nd then( a$ain( a#ter the old desires ha,e been dri,en out( #resh ones sprin$ up( which are a%in to them( and because he( their #ather( does not %now how to educate them( wa& #ierce and numerous) Aes( he said( that is apt to be the way) They draw him to his old associates( and holdin$ secret intercourse with them( breed and multiply in him) >ery true) 1t len$th they sei/e upon the citadel o# the youn$ man6s soul( which they percei,e to be ,oid o# all accomplishments and #air pursuits and true words( which ma%e their abode in the minds o# men who are dear to the $ods( and are their best $uardians and sentinels) None better) @alse and boast#ul conceits and phrases mount upwards and ta%e their place) They are certain to do so) 1nd so the youn$ man returns into the country o# the lotus-eaters( and ta%es up his dwellin$ there in the #ace o# all men+ and i# any help be sent by his #riends to the oli$archical part o# him( the a#oresaid ,ain conceits shut the $ate o# the %in$6s #astness+ and they will neither allow the embassy itsel# to enter( pri,ate i# pri,ate ad,isers o##er the #atherly counsel o# the a$ed will they listen to them or recei,e them) There is a battle and they $ain the day( and then modesty(

which they call silliness( is i$nominiously thrust into e&ile by them( and temperance( which they nic%name unmanliness( is trampled in the mire and cast #orth+ they persuade men that moderation and orderly e&penditure are ,ul$arity and meanness( and so( by the help o# a rabble o# e,il appetites( they dri,e them beyond the border) Aes( with a will) 1nd when they ha,e emptied and swept clean the soul o# him who is now in their power and who is bein$ initiated by them in $reat mysteries( the ne&t thin$ is to brin$ bac% to their house insolence and anarchy and waste and impudence in bri$ht array ha,in$ $arlands on their heads( and a $reat company with them( hymnin$ their praises and callin$ them by sweet names+ insolence they term breedin$( and anarchy liberty( and waste ma$ni#icence( and impudence coura$e) 1nd so the youn$ man passes out o# his ori$inal nature( which was trained in the school o# necessity( into the #reedom and libertinism o# useless and unnecessary pleasures) Aes( he said( the chan$e in him is ,isible enou$h) 1#ter this he li,es on( spendin$ his money and labour and time on unnecessary pleasures -uite as much as on necessary ones+ but i# he be #ortunate( and is not too much disordered in his wits( when years ha,e elapsed( and the heyday o# passion is o,er --supposin$ that he then re-admits into the city some part o# the e&iled ,irtues( and does not wholly $i,e himsel# up to their successors --in that case he balances his pleasures and li,es in a sort o# e-uilibrium( puttin$ the $o,ernment o# himsel# into the hands o# the one which comes #irst and wins the turn+ and when he has had enou$h o# that( then into the hands o# another+ he despises none o# them but encoura$es them all e-ually) >ery true( he said) Neither does he recei,e or let pass into the #ortress any true word o# ad,ice+ i# any one says to him that some pleasures are the satis#actions o# $ood and noble desires( and others o# e,il desires( and that he ou$ht to use and honour some and chastise and master the others --whene,er this is repeated to him he sha%es his head and says that they are all ali%e( and that one is as $ood as another) Aes( he said+ that is the way with him) Aes( I said( he li,es #rom day to day indul$in$ the appetite o# the hour+ and sometimes he is lapped in drin% and strains o# the #lute+ then he becomes a water-drin%er( and tries to $et thin+ then he ta%es a turn at $ymnastics+ sometimes idlin$ and ne$lectin$ e,erythin$( then once more li,in$ the li#e o# a philosopher+ o#ten he-is busy with politics( and starts to his #eet and says and does whate,er comes into his head+ and( i# he is emulous o# any one who is a warrior( o## he is in that direction( or o# men o# business( once more in that) His li#e has neither law nor order+ and this distracted e&istence he terms joy and bliss and #reedom+ and so he $oes on) Aes( he replied( he is all liberty and e-uality) Aes( I said+ his li#e is motley and mani#old and an epitome o# the

li,es o# many+ --he answers to the *tate which we described as #air and span$led) 1nd many a man and many a woman will ta%e him #or their pattern( and many a constitution and many an e&ample o# manners is contained in him) Just so) 'et him then be set o,er a$ainst democracy+ he may truly be called the democratic man) 'et that be his place( he said) 'ast o# all comes the most beauti#ul o# all( man and *tate ali%e( tyranny and the tyrant+ these we ha,e now to consider) Cuite true( he said) *ay then( my #riend( in what manner does tyranny arise9 --that it has a democratic ori$in is e,ident) "learly) 1nd does not tyranny sprin$ #rom democracy in the same manner as democracy #rom oli$archy --I mean( a#ter a sort9 How9 The $ood which oli$archy proposed to itsel# and the means by which it was maintained was e&cess o# wealth --am I not ri$ht9 Aes) 1nd the insatiable desire o# wealth and the ne$lect o# all other thin$s #or the sa%e o# money-$ettin$ was also the ruin o# oli$archy9 True) 1nd democracy has her own $ood( o# which the insatiable desire brin$s her to dissolution9 2hat $ood9 @reedom( I replied+ which( as they tell you in a democracy( is the $lory o# the *tate --and that there#ore in a democracy alone will the #reeman o# nature dei$n to dwell) Aes+ the sayin$ is in e,erybody6s mouth) I was $oin$ to obser,e( that the insatiable desire o# this and the ne$lect o# other thin$s introduces the chan$e in democracy( which occasions a demand #or tyranny) How so9 2hen a democracy which is thirstin$ #or #reedom has e,il cupbearers presidin$ o,er the #east( and has drun% too deeply o# the stron$ wine o# #reedom( then( unless her rulers are ,ery amenable and $i,e a plenti#ul drau$ht( she calls them to account and punishes them( and says that they are cursed oli$archs) Aes( he replied( a ,ery common occurrence) Aes( I said+ and loyal citi/ens are insultin$ly termed by her sla,es who hu$ their chains and men o# nau$ht+ she would ha,e subjects who

are li%e rulers( and rulers who are li%e subjectsD these are men a#ter her own heart( whom she praises and honours both in pri,ate and public) Now( in such a *tate( can liberty ha,e any limit9 "ertainly not) By de$rees the anarchy #inds a way into pri,ate houses( and ends by $ettin$ amon$ the animals and in#ectin$ them) How do you mean9 I mean that the #ather $rows accustomed to descend to the le,el o# his sons and to #ear them( and the son is on a le,el with his #ather( he ha,in$ no respect or re,erence #or either o# his parents+ and this is his #reedom( and metic is e-ual with the citi/en and the citi/en with the metic( and the stran$er is -uite as $ood as either) Aes( he said( that is the way) 1nd these are not the only e,ils( I said --there are se,eral lesser onesD In such a state o# society the master #ears and #latters his scholars( and the scholars despise their masters and tutors+ youn$ and old are all ali%e+ and the youn$ man is on a le,el with the old( and is ready to compete with him in word or deed+ and old men condescend to the youn$ and are #ull o# pleasantry and $aiety+ they are loth to be thou$ht morose and authoritati,e( and there#ore they adopt the manners o# the youn$) Cuite true( he said) The last e&treme o# popular liberty is when the sla,e bou$ht with money( whether male or #emale( is just as #ree as his or her purchaser+ nor must I #or$et to tell o# the liberty and e-uality o# the two se&es in relation to each other) 2hy not( as 1eschylus says( utter the word which rises to our lips9 That is what I am doin$( I replied+ and I must add that no one who does not %now would belie,e( how much $reater is the liberty which the animals who are under the dominion o# man ha,e in a democracy than in any other *tateD #or truly( the she-do$s( as the pro,erb says( are as $ood as their she-mistresses( and the horses and asses ha,e a way o# marchin$ alon$ with all the ri$hts and di$nities o# #reemen+ and they will run at anybody who comes in their way i# he does not lea,e the road clear #or themD and all thin$s are just ready to burst with liberty) 2hen I ta%e a country wal%( he said( I o#ten e&perience what you describe) Aou and I ha,e dreamed the same thin$) 1nd abo,e all( I said( and as the result o# all( see how sensiti,e the citi/ens become+ they cha#e impatiently at the least touch o# authority and at len$th( as you %now( they cease to care e,en #or the laws( written or unwritten+ they will ha,e no one o,er them) Aes( he said( I %now it too well) *uch( my #riend( I said( is the #air and $lorious be$innin$ out o#

which sprin$s tyranny) .lorious indeed( he said) But what is the ne&t step9 The ruin o# oli$archy is the ruin o# democracy+ the same disease ma$ni#ied and intensi#ied by liberty o,ermasters democracy --the truth bein$ that the e&cessi,e increase o# anythin$ o#ten causes a reaction in the opposite direction+ and this is the case not only in the seasons and in ,e$etable and animal li#e( but abo,e all in #orms o# $o,ernment) True) The e&cess o# liberty( whether in *tates or indi,iduals( seems only to pass into e&cess o# sla,ery) Aes( the natural order) 1nd so tyranny naturally arises out o# democracy( and the most a$$ra,ated #orm o# tyranny and sla,ery out o# the most e&treme #orm o# liberty9 1s we mi$ht e&pect) That( howe,er( was not( as I belie,e( your -uestion-you rather desired to %now what is that disorder which is $enerated ali%e in oli$archy and democracy( and is the ruin o# both9 Just so( he replied) 2ell( I said( I meant to re#er to the class o# idle spendthri#ts( o# whom the more coura$eous are the-leaders and the more timid the #ollowers( the same whom we were comparin$ to drones( some stin$less( and others ha,in$ stin$s) 1 ,ery just comparison) These two classes are the pla$ues o# e,ery city in which they are $enerated( bein$ what phle$m and bile are to the body) 1nd the $ood physician and law$i,er o# the *tate ou$ht( li%e the wise bee-master( to %eep them at a distance and pre,ent( i# possible( their e,er comin$ in+ and i# they ha,e anyhow #ound a way in( then he should ha,e them and their cells cut out as speedily as possible) Aes( by all means( he said) Then( in order that we may see clearly what we are doin$( let us ima$ine democracy to be di,ided( as indeed it is( into three classes+ #or in the #irst place #reedom creates rather more drones in the democratic than there were in the oli$archical *tate) That is true) 1nd in the democracy they are certainly more intensi#ied) How so9 Because in the oli$archical *tate they are dis-uali#ied and dri,en #rom o##ice( and there#ore they cannot train or $ather stren$th+ whereas in a democracy they are almost the entire rulin$ power( and while the %eener sort spea% and act( the rest %eep bu//in$ about the bema and do not su##er a word to be said on the other side+ hence in democracies almost e,erythin$ is mana$ed by the drones)

>ery true( he said) Then there is another class which is always bein$ se,ered #rom the mass) 2hat is that9 They are the orderly class( which in a nation o# traders sure to be the richest) Naturally so) They are the most s-uee/able persons and yield the lar$est amount o# honey to the drones) 2hy( he said( there is little to be s-uee/ed out o# people who ha,e little) 1nd this is called the wealthy class( and the drones #eed upon them) That is pretty much the case( he said) The people are a third class( consistin$ o# those who wor% with their own hands+ they are not politicians( and ha,e not much to li,e upon) This( when assembled( is the lar$est and most power#ul class in a democracy) True( he said+ but then the multitude is seldom willin$ to con$re$ate unless they $et a little honey) 1nd do they not share9 I said) o not their leaders depri,e the rich o# their estates and distribute them amon$ the people+ at the same time ta%in$ care to reser,e the lar$er part #or themsel,es9 2hy( yes( he said( to that e&tent the people do share) 1nd the persons whose property is ta%en #rom them are compelled to de#end themsel,es be#ore the people as they best can9 2hat else can they do9 1nd then( althou$h they may ha,e no desire o# chan$e( the others char$e them with plottin$ a$ainst the people and bein$ #riends o# oli$archy9 True) 1nd the end is that when they see the people( not o# their own accord( but throu$h i$norance( and because they are decei,ed by in#ormers( see%in$ to do them wron$( then at last they are #orced to become oli$archs in reality+ they do not wish to be( but the stin$ o# the drones torments them and breeds re,olution in them) That is e&actly the truth) Then come impeachments and jud$ments and trials o# one another) True) The people ha,e always some champion whom they set o,er them and nurse into $reatness) Aes( that is their way)

This and no other is the root #rom which a tyrant sprin$s+ when he #irst appears abo,e $round he is a protector) Aes( that is -uite clear) How then does a protector be$in to chan$e into a tyrant9 "learly when he does what the man is said to do in the tale o# the 1rcadian temple o# 'ycaean Jeus) 2hat tale9 The tale is that he who has tasted the entrails o# a sin$le human ,ictim minced up with the entrails o# other ,ictims is destined to become a wol#) id you ne,er hear it9 Oh( yes) 1nd the protector o# the people is li%e him+ ha,in$ a mob entirely at his disposal( he is not restrained #rom sheddin$ the blood o# %insmen+ by the #a,ourite method o# #alse accusation he brin$s them into court and murders them( ma%in$ the li#e o# man to disappear( and with unholy ton$ue and lips tastin$ the blood o# his #ellow citi/en+ some he %ills and others he banishes( at the same time hintin$ at the abolition o# debts and partition o# landsD and a#ter this( what will be his destiny9 3ust he not either perish at the hands o# his enemies( or #rom bein$ a man become a wol# --that is( a tyrant9 Ine,itably) This( I said( is he who be$ins to ma%e a party a$ainst the rich9 The same) 1#ter a while he is dri,en out( but comes bac%( in spite o# his enemies( a tyrant #ull $rown) That is clear) 1nd i# they are unable to e&pel him( or to $et him condemned to death by a public accusation( they conspire to assassinate him) Aes( he said( that is their usual way) Then comes the #amous re-uest #or a body$uard( which is the de,ice o# all those who ha,e $ot thus #ar in their tyrannical career --6'et not the people6s #riend(6 as they say( 6be lost to them)6 E&actly) The people readily assent+ all their #ears are #or him --they ha,e none #or themsel,es) >ery true) 1nd when a man who is wealthy and is also accused o# bein$ an enemy o# the people sees this( then( my #riend( as the oracle said to "roesus( By pebbly Hermus6 shore he #lees and rests not and is not ashamed to be a coward) 1nd -uite ri$ht too( said he( #or i# he were( he would ne,er be ashamed a$ain)

But i# he is cau$ht he dies) O# course) 1nd he( the protector o# whom we spo%e( is to be seen( not 6lardin$ the plain6 with his bul%( but himsel# the o,erthrower o# many( standin$ up in the chariot o# *tate with the reins in his hand( no lon$er protector( but tyrant absolute) No doubt( he said) 1nd now let us consider the happiness o# the man( and also o# the *tate in which a creature li%e him is $enerated) Aes( he said( let us consider that) 1t #irst( in the early days o# his power( he is #ull o# smiles( and he salutes e,ery one whom he meets+ --he to be called a tyrant( who is ma%in$ promises in public and also in pri,ate4 liberatin$ debtors( and distributin$ land to the people and his #ollowers( and wantin$ to be so %ind and $ood to e,ery one4 O# course( he said) But when he has disposed o# #orei$n enemies by con-uest or treaty( and there is nothin$ to #ear #rom them( then he is always stirrin$ up some war or other( in order that the people may re-uire a leader) To be sure) Has he not also another object( which is that they may be impo,erished by payment o# ta&es( and thus compelled to de,ote themsel,es to their daily wants and there#ore less li%ely to conspire a$ainst him9 "learly) 1nd i# any o# them are suspected by him o# ha,in$ notions o# #reedom( and o# resistance to his authority( he will ha,e a $ood prete&t #or destroyin$ them by placin$ them at the mercy o# the enemy+ and #or all these reasons the tyrant must be always $ettin$ up a war) He must) Now he be$ins to $row unpopular) 1 necessary result) Then some o# those who joined in settin$ him up( and who are in power( spea% their minds to him and to one another( and the more coura$eous o# them cast in his teeth what is bein$ done) Aes( that may be e&pected) 1nd the tyrant( i# he means to rule( must $et rid o# them+ he cannot stop while he has a #riend or an enemy who is $ood #or anythin$) He cannot) 1nd there#ore he must loo% about him and see who is ,aliant( who is hi$h-minded( who is wise( who is wealthy+ happy man( he is the enemy o# them all( and must see% occasion a$ainst them whether he will or no( until he has made a pur$ation o# the *tate) Aes( he said( and a rare pur$ation) Aes( I said( not the sort o# pur$ation which the physicians ma%e o#

the body+ #or they ta%e away the worse and lea,e the better part( but he does the re,erse) I# he is to rule( I suppose that he cannot help himsel#) 2hat a blessed alternati,e( I saidD --to be compelled to dwell only with the many bad( and to be by them hated( or not to li,e at all4 Aes( that is the alternati,e) 1nd the more detestable his actions are to the citi/ens the more satellites and the $reater de,otion in them will he re-uire9 "ertainly) 1nd who are the de,oted band( and where will he procure them9 They will #loc% to him( he said( o# their own accord( i# lie pays them) By the do$4 I said( here are more drones( o# e,ery sort and #rom e,ery land) Aes( he said( there are) But will he not desire to $et them on the spot9 How do you mean9 He will rob the citi/ens o# their sla,es+ he will then set them #ree and enrol them in his body$uard) To be sure( he said+ and he will be able to trust them best o# all) 2hat a blessed creature( I said( must this tyrant be+ he has put to death the others and has these #or his trusted #riends) Aes( he said+ they are -uite o# his sort) Aes( I said( and these are the new citi/ens whom he has called into e&istence( who admire him and are his companions( while the $ood hate and a,oid him) O# course) >erily( then( tra$edy is a wise thin$ and Euripides a $reat tra$edian) 2hy so9 2hy( because he is the author o# the pre$nant sayin$( Tyrants are wise by li,in$ with the wise+ and he clearly meant to say that they are the wise whom the tyrant ma%es his companions) Aes( he said( and he also praises tyranny as $odli%e+ and many other thin$s o# the same %ind are said by him and by the other poets) 1nd there#ore( I said( the tra$ic poets bein$ wise men will #or$i,e us and any others who li,e a#ter our manner i# we do not recei,e them into our *tate( because they are the eulo$ists o# tyranny)

Aes( he said( those who ha,e the wit will doubtless #or$i,e us) But they will continue to $o to other cities and attract mobs( and hire ,oices #air and loud and persuasi,e( and draw the cities o,er to tyrannies and democracies) >ery true) 3oreo,er( they are paid #or this and recei,e honour --the $reatest honour( as mi$ht be e&pected( #rom tyrants( and the ne&t $reatest #rom democracies+ but the hi$her they ascend our constitution hill( the more their reputation #ails( and seems unable #rom shortness o# breath to proceed #urther) True) But we are wanderin$ #rom the subjectD 'et us there#ore return and en-uire how the tyrant will maintain that #air and numerous and ,arious and e,er-chan$in$ army o# his) I#( he said( there are sacred treasures in the city( he will con#iscate and spend them+ and in so #ar as the #ortunes o# attainted persons may su##ice( he will be able to diminish the ta&es which he would otherwise ha,e to impose upon the people) 1nd when these #ail9 2hy( clearly( he said( then he and his boon companions( whether male or #emale( will be maintained out o# his #ather6s estate) Aou mean to say that the people( #rom whom he has deri,ed his bein$( will maintain him and his companions9 Aes( he said+ they cannot help themsel,es) But what i# the people #ly into a passion( and a,er that a $rown-up son ou$ht not to be supported by his #ather( but that the #ather should be supported by the son9 The #ather did not brin$ him into bein$( or settle him in li#e( in order that when his son became a man he should himsel# be the ser,ant o# his own ser,ants and should support him and his rabble o# sla,es and companions+ but that his son should protect him( and that by his help he mi$ht be emancipated #rom the $o,ernment o# the rich and aristocratic( as they are termed) 1nd so he bids him and his companions depart( just as any other #ather mi$ht dri,e out o# the house a riotous son and his undesirable associates) By hea,en( he said( then the parent will disco,er what a monster he has been #osterin$ in his bosom+ and( when he wants to dri,e him out( he will #ind that he is wea% and his son stron$) 2hy( you do not mean to say that the tyrant will use ,iolence9 2hat4 beat his #ather i# he opposes him9 Aes( he will( ha,in$ #irst disarmed him) Then he is a parricide( and a cruel $uardian o# an a$ed parent+ and this is real tyranny( about which there can be no lon$er a mista%eD as the sayin$ is( the people who would escape the smo%e which is the

sla,ery o# #reemen( has #allen into the #ire which is the tyranny o# sla,es) Thus liberty( $ettin$ out o# all order and reason( passes into the harshest and bitterest #orm o# sla,ery) True( he said) >ery well+ and may we not ri$htly say that we ha,e su##iciently discussed the nature o# tyranny( and the manner o# the transition #rom democracy to tyranny9 Aes( -uite enou$h( he said) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG I? *ocrates - 1 EI31NT!* 'ast o# all comes the tyrannical man+ about whom we ha,e once more to as%( how is he #ormed out o# the democratical9 and how does he li,e( in happiness or in misery9 Aes( he said( he is the only one remainin$) There is( howe,er( I said( a pre,ious -uestion which remains unanswered) 2hat -uestion9 I do not thin% that we ha,e ade-uately determined the nature and number o# the appetites( and until this is accomplished the en-uiry will always be con#used) 2ell( he said( it is not too late to supply the omission) >ery true( I said+ and obser,e the point which I want to understandD "ertain o# the unnecessary pleasures and appetites I concei,e to be unlaw#ul+ e,ery one appears to ha,e them( but in some persons they are controlled by the laws and by reason( and the better desires pre,ail o,er them-either they are wholly banished or they become #ew and wea%+ while in the case o# others they are stron$er( and there are more o# them) 2hich appetites do you mean9 I mean those which are awa%e when the reasonin$ and human and rulin$ power is asleep+ then the wild beast within us( $or$ed with meat or drin%( starts up and ha,in$ sha%en o## sleep( $oes #orth to satis#y his desires+ and there is no concei,able #olly or crime --not e&ceptin$ incest or any other unnatural union( or parricide( or the eatin$ o# #orbidden #ood --which at such a time( when he has parted company with all shame and sense( a man may not be ready to commit) 3ost true( he said) But when a man6s pulse is healthy and temperate( and when be#ore $oin$ to sleep he has awa%ened his rational powers( and #ed them on noble thou$hts and en-uiries( collectin$ himsel# in meditation+ a#ter ha,in$ #irst indul$ed his appetites neither too much nor too little( but

just enou$h to lay them to sleep( and pre,ent them and their enjoyments and pains #rom inter#erin$ with the hi$her principle --which he lea,es in the solitude o# pure abstraction( #ree to contemplate and aspire to the %nowled$e o# the un%nown( whether in past( present( or #utureD when a$ain he has allayed the passionate element( i# he has a -uarrel a$ainst any one --I say( when( a#ter paci#yin$ the two irrational principles( he rouses up the third( which is reason( be#ore he ta%es his rest( then( as you %now( he attains truth most nearly( and is least li%ely to be the sport o# #antastic and lawless ,isions) I -uite a$ree) In sayin$ this I ha,e been runnin$ into a di$ression+ but the point which I desire to note is that in all o# us( e,en in $ood men( there is a lawless wild-beast nature( which peers out in sleep) Pray( consider whether I am ri$ht( and you a$ree with me) Aes( I a$ree) 1nd now remember the character which we attributed to the democratic man) He was supposed #rom his youth upwards to ha,e been trained under a miserly parent( who encoura$ed the sa,in$ appetites in him( but discountenanced the unnecessary( which aim only at amusement and ornament9 True) 1nd then he $ot into the company o# a more re#ined( licentious sort o# people( and ta%in$ to all their wanton ways rushed into the opposite e&treme #rom an abhorrence o# his #ather6s meanness) 1t last( bein$ a better man than his corruptors( he was drawn in both directions until he halted midway and led a li#e( not o# ,ul$ar and sla,ish passion( but o# what he deemed moderate indul$ence in ,arious pleasures) 1#ter this manner the democrat was $enerated out o# the oli$arch9 Aes( he said+ that was our ,iew o# him( and is so still) 1nd now( I said( years will ha,e passed away( and you must concei,e this man( such as he is( to ha,e a son( who is brou$ht up in his #ather6s principles) I can ima$ine him) Then you must #urther ima$ine the same thin$ to happen to the son which has already happened to the #atherD --he is drawn into a per#ectly lawless li#e( which by his seducers is termed per#ect liberty+ and his #ather and #riends ta%e part with his moderate desires( and the opposite party assist the opposite ones) 1s soon as these dire ma$icians and tyrant-ma%ers #ind that they are losin$ their hold on him( they contri,e to implant in him a master passion( to be lord o,er his idle and spendthri#t lusts --a sort o# monstrous win$ed drone --that is the only ima$e which will ade-uately describe him) Aes( he said( that is the only ade-uate ima$e o# him) 1nd when his other lusts( amid clouds o# incense and per#umes and $arlands and wines( and all the pleasures o# a dissolute li#e( now let loose( come bu//in$ around him( nourishin$ to the utmost the stin$ o# desire which they implant in his drone-li%e nature( then at last

this lord o# the soul( ha,in$ 3adness #or the captain o# his $uard( brea%s out into a #ren/yD and i# he #inds in himsel# any $ood opinions or appetites in process o# #ormation( and there is in him any sense o# shame remainin$( to these better principles he puts an end( and casts them #orth until he has pur$ed away temperance and brou$ht in madness to the #ull) Aes( he said( that is the way in which the tyrannical man is $enerated) 1nd is not this the reason why o# old lo,e has been called a tyrant9 I should not wonder) @urther( I said( has not a drun%en man also the spirit o# a tyrant9 He has) 1nd you %now that a man who is deran$ed and not ri$ht in his mind( will #ancy that he is able to rule( not only o,er men( but also o,er the $ods9 That he will) 1nd the tyrannical man in the true sense o# the word comes into bein$ when( either under the in#luence o# nature( or habit( or both( he becomes drun%en( lust#ul( passionate9 O my #riend( is not that so9 1ssuredly) *uch is the man and such is his ori$in) 1nd ne&t( how does he li,e9 *uppose( as people #acetiously say( you were to tell me) I ima$ine( I said( at the ne&t step in his pro$ress( that there will be #easts and carousals and re,ellin$s and courte/ans( and all that sort o# thin$+ 'o,e is the lord o# the house within him( and orders all the concerns o# his soul) That is certain) Aes+ and e,ery day and e,ery ni$ht desires $row up many and #ormidable( and their demands are many) They are indeed( he said) His re,enues( i# he has any( are soon spent) True) Then comes debt and the cuttin$ down o# his property) O# course) 2hen he has nothin$ le#t( must not his desires( crowdin$ in the nest li%e youn$ ra,ens( be cryin$ aloud #or #ood+ and he( $oaded on by them( and especially by lo,e himsel#( who is in a manner the captain o# them( is in a #ren/y( and would #ain disco,er whom he can de#raud or despoil o# his property( in order that he may $rati#y them9 Aes( that is sure to be the case) He must ha,e money( no matter how( i# he is to escape horrid pains and pan$s)

He must) 1nd as in himsel# there was a succession o# pleasures( and the new $ot the better o# the old and too% away their ri$hts( so he bein$ youn$er will claim to ha,e more than his #ather and his mother( and i# he has spent his own share o# the property( he will ta%e a slice o# theirs) No doubt he will) 1nd i# his parents will not $i,e way( then he will try #irst o# all to cheat and decei,e them) >ery true) 1nd i# he #ails( then he will use #orce and plunder them) Aes( probably) 1nd i# the old man and woman #i$ht #or their own( what then( my #riend9 2ill the creature #eel any compunction at tyranni/in$ o,er them9 Nay( he said( I should not #eel at all com#ortable about his parents) But( O hea,ens4 1deimantus( on account o# some new#an$led lo,e o# a harlot( who is anythin$ but a necessary connection( can you belie,e that he would stri%e the mother who is his ancient #riend and necessary to his ,ery e&istence( and would place her under the authority o# the other( when she is brou$ht under the same roo# with her+ or that( under li%e circumstances( he would do the same to his withered old #ather( #irst and most indispensable o# #riends( #or the sa%e o# some newly #ound bloomin$ youth who is the re,erse o# indispensable9 Aes( indeed( he said+ I belie,e that he would) Truly( then( I said( a tyrannical son is a blessin$ to his #ather and mother) He is indeed( he replied) He #irst ta%es their property( and when that #alls( and pleasures are be$innin$ to swarm in the hi,e o# his soul( then he brea%s into a house( or steals the $arments o# some ni$htly way#arer+ ne&t he proceeds to clear a temple) 3eanwhile the old opinions which he had when a child( and which $a,e jud$ment about $ood and e,il( are o,erthrown by those others which ha,e just been emancipated( and are now the body$uard o# lo,e and share his empire) These in his democratic days( when he was still subject to the laws and to his #ather( were only let loose in the dreams o# sleep) But now that he is under the dominion o# lo,e( he becomes always and in wa%in$ reality what he was then ,ery rarely and in a dream only+ he will commit the #oulest murder( or eat #orbidden #ood( or be $uilty o# any other horrid act) 'o,e is his tyrant( and li,es lordly in him and lawlessly( and bein$ himsel# a %in$( leads him on( as a tyrant leads a *tate( to the per#ormance o# any rec%less deed by which he can maintain himsel# and the rabble o# his associates( whether those whom e,il communications ha,e brou$ht in #rom without( or those whom he himsel# has allowed to brea% loose within him by reason o# a similar e,il nature in himsel#) Ha,e we not here a picture o# his way o# li#e9

Aes( indeed( he said) 1nd i# there are only a #ew o# them in the *tate( the rest o# the people are well disposed( they $o away and become the body$uard or mercenary soldiers o# some other tyrant who may probably want them #or a war+ and i# there is no war( they stay at home and do many little pieces o# mischie# in the city) 2hat sort o# mischie#9 @or e&ample( they are the thie,es( bur$lars( cutpurses( #ootpads( robbers o# temples( man-stealers o# the community+ or i# they are able to spea% they turn in#ormers( and bear #alse witness( and ta%e bribes) 1 small catalo$ue o# e,ils( e,en i# the perpetrators o# them are #ew in number) Aes( I said+ but small and $reat are comparati,e terms( and all these thin$s( in the misery and e,il which they in#lict upon a *tate( do not come within a thousand miles o# the tyrant+ when this no&ious class and their #ollowers $row numerous and become conscious o# their stren$th( assisted by the in#atuation o# the people( they choose #rom amon$ themsel,es the one who has most o# the tyrant in his own soul( and him they create their tyrant) Aes( he said( and he will be the most #it to be a tyrant) I# the people yield( well and $ood+ but i# they resist him( as he be$an by beatin$ his own #ather and mother( so now( i# he has the power( he beats them( and will %eep his dear old #atherland or motherland( as the "retans say( in subjection to his youn$ retainers whom he has introduced to be their rulers and masters) This is the end o# his passions and desires) E&actly) 2hen such men are only pri,ate indi,iduals and be#ore they $et power( this is their character+ they associate entirely with their own #latterers or ready tools+ or i# they want anythin$ #rom anybody( they in their turn are e-ually ready to bow down be#ore themD they pro#ess e,ery sort o# a##ection #or them+ but when they ha,e $ained their point they %now them no more) Aes( truly) They are always either the masters or ser,ants and ne,er the #riends o# anybody+ the tyrant ne,er tastes o# true #reedom or #riendship) "ertainly not) 1nd may we not ri$htly call such men treacherous9 No -uestion) 1lso they are utterly unjust( i# we were ri$ht in our notion o# justice9 Aes( he said( and we were per#ectly ri$ht) 'et us then sum up in a word( I said( the character o# the worst manD

he is the wa%in$ reality o# what we dreamed) 3ost true) 1nd this is he who bein$ by nature most o# a tyrant bears rule( and the lon$er he li,es the more o# a tyrant he becomes) *ocrates - .'1!"ON That is certain( said .laucon( ta%in$ his turn to answer) 1nd will not he who has been shown to be the wic%edest( be also the most miserable9 and he who has tyranni/ed lon$est and most( most continually and truly miserable+ althou$h this may not be the opinion o# men in $eneral9 Aes( he said( ine,itably) 1nd must not the tyrannical man be li%e the tyrannical( *tate( and the democratical man li%e the democratical *tate+ and the same o# the others9 "ertainly) 1nd as *tate is to *tate in ,irtue and happiness( so is man in relation to man9 To be sure) Then comparin$ our ori$inal city( which was under a %in$( and the city which is under a tyrant( how do they stand as to ,irtue9 They are the opposite e&tremes( he said( #or one is the ,ery best and the other is the ,ery worst) There can be no mista%e( I said( as to which is which( and there#ore I will at once en-uire whether you would arri,e at a similar decision about their relati,e happiness and misery) 1nd here we must not allow oursel,es to be panic-stric%en at the apparition o# the tyrant( who is only a unit and may perhaps ha,e a #ew retainers about him+ but let us $o as we ou$ht into e,ery corner o# the city and loo% all about( and then we will $i,e our opinion) 1 #air in,itation( he replied+ and I see( as e,ery one must( that a tyranny is the wretchedest #orm o# $o,ernment( and the rule o# a %in$ the happiest) 1nd in estimatin$ the men too( may I not #airly ma%e a li%e re-uest( that I should ha,e a jud$e whose mind can enter into and see throu$h human nature9 He must not be li%e a child who loo%s at the outside and is da//led at the pompous aspect which the tyrannical nature assumes to the beholder( but let him be one who has a clear insi$ht) 3ay I suppose that the jud$ment is $i,en in the hearin$ o# us all by one who is able to jud$e( and has dwelt in the same place with him( and been present at his dally li#e and %nown him in his #amily relations( where he may be seen stripped o# his tra$edy attire( and a$ain in the hour o# public dan$er --he shall tell us about the happiness and

misery o# the tyrant when compared with other men9 That a$ain( he said( is a ,ery #air proposal) *hall I assume that we oursel,es are able and e&perienced jud$es and ha,e be#ore now met with such a person9 2e shall then ha,e some one who will answer our en-uiries) By all means) 'et me as% you not to #or$et the parallel o# the indi,idual and the *tate+ bearin$ this in mind( and $lancin$ in turn #rom one to the other o# them( will you tell me their respecti,e conditions9 2hat do you mean9 he as%ed) Be$innin$ with the *tate( I replied( would you say that a city which is $o,erned by a tyrant is #ree or ensla,ed9 No city( he said( can be more completely ensla,ed) 1nd yet( as you see( there are #reemen as well as masters in such a *tate9 Aes( he said( I see that there are --a #ew+ but the people( spea%in$ $enerally( and the best o# them( are miserably de$raded and ensla,ed) Then i# the man is li%e the *tate( I said( must not the same rule pre,ail9 his soul is #ull o# meanness and ,ul$arity --the best elements in him are ensla,ed+ and there is a small rulin$ part( which is also the worst and maddest) Ine,itably) 1nd would you say that the soul o# such an one is the soul o# a #reeman( or o# a sla,e9 He has the soul o# a sla,e( in my opinion) 1nd the *tate which is ensla,ed under a tyrant is utterly incapable o# actin$ ,oluntarily9 !tterly incapable) 1nd also the soul which is under a tyrant 5I am spea%in$ o# the soul ta%en as a whole7 is least capable o# doin$ what she desires+ there is a $ad#ly which $oads her( and she is #ull o# trouble and remorse9 "ertainly) 1nd is the city which is under a tyrant rich or poor9 Poor) 1nd the tyrannical soul must be always poor and insatiable9 True) 1nd must not such a *tate and such a man be always #ull o# #ear9 Aes( indeed) Is there any *tate in which you will #ind more o# lamentation and sorrow and $roanin$ and pain9

"ertainly not) 1nd is there any man in whom you will #ind more o# this sort o# misery than in the tyrannical man( who is in a #ury o# passions and desires9 Impossible) Re#lectin$ upon these and similar e,ils( you held the tyrannical *tate to be the most miserable o# *tates9 1nd I was ri$ht( he said) "ertainly( I said) 1nd when you see the same e,ils in the tyrannical man( what do you say o# him9 I say that he is by #ar the most miserable o# all men) There( I said( I thin% that you are be$innin$ to $o wron$) 2hat do you mean9 I do not thin% that he has as yet reached the utmost e&treme o# misery) Then who is more miserable9 One o# whom I am about to spea%) 2ho is that9 He who is o# a tyrannical nature( and instead o# leadin$ a pri,ate li#e has been cursed with the #urther mis#ortune o# bein$ a public tyrant) @rom what has been said( I $ather that you are ri$ht) Aes( I replied( but in this hi$h ar$ument you should be a little more certain( and should not conjecture only+ #or o# all -uestions( this respectin$ $ood and e,il is the $reatest) >ery true( he said) 'et me then o##er you an illustration( which may( I thin%( throw a li$ht upon this subject) 2hat is your illustration9 The case o# rich indi,iduals in cities who possess many sla,esD #rom them you may #orm an idea o# the tyrant6s condition( #or they both ha,e sla,es+ the only di##erence is that he has more sla,es) Aes( that is the di##erence) Aou %now that they li,e securely and ha,e nothin$ to apprehend #rom their ser,ants9 2hat should they #ear9 Nothin$) But do you obser,e the reason o# this9 Aes+ the reason is( that the whole city is lea$ued to$ether #or the protection o# each indi,idual) >ery true( I said) But ima$ine one o# these owners( the master say o# some #i#ty sla,es( to$ether with his #amily and property and sla,es( carried o## by a $od into the wilderness( where there are no #reemen to help him --will he not be in an a$ony o# #ear lest he and his wi#e and children should be put to death by his sla,es9

Aes( he said( he will be in the utmost #ear) The time has arri,ed when he will be compelled to #latter di,ers o# his sla,es( and ma%e many promises to them o# #reedom and other thin$s( much a$ainst his will --he will ha,e to cajole his own ser,ants) Aes( he said( that will be the only way o# sa,in$ himsel#) 1nd suppose the same $od( who carried him away( to surround him with nei$hbours who will not su##er one man to be the master o# another( and who( i# they could catch the o##ender( would ta%e his li#e9 His case will be still worse( i# you suppose him to be e,erywhere surrounded and watched by enemies) 1nd is not this the sort o# prison in which the tyrant will be bound --he who bein$ by nature such as we ha,e described( is #ull o# all sorts o# #ears and lusts9 His soul is dainty and $reedy( and yet alone( o# all men in the city( he is ne,er allowed to $o on a journey( or to see the thin$s which other #reemen desire to see( but he li,es in his hole li%e a woman hidden in the house( and is jealous o# any other citi/en who $oes into #orei$n parts and sees anythin$ o# interest) >ery true( he said) 1nd amid e,ils such as these will not he who is ill-$o,erned in his own person --the tyrannical man( I mean --whom you just now decided to be the most miserable o# all --will not he be yet more miserable when( instead o# leadin$ a pri,ate li#e( he is constrained by #ortune to be a public tyrant9 He has to be master o# others when he is not master o# himsel#D he is li%e a diseased or paralytic man who is compelled to pass his li#e( not in retirement( but #i$htin$ and combatin$ with other men) Aes( he said( the similitude is most e&act) Is not his case utterly miserable9 and does not the actual tyrant lead a worse li#e than he whose li#e you determined to be the worst9 "ertainly) He who is the real tyrant( whate,er men may thin%( is the real sla,e( and is obli$ed to practise the $reatest adulation and ser,ility( and to be the #latterer o# the ,ilest o# man%ind) He has desires which he is utterly unable to satis#y( and has more wants than any one( and is truly poor( i# you %now how to inspect the whole soul o# himD all his li#e lon$ he is beset with #ear and is #ull o# con,ulsions( and distractions( e,en as the *tate which he resemblesD and surely the resemblance holds9 >ery true( he said) 3oreo,er( as we were sayin$ be#ore( he $rows worse #rom ha,in$ powerD he becomes and is o# necessity more jealous( more #aithless( more unjust( more #riendless( more impious( than he was at #irst+ he is the pur,eyor and cherisher o# e,ery sort o# ,ice( and the conse-uence is that he is supremely miserable( and that he ma%es e,erybody else

as miserable as himsel#) No man o# any sense will dispute your words) "ome then( I said( and as the $eneral umpire in theatrical contests proclaims the result( do you also decide who in your opinion is #irst in the scale o# happiness( and who second( and in what order the others #ollowD there are #i,e o# them in all --they are the royal( timocratical( oli$archical( democratical( tyrannical) The decision will be easily $i,en( he replied+ they shall be choruses comin$ on the sta$e( and I must jud$e them in the order in which they enter( by the criterion o# ,irtue and ,ice( happiness and misery) Need we hire a herald( or shall I announce( that the son o# 1riston 5the best7 has decided that the best and justest is also the happiest( and that this is he who is the most royal man and %in$ o,er himsel#+ and that the worst and most unjust man is also the most miserable( and that this is he who bein$ the $reatest tyrant o# himsel# is also the $reatest tyrant o# his *tate9 3a%e the proclamation yoursel#( he said) 1nd shall I add( 6whether seen or unseen by $ods and men69 'et the words be added) Then this( I said( will be our #irst proo#+ and there is another( which may also ha,e some wei$ht) 2hat is that9 The second proo# is deri,ed #rom the nature o# the soulD seein$ that the indi,idual soul( li%e the *tate( has been di,ided by us into three principles( the di,ision may( I thin%( #urnish a new demonstration) O# what nature9 It seems to me that to these three principles three pleasures correspond+ also three desires and $o,ernin$ powers) How do you mean9 he said) There is one principle with which( as we were sayin$( a man learns( another with which he is an$ry+ the third( ha,in$ many #orms( has no special name( but is denoted by the $eneral term appetiti,e( #rom the e&traordinary stren$th and ,ehemence o# the desires o# eatin$ and drin%in$ and the other sensual appetites which are the main elements o# it+ also money-lo,in$( because such desires are $enerally satis#ied by the help o# money) That is true( he said) I# we were to say that the lo,es and pleasures o# this third part were concerned with $ain( we should then be able to #all bac% on a sin$le notion+ and mi$ht truly and intelli$ibly describe this part o# the soul as lo,in$ $ain or money) I a$ree with you) 1$ain( is not the passionate element wholly set on rulin$ and con-uerin$

and $ettin$ #ame9 True) *uppose we call it the contentious or ambitious --would the term be suitable9 E&tremely suitable) On the other hand( e,ery one sees that the principle o# %nowled$e is wholly directed to the truth( and cares less than either o# the others #or $ain or #ame) @ar less) 6'o,er o# wisdom(6 6lo,er o# %nowled$e(6 are titles which we may #itly apply to that part o# the soul9 "ertainly) One principle pre,ails in the souls o# one class o# men( another in others( as may happen9 Aes) Then we may be$in by assumin$ that there are three classes o# men --lo,ers o# wisdom( lo,ers o# honour( lo,ers o# $ain9 E&actly) 1nd there are three %inds o# pleasure( which are their se,eral objects9 >ery true) Now( i# you e&amine the three classes o# men( and as% o# them in turn which o# their li,es is pleasantest( each will be #ound praisin$ his own and depreciatin$ that o# othersD the money-ma%er will contrast the ,anity o# honour or o# learnin$ i# they brin$ no money with the solid ad,anta$es o# $old and sil,er9 True( he said) 1nd the lo,er o# honour --what will be his opinion9 2ill he not thin% that the pleasure o# riches is ,ul$ar( while the pleasure o# learnin$( i# it brin$s no distinction( is all smo%e and nonsense to him9 >ery true) 1nd are we to suppose( I said( that the philosopher sets any ,alue on other pleasures in comparison with the pleasure o# %nowin$ the truth( and in that pursuit abidin$( e,er learnin$( not so #ar indeed #rom the hea,en o# pleasure9 oes he not call the other pleasures necessary( under the idea that i# there were no necessity #or them( he would rather not ha,e them9 There can be no doubt o# that( he replied) *ince( then( the pleasures o# each class and the li#e o# each are in dispute( and the -uestion is not which li#e is more or less honourable( or better or worse( but which is the more pleasant or painless --how shall we %now who spea%s truly9 I cannot mysel# tell( he said)

2ell( but what ou$ht to be the criterion9 Is any better than e&perience and wisdom and reason9 There cannot be a better( he said) Then( I said( re#lect) O# the three indi,iduals( which has the $reatest e&perience o# all the pleasures which we enumerated9 Has the lo,er o# $ain( in learnin$ the nature o# essential truth( $reater e&perience o# the pleasure o# %nowled$e than the philosopher has o# the pleasure o# $ain9 The philosopher( he replied( has $reatly the ad,anta$e+ #or he has o# necessity always %nown the taste o# the other pleasures #rom his childhood upwardsD but the lo,er o# $ain in all his e&perience has not o# necessity tasted --or( I should rather say( e,en had he desired( could hardly ha,e tasted --the sweetness o# learnin$ and %nowin$ truth) Then the lo,er o# wisdom has a $reat ad,anta$e o,er the lo,er o# $ain( #or he has a double e&perience9 Aes( ,ery $reat) 1$ain( has he $reater e&perience o# the pleasures o# honour( or the lo,er o# honour o# the pleasures o# wisdom9 Nay( he said( all three are honoured in proportion as they attain their object+ #or the rich man and the bra,e man and the wise man ali%e ha,e their crowd o# admirers( and as they all recei,e honour they all ha,e e&perience o# the pleasures o# honour+ but the deli$ht which is to be #ound in the %nowled$e o# true bein$ is %nown to the philosopher only) His e&perience( then( will enable him to jud$e better than any one9 @ar better) 1nd he is the only one who has wisdom as well as e&perience9 "ertainly) @urther( the ,ery #aculty which is the instrument o# jud$ment is not possessed by the co,etous or ambitious man( but only by the philosopher9 2hat #aculty9 Reason( with whom( as we were sayin$( the decision ou$ht to rest) Aes) 1nd reasonin$ is peculiarly his instrument9 "ertainly) I# wealth and $ain were the criterion( then the praise or blame o# the lo,er o# $ain would surely be the most trustworthy9 1ssuredly) Or i# honour or ,ictory or coura$e( in that case the jud$ement o# the ambitious or pu$nacious would be the truest9 "learly)

But since e&perience and wisdom and reason are the jud$es-The only in#erence possible( he replied( is that pleasures which are appro,ed by the lo,er o# wisdom and reason are the truest) 1nd so we arri,e at the result( that the pleasure o# the intelli$ent part o# the soul is the pleasantest o# the three( and that he o# us in whom this is the rulin$ principle has the pleasantest li#e) !n-uestionably( he said( the wise man spea%s with authority when he appro,es o# his own li#e) 1nd what does the jud$e a##irm to be the li#e which is ne&t( and the pleasure which is ne&t9 "learly that o# the soldier and lo,er o# honour+ who is nearer to himsel# than the money-ma%er) 'ast comes the lo,er o# $ain9 >ery true( he said) Twice in succession( then( has the just man o,erthrown the unjust in this con#lict+ and now comes the third trial( which is dedicated to Olympian Jeus the sa,iourD a sa$e whispers in my ear that no pleasure e&cept that o# the wise is -uite true and pure --all others are a shadow only+ and surely this will pro,e the $reatest and most decisi,e o# #alls9 Aes( the $reatest+ but will you e&plain yoursel#9 I will wor% out the subject and you shall answer my -uestions) Proceed) *ay( then( is not pleasure opposed to pain9 True) 1nd there is a neutral state which is neither pleasure nor pain9 There is) 1 state which is intermediate( and a sort o# repose o# the soul about either --that is what you mean9 Aes) Aou remember what people say when they are sic%9 2hat do they say9 That a#ter all nothin$ is pleasanter than health) But then they ne,er %new this to be the $reatest o# pleasures until they were ill) Aes( I %now( he said) 1nd when persons are su##erin$ #rom acute pain( you must) ha,e heard them say that there is nothin$ pleasanter than to $et rid o# their pain9 I ha,e) 1nd there are many other cases o# su##erin$ in which the mere rest and cessation o# pain( and not any positi,e enjoyment( is e&tolled

by them as the $reatest pleasure9 Aes( he said+ at the time they are pleased and well content to be at rest) 1$ain( when pleasure ceases( that sort o# rest or cessation will be pain#ul9 oubtless( he said) Then the intermediate state o# rest will be pleasure and will also be pain9 *o it would seem) But can that which is neither become both9 I should say not) 1nd both pleasure and pain are motions o# the soul( are they not9 Aes) But that which is neither was just now shown to be rest and not motion( and in a mean between them9 Aes) How( then( can we be ri$ht in supposin$ that the absence o# pain is pleasure( or that the absence o# pleasure is pain9 Impossible) This then is an appearance only and not a reality+ that is tc say( the rest is pleasure at the moment and in comparison o# what is pain#ul( and pain#ul in comparison o# what is pleasant+ but all these representations( when tried by the test o# true pleasure( are not real but a sort o# imposition9 That is the in#erence) 'oo% at the other class o# pleasures which ha,e no antecedent pains and you will no lon$er suppose( as you perhaps may at present( that pleasure is only the cessation o# pain( or pain o# pleasure) 2hat are they( he said( and where shall I #ind them9 There are many o# themD ta%e as an e&ample the pleasures( o# smell( which are ,ery $reat and ha,e no antecedent pains+ they come in a moment( and when they depart lea,e no pain behind them) 3ost true( he said) 'et us not( then( be induced to belie,e that pure pleasure is the cessation o# pain( or pain o# pleasure) No) *till( the more numerous and ,iolent pleasures which reach the soul throu$h the body are $enerally o# this sort --they are relie#s o# pain) That is true) 1nd the anticipations o# #uture pleasures and pains are o# a li%e

nature9 Aes) *hall I $i,e you an illustration o# them9 'et me hear) Aou would allow( I said( that there is in nature an upper and lower and middle re$ion9 I should) 1nd i# a person were to $o #rom the lower to the middle re$ion( would he not ima$ine that he is $oin$ up+ and he who is standin$ in the middle and sees whence he has come( would ima$ine that he is already in the upper re$ion( i# he has ne,er seen the true upper world9 To be sure( he said+ how can he thin% otherwise9 But i# he were ta%en bac% a$ain he would ima$ine( and truly ima$ine( that he was descendin$9 No doubt) 1ll that would arise out o# his i$norance o# the true upper and middle and lower re$ions9 Aes) Then can you wonder that persons who are ine&perienced in the truth( as they ha,e wron$ ideas about many other thin$s( should also ha,e wron$ ideas about pleasure and pain and the intermediate state+ so that when they are only bein$ drawn towards the pain#ul they #eel pain and thin% the pain which they e&perience to be real( and in li%e manner( when drawn away #rom pain to the neutral or intermediate state( they #irmly belie,e that they ha,e reached the $oal o# satiety and pleasure+ they( not %nowin$ pleasure( err in contrastin$ pain with the absence o# pain) which is li%e contrastin$ blac% with $rey instead o# white --can you wonder( I say( at this9 No( indeed+ I should be much more disposed to wonder at the opposite) 'oo% at the matter thusD --Hun$er( thirst( and the li%e( are inanitions o# the bodily state9 Aes) 1nd i$norance and #olly are inanitions o# the soul9 True) 1nd #ood and wisdom are the correspondin$ satis#actions o# either9 "ertainly) 1nd is the satis#action deri,ed #rom that which has less or #rom that which has more e&istence the truer9 "learly( #rom that which has more) 2hat classes o# thin$s ha,e a $reater share o# pure e&istence in your jud$ment --those o# which #ood and drin% and condiments and all %inds o# sustenance are e&amples( or the class which contains true opinion and %nowled$e and mind and all the di##erent %inds o# ,irtue9 Put

the -uestion in this wayD --2hich has a more pure bein$ --that which is concerned with the in,ariable( the immortal( and the true( and is o# such a nature( and is #ound in such natures+ or that which is concerned with and #ound in the ,ariable and mortal( and is itsel# ,ariable and mortal9 @ar purer( he replied( is the bein$ o# that which is concerned with the in,ariable) 1nd does the essence o# the in,ariable parta%e o# %nowled$e in the same de$ree as o# essence9 Aes( o# %nowled$e in the same de$ree) 1nd o# truth in the same de$ree9 Aes) 1nd( con,ersely( that which has less o# truth will also ha,e less o# essence9 Necessarily) Then( in $eneral( those %inds o# thin$s which are in the ser,ice o# the body ha,e less o# truth and essence than those which are in the ser,ice o# the soul9 @ar less) 1nd has not the body itsel# less o# truth and essence than the soul9 Aes) 2hat is #illed with more real e&istence( and actually has a more real e&istence( is more really #illed than that which is #illed with less real e&istence and is less real9 O# course) 1nd i# there be a pleasure in bein$ #illed with that which is accordin$ to nature( that which is more really #illed with more real bein$ will more really and truly enjoy true pleasure+ whereas that which participates in less real bein$ will be less truly and surely satis#ied( and will participate in an illusory and less real pleasure9 !n-uestionably) Those then who %now not wisdom and ,irtue( and are always busy with $luttony and sensuality( $o down and up a$ain as #ar as the mean+ and in this re$ion they mo,e at random throu$hout li#e( but they ne,er pass into the true upper world+ thither they neither loo%( nor do they e,er #ind their way( neither are they truly #illed with true bein$( nor do they taste o# pure and abidin$ pleasure) 'i%e cattle( with their eyes always loo%in$ down and their heads stoopin$ to the earth( that is( to the dinin$-table( they #atten and #eed and breed( and( in their e&cessi,e lo,e o# these deli$hts( they %ic% and butt at one another with horns and hoo#s which are made o# iron+ and they %ill one another by reason o# their insatiable lust) @or they #ill themsel,es with that which is not substantial( and the part o# themsel,es which they #ill is also unsubstantial and incontinent)

>erily( *ocrates( said .laucon( you describe the li#e o# the many li%e an oracle) Their pleasures are mi&ed with pains --how can they be otherwise9 @or they are mere shadows and pictures o# the true( and are coloured by contrast( which e&a$$erates both li$ht and shade( and so they implant in the minds o# #ools insane desires o# themsel,es+ and they are #ou$ht about as *tesichorus says that the .ree%s #ou$ht about the shadow o# Helen at Troy in i$norance o# the truth) *omethin$ o# that sort must ine,itably happen) 1nd must not the li%e happen with the spirited or passionate element o# the soul9 2ill not the passionate man who carries his passion into action( be in the li%e case( whether he is en,ious and ambitious( or ,iolent and contentious( or an$ry and discontented( i# he be see%in$ to attain honour and ,ictory and the satis#action o# his an$er without reason or sense9 Aes( he said( the same will happen with the spirited element also) Then may we not con#idently assert that the lo,ers o# money and honour( when they see% their pleasures under the $uidance and in the company o# reason and %nowled$e( and pursue a#ter and win the pleasures which wisdom shows them( will also ha,e the truest pleasures in the hi$hest de$ree which is attainable to them( inasmuch as they #ollow truth+ and they will ha,e the pleasures which are natural to them( i# that which is best #or each one is also most natural to him9 Aes( certainly+ the best is the most natural) 1nd when the whole soul #ollows the philosophical principle( and there is no di,ision( the se,eral parts are just( and do each o# them their own business( and enjoy se,erally the best and truest pleasures o# which they are capable9 E&actly) But when either o# the two other principles pre,ails( it #ails in attainin$ its own pleasure( and compels the rest to pursue a#ter a pleasure which is a shadow only and which is not their own9 True) 1nd the $reater the inter,al which separates them #rom philosophy and reason( the more stran$e and illusi,e will be the pleasure9 Aes) 1nd is not that #arthest #rom reason which is at the $reatest distance #rom law and order9 "learly) 1nd the lust#ul and tyrannical desires are( as we saw( at the $reatest distance9 Aes) 1nd the royal and orderly desires are nearest9 Aes)

Then the tyrant will li,e at the $reatest distance #rom true or natural pleasure( and the %in$ at the least9 "ertainly) But i# so( the tyrant will li,e most unpleasantly( and the %in$ most pleasantly9 Ine,itably) 2ould you %now the measure o# the inter,al which separates them9 2ill you tell me9 There appear to be three pleasures( one $enuine and two spuriousD now the trans$ression o# the tyrant reaches a point beyond the spurious+ he has run away #rom the re$ion o# law and reason( and ta%en up his abode with certain sla,e pleasures which are his satellites( and the measure o# his in#eriority can only be e&pressed in a #i$ure) How do you mean9 I assume( I said( that the tyrant is in the third place #rom the oli$arch+ the democrat was in the middle9 Aes) 1nd i# there is truth in what has preceded( he will be wedded to an ima$e o# pleasure which is thrice remo,ed as to truth #rom the pleasure o# the oli$arch9 He will) 1nd the oli$arch is third #rom the royal+ since we count as one royal and aristocratical9 Aes( he is third) Then the tyrant is remo,ed #rom true pleasure by the space o# a number which is three times three9 3ani#estly) The shadow then o# tyrannical pleasure determined by the number o# len$th will be a plane #i$ure) "ertainly) 1nd i# you raise the power and ma%e the plane a solid( there is no di##iculty in seein$ how ,ast is the inter,al by which the tyrant is parted #rom the %in$) Aes+ the arithmetician will easily do the sum) Or i# some person be$ins at the other end and measures the inter,al by which the %in$ is parted #rom the tyrant in truth o# pleasure( he will #ind him( when the multiplication is complete( li,in$ F:E times more pleasantly( and the tyrant more pain#ully by this same inter,al) 2hat a wonder#ul calculation4 1nd how enormous is the distance which separates the just #rom the unjust in re$ard to pleasure and pain4

Aet a true calculation( I said( and a number which nearly concerns human li#e( i# human bein$s are concerned with days and ni$hts and months and years) Aes( he said( human li#e is certainly concerned with them) Then i# the $ood and just man be thus superior in pleasure to the e,il and unjust( his superiority will be in#initely $reater in propriety o# li#e and in beauty and ,irtue9 Immeasurably $reater) 2ell( I said( and now ha,in$ arri,ed at this sta$e o# the ar$ument( we may re,ert to the words which brou$ht us hitherD 2as not some one sayin$ that injustice was a $ain to the per#ectly unjust who was reputed to be just9 Aes( that was said) Now then( ha,in$ determined the power and -uality o# justice and injustice( let us ha,e a little con,ersation with him) 2hat shall we say to him9 'et us ma%e an ima$e o# the soul( that he may ha,e his own words presented be#ore his eyes) O# what sort9 1n ideal ima$e o# the soul( li%e the composite creations o# ancient mytholo$y( such as the "himera or *cylla or "erberus( and there are many others in which two or more di##erent natures are said to $row into one) There are said o# ha,e been such unions) Then do you now model the #orm o# a multitudinous( many-headed monster( ha,in$ a rin$ o# heads o# all manner o# beasts( tame and wild( which he is able to $enerate and metamorphose at will) Aou suppose mar,ellous powers in the artist+ but( as lan$ua$e is more pliable than wa& or any similar substance( let there be such a model as you propose) *uppose now that you ma%e a second #orm as o# a lion( and a third o# a man( the second smaller than the #irst( and the third smaller than the second) That( he said( is an easier tas%+ and I ha,e made them as you say) 1nd now join them( and let the three $row into one) That has been accomplished) Ne&t #ashion the outside o# them into a sin$le ima$e( as o# a man( so that he who is not able to loo% within( and sees only the outer hull( may belie,e the beast to be a sin$le human creature) I ha,e done so( he said) 1nd now( to him who maintains that it is pro#itable #or the human

creature to be unjust( and unpro#itable to be just( let us reply that( i# he be ri$ht( it is pro#itable #or this creature to #east the multitudinous monster and stren$then the lion and the lion-li%e -ualities( but to star,e and wea%en the man( who is conse-uently liable to be dra$$ed about at the mercy o# either o# the other two+ and he is not to attempt to #amiliari/e or harmoni/e them with one another --he ou$ht rather to su##er them to #i$ht and bite and de,our one another) "ertainly( he said+ that is what the appro,er o# injustice says) To him the supporter o# justice ma%es answer that he should e,er so spea% and act as to $i,e the man within him in some way or other the most complete mastery o,er the entire human creature) He should watch o,er the many-headed monster li%e a $ood husbandman( #osterin$ and culti,atin$ the $entle -ualities( and pre,entin$ the wild ones #rom $rowin$+ he should be ma%in$ the lion-heart his ally( and in common care o# them all should be unitin$ the se,eral parts with one another and with himsel#) Aes( he said( that is -uite what the maintainer o# justice say) 1nd so #rom e,ery point o# ,iew( whether o# pleasure( honour( or ad,anta$e( the appro,er o# justice is ri$ht and spea%s the truth( and the disappro,er is wron$ and #alse and i$norant) Aes( #rom e,ery point o# ,iew) "ome( now( and let us $ently reason with the unjust( who is not intentionally in error) 6*weet *ir(6 we will say to him( what thin% you o# thin$s esteemed noble and i$noble9 Is not the noble that which subjects the beast to the man( or rather to the $od in man+ and the i$noble that which subjects the man to the beast96 He can hardly a,oid sayin$ yes --can he now9 Not i# he has any re$ard #or my opinion) But( i# he a$ree so #ar( we may as% him to answer another -uestionD 6Then how would a man pro#it i# he recei,ed $old and sil,er on the condition that he was to ensla,e the noblest part o# him to the worst9 2ho can ima$ine that a man who sold his son or dau$hter into sla,ery #or money( especially i# he sold them into the hands o# #ierce and e,il men( would be the $ainer( howe,er lar$e mi$ht be the sum which he recei,ed9 1nd will any one say that he is not a miserable caiti## who remorselessly sells his own di,ine bein$ to that which is most $odless and detestable9 Eriphyle too% the nec%lace as the price o# her husband6s li#e( but he is ta%in$ a bribe in order to compass a worse ruin)6 Aes( said .laucon( #ar worse --I will answer #or him) Has not the intemperate been censured o# old( because in him the hu$e multi#orm monster is allowed to be too much at lar$e9 "learly) 1nd men are blamed #or pride and bad temper when the lion and serpent

element in them disproportionately $rows and $ains stren$th9 Aes) 1nd lu&ury and so#tness are blamed( because they rela& and wea%en this same creature( and ma%e a coward o# him9 >ery true) 1nd is not a man reproached #or #lattery and meanness who subordinates the spirited animal to the unruly monster( and( #or the sa%e o# money( o# which he can ne,er ha,e enou$h( habituates him in the days o# his youth to be trampled in the mire( and #rom bein$ a lion to become a mon%ey9 True( he said) 1nd why are mean employments and manual arts a reproach Only because they imply a natural wea%ness o# the hi$her principle+ the indi,idual is unable to control the creatures within him( but has to court them( and his $reat study is how to #latter them) *uch appears to be the reason) 1nd there#ore( bein$ desirous o# placin$ him under a rule li%e that o# the best( we say that he ou$ht to be the ser,ant o# the best( in whom the i,ine rules+ not( as Thrasymachus supposed( to the injury o# the ser,ant( but because e,ery one had better be ruled by di,ine wisdom dwellin$ within him+ or( i# this be impossible( then by an e&ternal authority( in order that we may be all( as #ar as possible( under the same $o,ernment( #riends and e-uals) True( he said) 1nd this is clearly seen to be the intention o# the law( which is the ally o# the whole city+ and is seen also in the authority which we e&ercise o,er children( and the re#usal to let them be #ree until we ha,e established in them a principle analo$ous to the constitution o# a state( and by culti,ation o# this hi$her element ha,e set up in their hearts a $uardian and ruler li%e our own( and when this is done they may $o their ways) Aes( he said( the purpose o# the law is mani#est) @rom what point o# ,iew( then( and on what $round can we say that a man is pro#ited by injustice or intemperance or other baseness( which will ma%e him a worse man( e,en thou$h he ac-uire money or power by his wic%edness9 @rom no point o# ,iew at all) 2hat shall he pro#it( i# his injustice be undetected and unpunished9 He who is undetected only $ets worse( whereas he who is detected and punished has the brutal part o# his nature silenced and humani/ed+ the $entler element in him is liberated( and his whole soul is per#ected and ennobled by the ac-uirement o# justice and temperance and wisdom( more than the body e,er is by recei,in$ $i#ts o# beauty( stren$th and health( in proportion as the soul is more honourable than the body)

"ertainly( he said) To this nobler purpose the man o# understandin$ will de,ote the ener$ies o# his li#e) 1nd in the #irst place( he will honour studies which impress these -ualities on his soul and disre$ard others9 "learly( he said) In the ne&t place( he will re$ulate his bodily habit and trainin$( and so #ar will he be #rom yieldin$ to brutal and irrational pleasures( that he will re$ard e,en health as -uite a secondary matter+ his #irst object will be not that he may be #air or stron$ or well( unless he is li%ely thereby to $ain temperance( but he will always desire so to attemper the body as to preser,e the harmony o# the soul9 "ertainly he will( i# he has true music in him) 1nd in the ac-uisition o# wealth there is a principle o# order and harmony which he will also obser,e+ he will not allow himsel# to be da//led by the #oolish applause o# the world( and heap up riches to his own in#inite harm9 "ertainly not( he said) He will loo% at the city which is within him( and ta%e heed that no disorder occur in it( such as mi$ht arise either #rom super#luity or #rom want+ and upon this principle he will re$ulate his property and $ain or spend accordin$ to his means) >ery true) 1nd( #or the same reason( he will $ladly accept and enjoy such honours as he deems li%ely to ma%e him a better man+ but those( whether pri,ate or public( which are li%ely to disorder his li#e( he will a,oid9 Then( i# that is his moti,e( he will not be a statesman) By the do$ o# E$ypt( he will4 in the city which 6s his own he certainly will( thou$h in the land o# his birth perhaps not( unless he ha,e a di,ine call) I understand+ you mean that he will be a ruler in the city o# which we are the #ounders( and which e&ists in idea only+ #or I do not belie,e that there is such an one anywhere on earth9 In hea,en( I replied( there is laid up a pattern o# it( methin%s( which he who desires may behold( and beholdin$( may set his own house in order) But whether such an one e&ists( or e,er will e&ist in #act( is no matter+ #or he will li,e a#ter the manner o# that city( ha,in$ nothin$ to do with any other) I thin% so( he said) ---------------------------------------------------------------------BOOG ? *ocrates - .'1!"ON

O# he many e&cellences which I percei,e in the order o# our *tate( there is none which upon re#lection pleases me better than the rule about poetry) To what do you re#er9 To the rejection o# imitati,e poetry( which certainly ou$ht not to be recei,ed+ as I see #ar more clearly now that the parts o# the soul ha,e been distin$uished) 2hat do you mean9 *pea%in$ in con#idence( #or I should not li%e to ha,e my words repeated to the tra$edians and the rest o# the imitati,e tribe --but I do not mind sayin$ to you( that all poetical imitations are ruinous to the understandin$ o# the hearers( and that the %nowled$e o# their true nature is the only antidote to them) E&plain the purport o# your remar%) 2ell( I will tell you( althou$h I ha,e always #rom my earliest youth had an awe and lo,e o# Homer( which e,en now ma%es the words #alter on my lips( #or he is the $reat captain and teacher o# the whole o# that charmin$ tra$ic company+ but a man is not to be re,erenced more than the truth( and there#ore I will spea% out) >ery $ood( he said) 'isten to me then( or rather( answer me) Put your -uestion) "an you tell me what imitation is9 #or I really do not %now) 1 li%ely thin$( then( that I should %now) 2hy not9 #or the duller eye may o#ten see a thin$ sooner than the %eener) >ery true( he said+ but in your presence( e,en i# I had any #aint notion( I could not muster coura$e to utter it) 2ill you en-uire yoursel#9 2ell then( shall we be$in the en-uiry in our usual mannerD 2hene,er a number o# indi,iduals ha,e a common name( we assume them to ha,e also a correspondin$ idea or #orm) o you understand me9 I do) 'et us ta%e any common instance+ there are beds and tables in the world --plenty o# them( are there not9 Aes) But there are only two ideas or #orms o# them --one the idea o# a bed( the other o# a table) True) 1nd the ma%er o# either o# them ma%es a bed or he ma%es a table #or our use( in accordance with the idea --that is our way o# spea%in$ in this and similar instances --but no arti#icer ma%es the ideas themsel,esD how could he9

Impossible) 1nd there is another artist( --I should li%e to %now what you would say o# him) 2ho is he9 One who is the ma%er o# all the wor%s o# all other wor%men) 2hat an e&traordinary man4 2ait a little( and there will be more reason #or your sayin$ so) @or this is he who is able to ma%e not only ,essels o# e,ery %ind( but plants and animals( himsel# and all other thin$s --the earth and hea,en( and the thin$s which are in hea,en or under the earth+ he ma%es the $ods also) He must be a wi/ard and no mista%e) Oh4 you are incredulous( are you9 o you mean that there is no such ma%er or creator( or that in one sense there mi$ht be a ma%er o# all these thin$s but in another not9 o you see that there is a way in which you could ma%e them all yoursel#9 2hat way9 1n easy way enou$h+ or rather( there are many ways in which the #eat mi$ht be -uic%ly and easily accomplished( none -uic%er than that o# turnin$ a mirror round and round --you would soon enou$h ma%e the sun and the hea,ens( and the earth and yoursel#( and other animals and plants( and all the( other thin$s o# which we were just now spea%in$( in the mirror) Aes( he said+ but they would be appearances only) >ery $ood( I said( you are comin$ to the point now) 1nd the painter too is( as I concei,e( just such another --a creator o# appearances( is he not9 O# course) But then I suppose you will say that what he creates is untrue) 1nd yet there is a sense in which the painter also creates a bed9 Aes( he said( but not a real bed) 1nd what o# the ma%er o# the bed9 2ere you not sayin$ that he too ma%es( not the idea which( accordin$ to our ,iew( is the essence o# the bed( but only a particular bed9 Aes( I did) Then i# he does not ma%e that which e&ists he cannot ma%e true e&istence( but only some semblance o# e&istence+ and i# any one were to say that the wor% o# the ma%er o# the bed( or o# any other wor%man( has real e&istence( he could hardly be supposed to be spea%in$ the truth) 1t any rate( he replied( philosophers would say that he was not spea%in$ the truth) No wonder( then( that his wor% too is an indistinct e&pression o#

truth) No wonder) *uppose now that by the li$ht o# the e&amples just o##ered we en-uire who this imitator is9 I# you please) 2ell then( here are three bedsD one e&istin$ in nature( which is made by .od( as I thin% that we may say --#or no one else can be the ma%er9 No) There is another which is the wor% o# the carpenter9 Aes) 1nd the wor% o# the painter is a third9 Aes) Beds( then( are o# three %inds( and there are three artists who superintend themD .od( the ma%er o# the bed( and the painter9 Aes( there are three o# them) .od( whether #rom choice or #rom necessity( made one bed in nature and one only+ two or more such ideal beds neither e,er ha,e been nor e,er will be made by .od) 2hy is that9 Because e,en i# He had made but two( a third would still appear behind them which both o# them would ha,e #or their idea( and that would be the ideal bed and the two others) >ery true( he said) .od %new this( and He desired to be the real ma%er o# a real bed( not a particular ma%er o# a particular bed( and there#ore He created a bed which is essentially and by nature one only) *o we belie,e) *hall we( then( spea% o# Him as the natural author or ma%er o# the bed9 Aes( he replied+ inasmuch as by the natural process o# creation He is the author o# this and o# all other thin$s) 1nd what shall we say o# the carpenter --is not he also the ma%er o# the bed9 Aes) But would you call the painter a creator and ma%er9 "ertainly not) Aet i# he is not the ma%er( what is he in relation to the bed9 I thin%( he said( that we may #airly desi$nate him as the imitator o# that which the others ma%e) .ood( I said+ then you call him who is third in the descent #rom nature an imitator9

"ertainly( he said) 1nd the tra$ic poet is an imitator( and there#ore( li%e all other imitators( he is thrice remo,ed #rom the %in$ and #rom the truth9 That appears to be so) Then about the imitator we are a$reed) 1nd what about the painter9 --I would li%e to %now whether he may be thou$ht to imitate that which ori$inally e&ists in nature( or only the creations o# artists9 The latter) 1s they are or as they appear9 Aou ha,e still to determine this) 2hat do you mean9 I mean( that you may loo% at a bed #rom di##erent points o# ,iew( obli-uely or directly or #rom any other point o# ,iew( and the bed will appear di##erent( but there is no di##erence in reality) 1nd the same o# all thin$s) Aes( he said( the di##erence is only apparent) Now let me as% you another -uestionD 2hich is the art o# paintin$ desi$ned to be --an imitation o# thin$s as they are( or as they appear --o# appearance or o# reality9 O# appearance) Then the imitator( I said( is a lon$ way o## the truth( and can do all thin$s because he li$htly touches on a small part o# them( and that part an ima$e) @or e&ampleD 1 painter will paint a cobbler( carpenter( or any other artist( thou$h he %nows nothin$ o# their arts+ and( i# he is a $ood artist( he may decei,e children or simple persons( when he shows them his picture o# a carpenter #rom a distance( and they will #ancy that they are loo%in$ at a real carpenter) "ertainly) 1nd whene,er any one in#orms us that he has #ound a man %nows all the arts( and all thin$s else that anybody %nows( and e,ery sin$le thin$ with a hi$her de$ree o# accuracy than any other man --whoe,er tells us this( I thin% that we can only ima$ine to be a simple creature who is li%ely to ha,e been decei,ed by some wi/ard or actor whom he met( and whom he thou$ht all-%nowin$( because he himsel# was unable to analyse the nature o# %nowled$e and i$norance and imitation) 3ost true) 1nd so( when we hear persons sayin$ that the tra$edians( and Homer( who is at their head( %now all the arts and all thin$s human( ,irtue as well as ,ice( and di,ine thin$s too( #or that the $ood poet cannot compose well unless he %nows his subject( and that he who has not this %nowled$e can ne,er be a poet( we ou$ht to consider whether here also there may not be a similar illusion) Perhaps they may ha,e come across imitators and been decei,ed by them+ they may not ha,e remembered when they saw their wor%s that these were but imitations thrice remo,ed #rom the truth( and could easily be made without any %nowled$e o# the truth( because they are appearances only and not realities9 Or(

a#ter all( they may be in the ri$ht( and poets do really %now the thin$s about which they seem to the many to spea% so well9 The -uestion( he said( should by all means be considered) Now do you suppose that i# a person were able to ma%e the ori$inal as well as the ima$e( he would seriously de,ote himsel# to the ima$e-ma%in$ branch9 2ould he allow imitation to be the rulin$ principle o# his li#e( as i# he had nothin$ hi$her in him9 I should say not) The real artist( who %new what he was imitatin$( would be interested in realities and not in imitations+ and would desire to lea,e as memorials o# himsel# wor%s many and #air+ and( instead o# bein$ the author o# encomiums( he would pre#er to be the theme o# them) Aes( he said( that would be to him a source o# much $reater honour and pro#it) Then( I said( we must put a -uestion to Homer+ not about medicine( or any o# the arts to which his poems only incidentally re#erD we are not $oin$ to as% him( or any other poet( whether he has cured patients li%e 1sclepius( or le#t behind him a school o# medicine such as the 1sclepiads were( or whether he only tal%s about medicine and other arts at second hand+ but we ha,e a ri$ht to %now respectin$ military tactics( politics( education( which are the chie#est and noblest subjects o# his poems( and we may #airly as% him about them) 6@riend Homer(6 then we say to him( 6i# you are only in the second remo,e #rom truth in what you say o# ,irtue( and not in the third --not an ima$e ma%er or imitator --and i# you are able to discern what pursuits ma%e men better or worse in pri,ate or public li#e( tell us what *tate was e,er better $o,erned by your help9 The $ood order o# 'acedaemon is due to 'ycur$us( and many other cities $reat and small ha,e been similarly bene#ited by others+ but who says that you ha,e been a $ood le$islator to them and ha,e done them any $ood9 Italy and *icily boast o# "harondas( and there is *olon who is renowned amon$ us+ but what city has anythin$ to say about you96 Is there any city which he mi$ht name9 I thin% not( said .laucon+ not e,en the Homerids themsel,es pretend that he was a le$islator) 2ell( but is there any war on record which was carried on success#ully by him( or aided by his counsels( when he was ali,e9 There is not) Or is there any in,ention o# his( applicable to the arts or to human li#e( such as Thales the 3ilesian or 1nacharsis the *cythian( and other in$enious men ha,e concei,ed( which is attributed to him9 There is absolutely nothin$ o# the %ind) But( i# Homer ne,er did any public ser,ice( was he pri,ately a $uide or teacher o# any9 Had he in his li#etime #riends who lo,ed to associate

with him( and who handed down to posterity an Homeric way o# li#e( such as was established by Pytha$oras who was so $reatly belo,ed #or his wisdom( and whose #ollowers are to this day -uite celebrated #or the order which was named a#ter him9 Nothin$ o# the %ind is recorded o# him) @or surely( *ocrates( "reophylus( the companion o# Homer( that child o# #lesh( whose name always ma%es us lau$h( mi$ht be more justly ridiculed #or his stupidity( i#( as is said( Homer was $reatly ne$lected by him and others in his own day when he was ali,e9 Aes( I replied( that is the tradition) But can you ima$ine( .laucon( that i# Homer had really been able to educate and impro,e man%ind --i# he had possessed %nowled$e and not been a mere imitator --can you ima$ine( I say( that he would not ha,e had many #ollowers( and been honoured and lo,ed by them9 Prota$oras o# 1bdera( and Prodicus o# "eos( and a host o# others( ha,e only to whisper to their contemporariesD 6Aou will ne,er be able to mana$e either your own house or your own *tate until you appoint us to be your ministers o# education6 --and this in$enious de,ice o# theirs has such an e##ect in ma%in$ them lo,e them that their companions all but carry them about on their shoulders) 1nd is it concei,able that the contemporaries o# Homer( or a$ain o# Hesiod( would ha,e allowed either o# them to $o about as rhapsodists( i# they had really been able to ma%e man%ind ,irtuous9 2ould they not ha,e been as unwillin$ to part with them as with $old( and ha,e compelled them to stay at home with them9 Or( i# the master would not stay( then the disciples would ha,e #ollowed him about e,erywhere( until they had $ot education enou$h9 Aes( *ocrates( that( I thin%( is -uite true) Then must we not in#er that all these poetical indi,iduals( be$innin$ with Homer( are only imitators+ they copy ima$es o# ,irtue and the li%e( but the truth they ne,er reach9 The poet is li%e a painter who( as we ha,e already obser,ed( will ma%e a li%eness o# a cobbler thou$h he understands nothin$ o# cobblin$+ and his picture is $ood enou$h #or those who %now no more than he does( and jud$e only by colours and #i$ures) Cuite so) In li%e manner the poet with his words and phrases may be said to lay on the colours o# the se,eral arts( himsel# understandin$ their nature only enou$h to imitate them+ and other people( who are as i$norant as he is( and jud$e only #rom his words( ima$ine that i# he spea%s o# cobblin$( or o# military tactics( or o# anythin$ else( in metre and harmony and rhythm( he spea%s ,ery well --such is the sweet in#luence which melody and rhythm by nature ha,e) 1nd I thin% that you must ha,e obser,ed a$ain and a$ain what a poor appearance the tales o# poets ma%e when stripped o# the colours which music puts upon them( and recited in simple prose) Aes( he said) They are li%e #aces which were ne,er really beauti#ul( but only bloomin$+ and now the bloom o# youth has passed away #rom them9

E&actly) Here is another pointD The imitator or ma%er o# the ima$e %nows nothin$ o# true e&istence+ he %nows appearances only) 1m I not ri$ht9 Aes) Then let us ha,e a clear understandin$( and not be satis#ied with hal# an e&planation) Proceed) O# the painter we say that he will paint reins( and he will paint a bit9 Aes) 1nd the wor%er in leather and brass will ma%e them9 "ertainly) But does the painter %now the ri$ht #orm o# the bit and reins9 Nay( hardly e,en the wor%ers in brass and leather who ma%e them+ only the horseman who %nows how to use them --he %nows their ri$ht #orm) 3ost true) 1nd may we not say the same o# all thin$s9 2hat9 That there are three arts which are concerned with all thin$sD one which uses( another which ma%es( a third which imitates them9 Aes) 1nd the e&cellence or beauty or truth o# e,ery structure( animate or inanimate( and o# e,ery action o# man( is relati,e to the use #or which nature or the artist has intended them) True) Then the user o# them must ha,e the $reatest e&perience o# them( and he must indicate to the ma%er the $ood or bad -ualities which de,elop themsel,es in use+ #or e&ample( the #lute-player will tell the #lute-ma%er which o# his #lutes is satis#actory to the per#ormer+ he will tell him how he ou$ht to ma%e them( and the other will attend to his instructions9 O# course) The one %nows and there#ore spea%s with authority about the $oodness and badness o# #lutes( while the other( con#idin$ in him( will do what he is told by him9 True) The instrument is the same( but about the e&cellence or badness o# it the ma%er will only attain to a correct belie#+ and this he will $ain #rom him who %nows( by tal%in$ to him and bein$ compelled to hear what he has to say( whereas the user will ha,e %nowled$e9 True) But will the imitator ha,e either9 2ill he %now #rom use whether or no his drawin$ is correct or beauti#ul9 Or will he ha,e ri$ht opinion #rom bein$ compelled to associate with another who %nows and $i,es

him instructions about what he should draw9 Neither) Then he will no more ha,e true opinion than he will ha,e %nowled$e about the $oodness or badness o# his imitations9 I suppose not) The imitati,e artist will be in a brilliant state o# intelli$ence about his own creations9 Nay( ,ery much the re,erse) 1nd still he will $o on imitatin$ without %nowin$ what ma%es a thin$ $ood or bad( and may be e&pected there#ore to imitate only that which appears to be $ood to the i$norant multitude9 Just so) Thus #ar then we are pretty well a$reed that the imitator has no %nowled$e worth mentionin$ o# what he imitates) Imitation is only a %ind o# play or sport( and the tra$ic poets( whether they write in iambic or in Heroic ,erse( are imitators in the hi$hest de$ree9 >ery true) 1nd now tell me( I conjure you( has not imitation been shown by us to be concerned with that which is thrice remo,ed #rom the truth9 "ertainly) 1nd what is the #aculty in man to which imitation is addressed9 2hat do you mean9 I will e&plainD The body which is lar$e when seen near( appears small when seen at a distance9 True) 1nd the same object appears strai$ht when loo%ed at out o# the water( and croo%ed when in the water+ and the conca,e becomes con,e&( owin$ to the illusion about colours to which the si$ht is liable) Thus e,ery sort o# con#usion is re,ealed within us+ and this is that wea%ness o# the human mind on which the art o# conjurin$ and o# decei,in$ by li$ht and shadow and other in$enious de,ices imposes( ha,in$ an e##ect upon us li%e ma$ic) True) 1nd the arts o# measurin$ and numberin$ and wei$hin$ come to the rescue o# the human understandin$-there is the beauty o# them --and the apparent $reater or less( or more or hea,ier( no lon$er ha,e the mastery o,er us( but $i,e way be#ore calculation and measure and wei$ht9 3ost true) 1nd this( surely( must be the wor% o# the calculatin$ and rational principle in the soul To be sure) 1nd when this principle measures and certi#ies that some thin$s are

e-ual( or that some are $reater or less than others( there occurs an apparent contradiction9 True) But were we not sayin$ that such a contradiction is the same #aculty cannot ha,e contrary opinions at the same time about the same thin$9 >ery true) Then that part o# the soul which has an opinion contrary to measure is not the same with that which has an opinion in accordance with measure9 True) 1nd the better part o# the soul is li%ely to be that which trusts to measure and calculation9 "ertainly) 1nd that which is opposed to them is one o# the in#erior principles o# the soul9 No doubt) This was the conclusion at which I was see%in$ to arri,e when I said that paintin$ or drawin$( and imitation in $eneral( when doin$ their own proper wor%( are #ar remo,ed #rom truth( and the companions and #riends and associates o# a principle within us which is e-ually remo,ed #rom reason( and that they ha,e no true or healthy aim) E&actly) The imitati,e art is an in#erior who marries an in#erior( and has in#erior o##sprin$) >ery true) 1nd is this con#ined to the si$ht only( or does it e&tend to the hearin$ also( relatin$ in #act to what we term poetry9 Probably the same would be true o# poetry) o not rely( I said( on a probability deri,ed #rom the analo$y o# paintin$+ but let us e&amine #urther and see whether the #aculty with which poetical imitation is concerned is $ood or bad) By all means) 2e may state the -uestion thusD --Imitation imitates the actions o# men( whether ,oluntary or in,oluntary( on which( as they ima$ine( a $ood or bad result has ensued( and they rejoice or sorrow accordin$ly) Is there anythin$ more9 No( there is nothin$ else) But in all this ,ariety o# circumstances is the man at unity with himsel# --or rather( as in the instance o# si$ht there was con#usion and opposition in his opinions about the same thin$s( so here also is there not stri#e and inconsistency in his li#e9 Thou$h I need hardly raise the -uestion a$ain( #or I remember that all this has been already admitted+ and the soul has been ac%nowled$ed by us to be #ull o# these

and ten thousand similar oppositions occurrin$ at the same moment9 1nd we were ri$ht( he said) Aes( I said( thus #ar we were ri$ht+ but there was an omission which must now be supplied) 2hat was the omission9 2ere we not sayin$ that a $ood man( who has the mis#ortune to lose his son or anythin$ else which is most dear to him( will bear the loss with more e-uanimity than another9 Aes) But will he ha,e no sorrow( or shall we say that althou$h he cannot help sorrowin$( he will moderate his sorrow9 The latter( he said( is the truer statement) Tell meD will he be more li%ely to stru$$le and hold out a$ainst his sorrow when he is seen by his e-uals( or when he is alone9 It will ma%e a $reat di##erence whether he is seen or not) 2hen he is by himsel# he will not mind sayin$ or doin$ many thin$s which he would be ashamed o# any one hearin$ or seein$ him do9 True) There is a principle o# law and reason in him which bids him resist( as well as a #eelin$ o# his mis#ortune which is #orcin$ him to indul$e his sorrow9 True) But when a man is drawn in two opposite directions( to and #rom the same object( this( as we a##irm( necessarily implies two distinct principles in him9 "ertainly) One o# them is ready to #ollow the $uidance o# the law9 How do you mean9 The law would say that to be patient under su##erin$ is best( and that we should not $i,e way to impatience( as there is no %nowin$ whether such thin$s are $ood or e,il+ and nothin$ is $ained by impatience+ also( because no human thin$ is o# serious importance( and $rie# stands in the way o# that which at the moment is most re-uired) 2hat is most re-uired9 he as%ed) That we should ta%e counsel about what has happened( and when the dice ha,e been thrown order our a##airs in the way which reason deems best+ not( li%e children who ha,e had a #all( %eepin$ hold o# the part struc% and wastin$ time in settin$ up a howl( but always accustomin$ the soul #orthwith to apply a remedy( raisin$ up that which is sic%ly and #allen( banishin$ the cry o# sorrow by the healin$ art) Aes( he said( that is the true way o# meetin$ the attac%s o# #ortune)

Aes( I said+ and the hi$her principle is ready to #ollow this su$$estion o# reason9 "learly) 1nd the other principle( which inclines us to recollection o# our troubles and to lamentation( and can ne,er ha,e enou$h o# them( we may call irrational( useless( and cowardly9 Indeed( we may) 1nd does not the latter --I mean the rebellious principle --#urnish a $reat ,ariety o# materials #or imitation9 2hereas the wise and calm temperament( bein$ always nearly e-uable( is not easy to imitate or to appreciate when imitated( especially at a public #esti,al when a promiscuous crowd is assembled in a theatre) @or the #eelin$ represented is one to which they are stran$ers) "ertainly) Then the imitati,e poet who aims at bein$ popular is not by nature made( nor is his art intended( to please or to a##ect the principle in the soul+ but he will pre#er the passionate and #it#ul temper( which is easily imitated9 "learly) 1nd now we may #airly ta%e him and place him by the side o# the painter( #or he is li%e him in two waysD #irst( inasmuch as his creations ha,e an in#erior de$ree o# truth --in this( I say( he is li%e him+ and he is also li%e him in bein$ concerned with an in#erior part o# the soul+ and there#ore we shall be ri$ht in re#usin$ to admit him into a well-ordered *tate( because he awa%ens and nourishes and stren$thens the #eelin$s and impairs the reason) 1s in a city when the e,il are permitted to ha,e authority and the $ood are put out o# the way( so in the soul o# man( as we maintain( the imitati,e poet implants an e,il constitution( #or he indul$es the irrational nature which has no discernment o# $reater and less( but thin%s the same thin$ at one time $reat and at another small-he is a manu#acturer o# ima$es and is ,ery #ar remo,ed #rom the truth) E&actly) But we ha,e not yet brou$ht #orward the hea,iest count in our accusationD --the power which poetry has o# harmin$ e,en the $ood 5and there are ,ery #ew who are not harmed7( is surely an aw#ul thin$9 Aes( certainly( i# the e##ect is what you say) Hear and jud$eD The best o# us( as I concei,e( when we listen to a passa$e o# Homer( or one o# the tra$edians( in which he represents some piti#ul hero who is drawlin$ out his sorrows in a lon$ oration( or weepin$( and smitin$ his breast --the best o# us( you %now( deli$ht in $i,in$ way to sympathy( and are in raptures at the e&cellence o# the poet who stirs our #eelin$s most) Aes( o# course I %now) But when any sorrow o# our own happens to us( then you may obser,e that we pride oursel,es on the opposite -uality --we would #ain be

-uiet and patient+ this is the manly part( and the other which deli$hted us in the recitation is now deemed to be the part o# a woman) >ery true( he said) Now can we be ri$ht in praisin$ and admirin$ another who is doin$ that which any one o# us would abominate and be ashamed o# in his own person9 No( he said( that is certainly not reasonable) Nay( I said( -uite reasonable #rom one point o# ,iew) 2hat point o# ,iew9 I# you consider( I said( that when in mis#ortune we #eel a natural hun$er and desire to relie,e our sorrow by weepin$ and lamentation( and that this #eelin$ which is %ept under control in our own calamities is satis#ied and deli$hted by the poets+-the better nature in each o# us( not ha,in$ been su##iciently trained by reason or habit( allows the sympathetic element to brea% loose because the sorrow is another6s+ and the spectator #ancies that there can be no dis$race to himsel# in praisin$ and pityin$ any one who comes tellin$ him what a $ood man he is( and ma%in$ a #uss about his troubles+ he thin%s that the pleasure is a $ain( and why should he be supercilious and lose this and the poem too9 @ew persons e,er re#lect( as I should ima$ine( that #rom the e,il o# other men somethin$ o# e,il is communicated to themsel,es) 1nd so the #eelin$ o# sorrow which has $athered stren$th at the si$ht o# the mis#ortunes o# others is with di##iculty repressed in our own) How ,ery true4 1nd does not the same hold also o# the ridiculous9 There are jests which you would be ashamed to ma%e yoursel#( and yet on the comic sta$e( or indeed in pri,ate( when you hear them( you are $reatly amused by them( and are not at all dis$usted at their unseemliness+ --the case o# pity is repeated+ --there is a principle in human nature which is disposed to raise a lau$h( and this which you once restrained by reason( because you were a#raid o# bein$ thou$ht a bu##oon( is now let out a$ain+ and ha,in$ stimulated the risible #aculty at the theatre( you are betrayed unconsciously to yoursel# into playin$ the comic poet at home) Cuite true( he said) 1nd the same may be said o# lust and an$er and all the other a##ections( o# desire and pain and pleasure( which are held to be inseparable #rom e,ery action ---in all o# them poetry #eeds and waters the passions instead o# dryin$ them up+ she lets them rule( althou$h they ou$ht to be controlled( i# man%ind are e,er to increase in happiness and ,irtue) I cannot deny it) There#ore( .laucon( I said( whene,er you meet with any o# the eulo$ists o# Homer declarin$ that he has been the educator o# Hellas( and that he is pro#itable #or education and #or the orderin$ o# human thin$s( and that you should ta%e him up a$ain and a$ain and $et to %now him and re$ulate your whole li#e accordin$ to him( we may lo,e and honour those who say these thin$s --they are e&cellent people( as #ar as

their li$hts e&tend+ and we are ready to ac%nowled$e that Homer is the $reatest o# poets and #irst o# tra$edy writers+ but we must remain #irm in our con,iction that hymns to the $ods and praises o# #amous men are the only poetry which ou$ht to be admitted into our *tate) @or i# you $o beyond this and allow the honeyed muse to enter( either in epic or lyric ,erse( not law and the reason o# man%ind( which by common consent ha,e e,er been deemed best( but pleasure and pain will be the rulers in our *tate) That is most true( he said) 1nd now since we ha,e re,erted to the subject o# poetry( let this our de#ence ser,e to show the reasonableness o# our #ormer jud$ment in sendin$ away out o# our *tate an art ha,in$ the tendencies which we ha,e described+ #or reason constrained us) But that she may impute to us any harshness or want o# politeness( let us tell her that there is an ancient -uarrel between philosophy and poetry+ o# which there are many proo#s( such as the sayin$ o# 6the yelpin$ hound howlin$ at her lord(6 or o# one 6mi$hty in the ,ain tal% o# #ools(6 and 6the mob o# sa$es circum,entin$ Jeus(6 and the 6subtle thin%ers who are be$$ars a#ter all6+ and there are innumerable other si$ns o# ancient enmity between them) Notwithstandin$ this( let us assure our sweet #riend and the sister arts o# imitation that i# she will only pro,e her title to e&ist in a well-ordered *tate we shall be deli$hted to recei,e her --we are ,ery conscious o# her charms+ but we may not on that account betray the truth) I dare say( .laucon( that you are as much charmed by her as I am( especially when she appears in Homer9 Aes( indeed( I am $reatly charmed) *hall I propose( then( that she be allowed to return #rom e&ile( but upon this condition only --that she ma%e a de#ence o# hersel# in lyrical or some other metre9 "ertainly) 1nd we may #urther $rant to those o# her de#enders who are lo,ers o# poetry and yet not poets the permission to spea% in prose on her behal#D let them show not only that she is pleasant but also use#ul to *tates and to human li#e( and we will listen in a %indly spirit+ #or i# this can be pro,ed we shall surely be the $ainers --I mean( i# there is a use in poetry as well as a deli$ht9 "ertainly( he said( we shall the $ainers) I# her de#ence #ails( then( my dear #riend( li%e other persons who are enamoured o# somethin$( but put a restraint upon themsel,es when they thin% their desires are opposed to their interests( so too must we a#ter the manner o# lo,ers $i,e her up( thou$h not without a stru$$le) 2e too are inspired by that lo,e o# poetry which the education o# noble *tates has implanted in us( and there#ore we would ha,e her appear at her best and truest+ but so lon$ as she is unable to ma%e $ood her de#ence( this ar$ument o# ours shall be a charm to us( which we will repeat to oursel,es while we listen to her strains+ that we may not #all away into the childish lo,e o# her which capti,ates the many) 1t all e,ents we are well aware that poetry bein$ such as we ha,e described is not to be re$arded seriously as attainin$ to the

truth+ and he who listens to her( #earin$ #or the sa#ety o# the city which is within him( should be on his $uard a$ainst her seductions and ma%e our words his law) Aes( he said( I -uite a$ree with you) Aes( I said( my dear .laucon( #or $reat is the issue at sta%e( $reater than appears( whether a man is to be $ood or bad) 1nd what will any one be pro#ited i# under the in#luence o# honour or money or power( aye( or under the e&citement o# poetry( he ne$lect justice and ,irtue9 Aes( he said+ I ha,e been con,inced by the ar$ument( as I belie,e that any one else would ha,e been) 1nd yet no mention has been made o# the $reatest pri/es and rewards which await ,irtue) 2hat( are there any $reater still9 I# there are( they must be o# an inconcei,able $reatness) 2hy( I said( what was e,er $reat in a short time9 The whole period o# threescore years and ten is surely but a little thin$ in comparison with eternity9 *ay rather 6nothin$(6 he replied) 1nd should an immortal bein$ seriously thin% o# this little space rather than o# the whole9 O# the whole( certainly) But why do you as%9 1re you not aware( I said( that the soul o# man is immortal and imperishable9 He loo%ed at me in astonishment( and saidD No( by hea,enD 1nd are you really prepared to maintain this9 Aes( I said( I ou$ht to be( and you too --there is no di##iculty in pro,in$ it) I see a $reat di##iculty+ but I should li%e to hear you state this ar$ument o# which you ma%e so li$ht) 'isten then) I am attendin$) There is a thin$ which you call $ood and another which you call e,il9 Aes( he replied) 2ould you a$ree with me in thin%in$ that the corruptin$ and destroyin$ element is the e,il( and the sa,in$ and impro,in$ element the $ood9 Aes) 1nd you admit that e,ery thin$ has a $ood and also an e,il+ as ophthalmia is the e,il o# the eyes and disease o# the whole body+ as mildew is o# corn( and rot o# timber( or rust o# copper and ironD in e,erythin$( or in almost e,erythin$( there is an inherent e,il and disease9

Aes( he said) 1nd anythin$ which is in#ected by any o# these e,ils is made e,il( and at last wholly dissol,es and dies9 True) The ,ice and e,il which is inherent in each is the destruction o# each+ and i# this does not destroy them there is nothin$ else that will+ #or $ood certainly will not destroy them( nor a$ain( that which is neither $ood nor e,il) "ertainly not) I#( then( we #ind any nature which ha,in$ this inherent corruption cannot be dissol,ed or destroyed( we may be certain that o# such a nature there is no destruction9 That may be assumed) 2ell( I said( and is there no e,il which corrupts the soul9 Aes( he said( there are all the e,ils which we were just now passin$ in re,iewD unri$hteousness( intemperance( cowardice( i$norance) But does any o# these dissol,e or destroy her9 --and here do not let us #all into the error o# supposin$ that the unjust and #oolish man( when he is detected( perishes throu$h his own injustice( which is an e,il o# the soul) Ta%e the analo$y o# the bodyD The e,il o# the body is a disease which wastes and reduces and annihilates the body+ and all the thin$s o# which we were just now spea%in$ come to annihilation throu$h their own corruption attachin$ to them and inherin$ in them and so destroyin$ them) Is not this true9 Aes) "onsider the soul in li%e manner) oes the injustice or other e,il which e&ists in the soul waste and consume her9 o they by attachin$ to the soul and inherin$ in her at last brin$ her to death( and so separate her #rom the body 9 "ertainly not) 1nd yet( I said( it is unreasonable to suppose that anythin$ can perish #rom without throu$h a##ection o# e&ternal e,il which could not be destroyed #rom within by a corruption o# its own9 It is( he replied) "onsider( I said( .laucon( that e,en the badness o# #ood( whether staleness( decomposition( or any other bad -uality( when con#ined to the actual #ood( is not supposed to destroy the body+ althou$h( i# the badness o# #ood communicates corruption to the body( then we should say that the body has been destroyed by a corruption o# itsel#( which is disease( brou$ht on by this+ but that the body( bein$ one thin$( can be destroyed by the badness o# #ood( which is another( and which does not en$ender any natural in#ection --this we shall absolutely deny9 >ery true)

1nd( on the same principle( unless some bodily e,il can produce an e,il o# the soul( we must not suppose that the soul( which is one thin$( can be dissol,ed by any merely e&ternal e,il which belon$s to another9 Aes( he said( there is reason in that) Either then( let us re#ute this conclusion( or( while it remains unre#uted( let us ne,er say that #e,er( or any other disease( or the %ni#e put to the throat( or e,en the cuttin$ up o# the whole body into the minutest pieces( can destroy the soul( until she hersel# is pro,ed to become more unholy or unri$hteous in conse-uence o# these thin$s bein$ done to the body+ but that the soul( or anythin$ else i# not destroyed by an internal e,il( can be destroyed by an e&ternal one( is not to) be a##irmed by any man) 1nd surely( he replied( no one will e,er pro,e that the souls o# men become more unjust in conse-uence o# death) But i# some one who would rather not admit the immortality o# the soul boldly denies this( and says that the dyin$ do really become more e,il and unri$hteous( then( i# the spea%er is ri$ht( I suppose that injustice( li%e disease( must be assumed to be #atal to the unjust( and that those who ta%e this disorder die by the natural inherent power o# destruction which e,il has( and which %ills them sooner or later( but in -uite another way #rom that in which( at present( the wic%ed recei,e death at the hands o# others as the penalty o# their deeds9 Nay( he said( in that case injustice( i# #atal to the unjust( will not be so ,ery terrible to him( #or he will be deli,ered #rom e,il) But I rather suspect the opposite to be the truth( and that injustice which( i# it ha,e the power( will murder others( %eeps the murderer ali,e --aye( and well awa%e too+ so #ar remo,ed is her dwellin$-place #rom bein$ a house o# death) True( I said+ i# the inherent natural ,ice or e,il o# the soul is unable to %ill or destroy her( hardly will that which is appointed to be the destruction o# some other body( destroy a soul or anythin$ else e&cept that o# which it was appointed to be the destruction) Aes( that can hardly be) But the soul which cannot be destroyed by an e,il( whether inherent or e&ternal( must e&ist #or e,er( and i# e&istin$ #or e,er( must be immortal9 "ertainly) That is the conclusion( I said+ and( i# a true conclusion( then the souls must always be the same( #or i# none be destroyed they will not diminish in number) Neither will they increase( #or the increase o# the immortal natures must come #rom somethin$ mortal( and all thin$s would thus end in immortality) >ery true)

But this we cannot belie,e --reason will not allow us --any more than we can belie,e the soul( in her truest nature( to be #ull o# ,ariety and di##erence and dissimilarity) 2hat do you mean9 he said) The soul( I said( bein$( as is now pro,en( immortal( must be the #airest o# compositions and cannot be compounded o# many elements9 "ertainly not) Her immortality is demonstrated by the pre,ious ar$ument( and there are many other proo#s+ but to see her as she really is( not as we now behold her( marred by communion with the body and other miseries( you must contemplate her with the eye o# reason( in her ori$inal purity+ and then her beauty will be re,ealed( and justice and injustice and all the thin$s which we ha,e described will be mani#ested more clearly) Thus #ar( we ha,e spo%en the truth concernin$ her as she appears at present( but we must remember also that we ha,e seen her only in a condition which may be compared to that o# the sea-$od .laucus( whose ori$inal ima$e can hardly be discerned because his natural members are bro%en o## and crushed and dama$ed by the wa,es in all sorts o# ways( and incrustations ha,e $rown o,er them o# seaweed and shells and stones( so that he is more li%e some monster than he is to his own natural #orm) 1nd the soul which we behold is in a similar condition( dis#i$ured by ten thousand ills) But not there( .laucon( not there must we loo%) 2here then9 1t her lo,e o# wisdom) 'et us see whom she a##ects( and what society and con,erse she see%s in ,irtue o# her near %indred with the immortal and eternal and di,ine+ also how di##erent she would become i# wholly #ollowin$ this superior principle( and borne by a di,ine impulse out o# the ocean in which she now is( and disen$a$ed #rom the stones and shells and thin$s o# earth and roc% which in wild ,ariety sprin$ up around her because she #eeds upon earth( and is o,er$rown by the $ood thin$s o# this li#e as they are termedD then you would see her as she is( and %now whether she has one shape only or many( or what her nature is) O# her a##ections and o# the #orms which she ta%es in this present li#e I thin% that we ha,e now said enou$h) True( he replied) 1nd thus( I said( we ha,e #ul#illed the conditions o# the ar$ument+ we ha,e not introduced the rewards and $lories o# justice( which( as you were sayin$( are to be #ound in Homer and Hesiod+ but justice in her own nature has been shown to be best #or the soul in her own nature) 'et a man do what is just( whether he ha,e the rin$ o# .y$es or not( and e,en i# in addition to the rin$ o# .y$es he put on the helmet o# Hades) >ery true) 1nd now( .laucon( there will be no harm in #urther enumeratin$ how many and how $reat are the rewards which justice and the other ,irtues procure to the soul #rom $ods and men( both in li#e and a#ter death)

"ertainly not( he said) 2ill you repay me( then( what you borrowed in the ar$ument9 2hat did I borrow9 The assumption that the just man should appear unjust and the unjust justD #or you were o# opinion that e,en i# the true state o# the case could not possibly escape the eyes o# $ods and men( still this admission ou$ht to be made #or the sa%e o# the ar$ument( in order that pure justice mi$ht be wei$hed a$ainst pure injustice) o you remember9 I should be much to blame i# I had #or$otten) Then( as the cause is decided( I demand on behal# o# justice that the estimation in which she is held by $ods and men and which we ac%nowled$e to be her due should now be restored to her by us+ since she has been shown to con#er reality( and not to decei,e those who truly possess her( let what has been ta%en #rom her be $i,en bac%( that so she may win that palm o# appearance which is hers also( and which she $i,es to her own) The demand( he said( is just) In the #irst place( I said --and this is the #irst thin$ which you will ha,e to $i,e bac% --the nature both o# the just and unjust is truly %nown to the $ods) .ranted) 1nd i# they are both %nown to them( one must be the #riend and the other the enemy o# the $ods( as we admitted #rom the be$innin$9 True) 1nd the #riend o# the $ods may be supposed to recei,e #rom them all thin$s at their best( e&ceptin$ only such e,il as is the necessary conse-uence o# #ormer sins9 "ertainly) Then this must be our notion o# the just man( that e,en when he is in po,erty or sic%ness( or any other seemin$ mis#ortune( all thin$s will in the end wor% to$ether #or $ood to him in li#e and deathD #or the $ods ha,e a care o# any one whose desire is to become just and to be li%e .od( as #ar as man can attain the di,ine li%eness( by the pursuit o# ,irtue9 Aes( he said+ i# he is li%e .od he will surely not be ne$lected by him) 1nd o# the unjust may not the opposite be supposed9 "ertainly) *uch( then( are the palms o# ,ictory which the $ods $i,e the just9 That is my con,iction) 1nd what do they recei,e o# men9 'oo% at thin$s as they really are( and you will see that the cle,er unjust are in the case o# runners( who run well #rom the startin$-place to the $oal but not bac% a$ain #rom the $oalD they $o o## at a $reat pace( but in the end only loo%

#oolish( slin%in$ away with their ears dra$$lin$ on their shoulders( and without a crown+ but the true runner comes to the #inish and recei,es the pri/e and is crowned) 1nd this is the way with the just+ he who endures to the end o# e,ery action and occasion o# his entire li#e has a $ood report and carries o## the pri/e which men ha,e to bestow) True) 1nd now you must allow me to repeat o# the just the blessin$s which you were attributin$ to the #ortunate unjust) I shall say o# them( what you were sayin$ o# the others( that as they $row older( they become rulers in their own city i# they care to be+ they marry whom they li%e and $i,e in marria$e to whom they will+ all that you said o# the others I now say o# these) 1nd( on the other hand( o# the unjust I say that the $reater number( e,en thou$h they escape in their youth( are #ound out at last and loo% #oolish at the end o# their course( and when they come to be old and miserable are #louted ali%e by stran$er and citi/en+ they are beaten and then come those thin$s un#it #or ears polite( as you truly term them+ they will be rac%ed and ha,e their eyes burned out( as you were sayin$) 1nd you may suppose that I ha,e repeated the remainder o# your tale o# horrors) But will you let me assume( without recitin$ them( that these thin$s are true9 "ertainly( he said( what you say is true) These( then( are the pri/es and rewards and $i#ts which are bestowed upon the just by $ods and men in this present li#e( in addition to the other $ood thin$s which justice o# hersel# pro,ides) Aes( he said+ and they are #air and lastin$) 1nd yet( I said( all these are as nothin$( either in number or $reatness in comparison with those other recompenses which await both just and unjust a#ter death) 1nd you ou$ht to hear them( and then both just and unjust will ha,e recei,ed #rom us a #ull payment o# the debt which the ar$ument owes to them) *pea%( he said+ there are #ew thin$s which I would more $ladly hear) *ocrates 2ell( I said( I will tell you a tale+ not one o# the tales which Odysseus tells to the hero 1lcinous( yet this too is a tale o# a hero( Er the son o# 1rmenius( a Pamphylian by birth) He was slain in battle( and ten days a#terwards( when the bodies o# the dead were ta%en up already in a state o# corruption( his body was #ound una##ected by decay( and carried away home to be buried) 1nd on the twel#th day( as he was lyin$ on the #uneral pile( he returned to li#e and told them what he had seen in the other world) He said that when his soul le#t the body he went on a journey with a $reat company( and that they came to a mysterious place at which there were two openin$s in the earth+ they were near to$ether( and o,er a$ainst them were two other openin$s in the hea,en abo,e) In the intermediate space there were jud$es seated( who commanded the just( a#ter they had $i,en jud$ment on them and had bound their sentences in #ront o# them( to ascend by the hea,enly way on the ri$ht hand+ and in li%e manner the unjust were bidden by

them to descend by the lower way on the le#t hand+ these also bore the symbols o# their deeds( but #astened on their bac%s) He drew near( and they told him that he was to be the messen$er who would carry the report o# the other world to men( and they bade him hear and see all that was to be heard and seen in that place) Then he beheld and saw on one side the souls departin$ at either openin$ o# hea,en and earth when sentence had been $i,en on them+ and at the two other openin$s other souls( some ascendin$ out o# the earth dusty and worn with tra,el( some descendin$ out o# hea,en clean and bri$ht) 1nd arri,in$ e,er and anon they seemed to ha,e come #rom a lon$ journey( and they went #orth with $ladness into the meadow( where they encamped as at a #esti,al+ and those who %new one another embraced and con,ersed( the souls which came #rom earth curiously en-uirin$ about the thin$s abo,e( and the souls which came #rom hea,en about the thin$s beneath) 1nd they told one another o# what had happened by the way( those #rom below weepin$ and sorrowin$ at the remembrance o# the thin$s which they had endured and seen in their journey beneath the earth 5now the journey lasted a thousand years7( while those #rom abo,e were describin$ hea,enly deli$hts and ,isions o# inconcei,able beauty) The *tory( .laucon( would ta%e too lon$ to tell+ but the sum was thisD --He said that #or e,ery wron$ which they had done to any one they su##ered ten#old+ or once in a hundred years --such bein$ rec%oned to be the len$th o# man6s li#e( and the penalty bein$ thus paid ten times in a thousand years) I#( #or e&ample( there were any who had been the cause o# many deaths( or had betrayed or ensla,ed cities or armies( or been $uilty o# any other e,il beha,iour( #or each and all o# their o##ences they recei,ed punishment ten times o,er( and the rewards o# bene#icence and justice and holiness were in the same proportion) I need hardly repeat what he said concernin$ youn$ children dyin$ almost as soon as they were born) O# piety and impiety to $ods and parents( and o# murderers( there were retributions other and $reater #ar which he described) He mentioned that he was present when one o# the spirits as%ed another( 62here is 1rdiaeus the .reat96 5Now this 1rdiaeus li,ed a thousand years be#ore the time o# ErD he had been the tyrant o# some city o# Pamphylia( and had murdered his a$ed #ather and his elder brother( and was said to ha,e committed many other abominable crimes)7 The answer o# the other spirit wasD 6He comes not hither and will ne,er come) 1nd this(6 said he( 6was one o# the dread#ul si$hts which we oursel,es witnessed) 2e were at the mouth o# the ca,ern( and( ha,in$ completed all our e&periences( were about to reascend( when o# a sudden 1rdiaeus appeared and se,eral others( most o# whom were tyrants+ and there were also besides the tyrants pri,ate indi,iduals who had been $reat criminalsD they were just( as they #ancied( about to return into the upper world( but the mouth( instead o# admittin$ them( $a,e a roar( whene,er any o# these incurable sinners or some one who had not been su##iciently punished tried to ascend+ and then wild men o# #iery aspect( who were standin$ by and heard the sound( sei/ed and carried them o##+ and 1rdiaeus and others they bound head and #oot and hand( and threw them down and #layed them with scour$es( and dra$$ed them alon$ the road at the side( cardin$ them on thorns li%e wool( and declarin$ to the passers-by what were their crimes( and that they were bein$ ta%en away to be cast into hell)6 1nd o# all the many terrors which they had endured( he said that there was

none li%e the terror which each o# them #elt at that moment( lest they should hear the ,oice+ and when there was silence( one by one they ascended with e&ceedin$ joy) These( said Er( were the penalties and retributions( and there were blessin$s as $reat) Now when the spirits which were in the meadow had tarried se,en days( on the ei$hth they were obli$ed to proceed on their journey( and( on the #ourth day a#ter( he said that they came to a place where they could see #rom abo,e a line o# li$ht( strai$ht as a column( e&tendin$ ri$ht throu$h the whole hea,en and throu$h the earth( in colour resemblin$ the rainbow( only bri$hter and purer+ another day6s journey brou$ht them to the place( and there( in the midst o# the li$ht( they saw the ends o# the chains o# hea,en let down #rom abo,eD #or this li$ht is the belt o# hea,en( and holds to$ether the circle o# the uni,erse( li%e the under-$irders o# a trireme) @rom these ends is e&tended the spindle o# Necessity( on which all the re,olutions turn) The sha#t and hoo% o# this spindle are made o# steel( and the whorl is made partly o# steel and also partly o# other materials) Now the whorl is in #orm li%e the whorl used on earth+ and the description o# it implied that there is one lar$e hollow whorl which is -uite scooped out( and into this is #itted another lesser one( and another( and another( and #our others( ma%in$ ei$ht in all( li%e ,essels which #it into one another+ the whorls show their ed$es on the upper side( and on their lower side all to$ether #orm one continuous whorl) This is pierced by the spindle( which is dri,en home throu$h the centre o# the ei$hth) The #irst and outermost whorl has the rim broadest( and the se,en inner whorls are narrower( in the #ollowin$ proportions --the si&th is ne&t to the #irst in si/e( the #ourth ne&t to the si&th+ then comes the ei$hth+ the se,enth is #i#th( the #i#th is si&th( the third is se,enth( last and ei$hth comes the second) The lar$est 5o# #i&ed stars7 is span$led( and the se,enth 5or sun7 is bri$htest+ the ei$hth 5or moon7 coloured by the re#lected li$ht o# the se,enth+ the second and #i#th 5*aturn and 3ercury7 are in colour li%e one another( and yellower than the precedin$+ the third 5>enus7 has the whitest li$ht+ the #ourth 53ars7 is reddish+ the si&th 5Jupiter7 is in whiteness second) Now the whole spindle has the same motion+ but( as the whole re,ol,es in one direction( the se,en inner circles mo,e slowly in the other( and o# these the swi#test is the ei$hth+ ne&t in swi#tness are the se,enth( si&th( and #i#th( which mo,e to$ether+ third in swi#tness appeared to mo,e accordin$ to the law o# this re,ersed motion the #ourth+ the third appeared #ourth and the second #i#th) The spindle turns on the %nees o# Necessity+ and on the upper sur#ace o# each circle is a siren( who $oes round with them( hymnin$ a sin$le tone or note) The ei$ht to$ether #orm one harmony+ and round about( at e-ual inter,als( there is another band( three in number( each sittin$ upon her throneD these are the @ates( dau$hters o# Necessity( who are clothed in white robes and ha,e chaplets upon their heads( 'achesis and "lotho and 1tropos( who accompany with their ,oices the harmony o# the sirens --'achesis sin$in$ o# the past( "lotho o# the present( 1tropos o# the #uture+ "lotho #rom time to time assistin$ with a touch o# her ri$ht hand the re,olution o# the outer circle o# the whorl or spindle( and 1tropos with her le#t hand touchin$ and $uidin$ the inner ones( and 'achesis layin$ hold o# either in turn( #irst with

one hand and then with the other) 2hen Er and the spirits arri,ed( their duty was to $o at once to 'achesis+ but #irst o# all there came a prophet who arran$ed them in order+ then he too% #rom the %nees o# 'achesis lots and samples o# li,es( and ha,in$ mounted a hi$h pulpit( spo%e as #ollowsD 6Hear the word o# 'achesis( the dau$hter o# Necessity) 3ortal souls( behold a new cycle o# li#e and mortality) Aour $enius will not be allotted to you( but you choose your $enius+ and let him who draws the #irst lot ha,e the #irst choice( and the li#e which he chooses shall be his destiny) >irtue is #ree( and as a man honours or dishonours her he will ha,e more or less o# her+ the responsibility is with the chooser --.od is justi#ied)6 2hen the Interpreter had thus spo%en he scattered lots indi##erently amon$ them all( and each o# them too% up the lot which #ell near him( all but Er himsel# 5he was not allowed7( and each as he too% his lot percei,ed the number which he had obtained) Then the Interpreter placed on the $round be#ore them the samples o# li,es+ and there were many more li,es than the souls present( and they were o# all sorts) There were li,es o# e,ery animal and o# man in e,ery condition) 1nd there were tyrannies amon$ them( some lastin$ out the tyrant6s li#e( others which bro%e o## in the middle and came to an end in po,erty and e&ile and be$$ary+ and there were li,es o# #amous men( some who were #amous #or their #orm and beauty as well as #or their stren$th and success in $ames( or( a$ain( #or their birth and the -ualities o# their ancestors+ and some who were the re,erse o# #amous #or the opposite -ualities) 1nd o# women li%ewise+ there was not( howe,er( any de#inite character them( because the soul( when choosin$ a new li#e( must o# necessity become di##erent) But there was e,ery other -uality( and the all min$led with one another( and also with elements o# wealth and po,erty( and disease and health+ and there were mean states also) 1nd here( my dear .laucon( is the supreme peril o# our human state+ and there#ore the utmost care should be ta%en) 'et each one o# us lea,e e,ery other %ind o# %nowled$e and see% and #ollow one thin$ only( i# perad,enture he may be able to learn and may #ind some one who will ma%e him able to learn and discern between $ood and e,il( and so to choose always and e,erywhere the better li#e as he has opportunity) He should consider the bearin$ o# all these thin$s which ha,e been mentioned se,erally and collecti,ely upon ,irtue+ he should %now what the e##ect o# beauty is when combined with po,erty or wealth in a particular soul( and what are the $ood and e,il conse-uences o# noble and humble birth( o# pri,ate and public station( o# stren$th and wea%ness( o# cle,erness and dullness( and o# all the soul( and the operation o# them when conjoined+ he will then loo% at the nature o# the soul( and #rom the consideration o# all these -ualities he will be able to determine which is the better and which is the worse+ and so he will choose( $i,in$ the name o# e,il to the li#e which will ma%e his soul more unjust( and $ood to the li#e which will ma%e his soul more just+ all else he will disre$ard) @or we ha,e seen and %now that this is the best choice both in li#e and a#ter death) 1 man must ta%e with him into the world below an adamantine #aith in truth and ri$ht( that there too he may be unda//led by the desire o# wealth or the other allurements o# e,il( lest( comin$ upon tyrannies and similar ,illainies( he do irremediable wron$s to

others and su##er yet worse himsel#+ but let him %now how to choose the mean and a,oid the e&tremes on either side( as #ar as possible( not only in this li#e but in all that which is to come) @or this is the way o# happiness) 1nd accordin$ to the report o# the messen$er #rom the other world this was what the prophet said at the timeD 6E,en #or the last comer( i# he chooses wisely and will li,e dili$ently( there is appointed a happy and not undesirable e&istence) 'et not him who chooses #irst be careless( and let not the last despair)6 1nd when he had spo%en( he who had the #irst choice came #orward and in a moment chose the $reatest tyranny+ his mind ha,in$ been dar%ened by #olly and sensuality( he had not thou$ht out the whole matter be#ore he chose( and did not at #irst si$ht percei,e that he was #ated( amon$ other e,ils( to de,our his own children) But when he had time to re#lect( and saw what was in the lot( he be$an to beat his breast and lament o,er his choice( #or$ettin$ the proclamation o# the prophet+ #or( instead o# throwin$ the blame o# his mis#ortune on himsel#( he accused chance and the $ods( and e,erythin$ rather than himsel#) Now he was one o# those who came #rom hea,en( and in a #ormer li#e had dwelt in a well-ordered *tate( but his ,irtue was a matter o# habit only( and he had no philosophy) 1nd it was true o# others who were similarly o,erta%en( that the $reater number o# them came #rom hea,en and there#ore they had ne,er been schooled by trial( whereas the pil$rims who came #rom earth( ha,in$ themsel,es su##ered and seen others su##er( were not in a hurry to choose) 1nd owin$ to this ine&perience o# theirs( and also because the lot was a chance( many o# the souls e&chan$ed a $ood destiny #or an e,il or an e,il #or a $ood) @or i# a man had always on his arri,al in this world dedicated himsel# #rom the #irst to sound philosophy( and had been moderately #ortunate in the number o# the lot( he mi$ht( as the messen$er reported( be happy here( and also his journey to another li#e and return to this( instead o# bein$ rou$h and under$round( would be smooth and hea,enly) 3ost curious( he said( was the spectacle --sad and lau$hable and stran$e+ #or the choice o# the souls was in most cases based on their e&perience o# a pre,ious li#e) There he saw the soul which had once been Orpheus choosin$ the li#e o# a swan out o# enmity to the race o# women( hatin$ to be born o# a woman because they had been his murderers+ he beheld also the soul o# Thamyras choosin$ the li#e o# a ni$htin$ale+ birds( on the other hand( li%e the swan and other musicians( wantin$ to be men) The soul which obtained the twentieth lot chose the li#e o# a lion( and this was the soul o# 1ja& the son o# Telamon( who would not be a man( rememberin$ the injustice which was done him the jud$ment about the arms) The ne&t was 1$amemnon( who too% the li#e o# an ea$le( because( li%e 1ja&( he hated human nature by reason o# his su##erin$s) 1bout the middle came the lot o# 1talanta+ she( seein$ the $reat #ame o# an athlete( was unable to resist the temptationD and a#ter her there #ollowed the soul o# Epeus the son o# Panopeus passin$ into the nature o# a woman cunnin$ in the arts+ and #ar away amon$ the last who chose( the soul o# the jester Thersites was puttin$ on the #orm o# a mon%ey) There came also the soul o# Odysseus ha,in$ yet to ma%e a choice( and his lot happened to be the last o# them all) Now the recollection o# #ormer tolls had disenchanted him o# ambition( and he went about #or a considerable

time in search o# the li#e o# a pri,ate man who had no cares+ he had some di##iculty in #indin$ this( which was lyin$ about and had been ne$lected by e,erybody else+ and when he saw it( he said that he would ha,e done the had his lot been #irst instead o# last( and that he was deli$hted to ha,e it) 1nd not only did men pass into animals( but I must also mention that there were animals tame and wild who chan$ed into one another and into correspondin$ human natures --the $ood into the $entle and the e,il into the sa,a$e( in all sorts o# combinations) 1ll the souls had now chosen their li,es( and they went in the order o# their choice to 'achesis( who sent with them the $enius whom they had se,erally chosen( to be the $uardian o# their li,es and the #ul#iller o# the choiceD this $enius led the souls #irst to "lotho( and drew them within the re,olution o# the spindle impelled by her hand( thus rati#yin$ the destiny o# each+ and then( when they were #astened to this( carried them to 1tropos( who spun the threads and made them irre,ersible( whence without turnin$ round they passed beneath the throne o# Necessity+ and when they had all passed( they marched on in a scorchin$ heat to the plain o# @or$et#ulness( which was a barren waste destitute o# trees and ,erdure+ and then towards e,enin$ they encamped by the ri,er o# !nmind#ulness( whose water no ,essel can hold+ o# this they were all obli$ed to drin% a certain -uantity( and those who were not sa,ed by wisdom dran% more than was necessary+ and each one as he dran% #or$ot all thin$s) Now a#ter they had $one to rest( about the middle o# the ni$ht there was a thunderstorm and earth-ua%e( and then in an instant they were dri,en upwards in all manner o# ways to their birth( li%e stars shootin$) He himsel# was hindered #rom drin%in$ the water) But in what manner or by what means he returned to the body he could not say+ only( in the mornin$( awa%in$ suddenly( he #ound himsel# lyin$ on the pyre) 1nd thus( .laucon( the tale has been sa,ed and has not perished( and will sa,e us i# we are obedient to the word spo%en+ and we shall pass sa#ely o,er the ri,er o# @or$et#ulness and our soul will not be de#iled) 2here#ore my counsel is that we hold #ast e,er to the hea,enly way and #ollow a#ter justice and ,irtue always( considerin$ that the soul is immortal and able to endure e,ery sort o# $ood and e,ery sort o# e,il) Thus shall we li,e dear to one another and to the $ods( both while remainin$ here and when( li%e con-uerors in the $ames who $o round to $ather $i#ts( we recei,e our reward) 1nd it shall be well with us both in this li#e and in the pil$rima$e o# a thousand years which we ha,e been describin$) THE EN ---------------------------------------------------------------------"opyri$ht statementD The Internet "lassics 1rchi,e by aniel ") *te,enson( 2eb 1tomics) 2orld 2ide 2eb presentation is copyri$ht 5"7 8EE<-:KKK( aniel ") *te,enson( 2eb 1tomics) 1ll ri$hts reser,ed under international and pan-1merican copyri$ht

con,entions( includin$ the ri$ht o# reproduction in whole or in part in any #orm) irect permission re-uests to classicsOclassics)mit)edu) Translation o# 0The eeds o# the i,ine 1u$ustus0 by 1u$ustus is copyri$ht 5"7 Thomas Bushnell( B*.)